Underrated comment

So philosophers ever since have been sophists and its just about the battle. Baudriallard then used something Lyotard called "retorsion", when you show an argument against you is in fact speaking for you - reverse uno, nice metaphor.

Your happiness Depending on a group all agreeing to some political cause is a recipe for disaster. Good luck and god speed. I ain’t got time for that.

"Everybody wants to change the world, but nobody wants to die"

There's some old theory that could still be useful in this regard, mainly to do with dual-power; constructing new institutions that serve the people while infiltrating existing institutions to make them less violent toward the people.

The better thing to do would be to pressure the legal system to broaden the playing field and limit the power of conglomerates and monopolies. Especially in factory farming examples. I don't know how we can design new systems that don't just encourage the platform owner to rig the deck in their favor. Uber eats and postmates

@@wraithwrecker_ definitely agree with this. It's been a guide to action for me. I feel like much of the criticism of this video can be said to be directed at those who spend their time talking about materialism while doing little to change material conditions. Even if we're to look at the evolution of the bourgeoisie, they didn't spend the majority of their time trying to "convince" people of their liberal-capitalist worldview before their revolutions. They built the damn institutions. All their talk was justification for what they were *already* doing and why they should have an expanded role in society. They actually changed material conditions until a crisis point was reached. While things won't be that straightforward for us, we need to be doing something similar.

@@SAGERUNE The answer to your question about how to design new systems is something to be worked out in practice so I won't waste both of our time by trying to spell it out. But I will point out that, by your own logic, pressuring the legal system would seem to be a waste of effort. The liberal system in a bourgeois-liberal state exists to serve the bourgeois-liberal elite. I'm not sure how we would pressure such a system that does not involve building institutions of counter-hegemonic power that can resist domination.

so you learned that you actually have to explain shit and give people a viable alternative? wow

Bro deberías colaborar mas con este chico

Una colaboración estaría de huevos

@@emilianobasurto548 he’s been on Pills’s podcast twice, if my memory serves

​@@theethanatorem ohhh, that's true. Thank you so much, bro :)

Viejo hace falta más canales como este en habla hispana!! Pero pills es un genio

Maybe Pills was referring to Lacan's real (with a wink).

@@pugix You got the joke

He's saying the message you seek does not exist, stop seeking!

nvm, I don't actually know what you mean by message.

I’m literally just saying I enjoyed the video lol

Fucking Gorillas spend something like 75% of their time sitting about "being lazy"...You ever see how swole a groilla is lol??...Nah, "lazy" is a term some greedy capitalist made up in order to make people work harder.

I disagree, I think there's nothing new under the sun in that respect. Imagine the state of mind of a mid-century middleclass suburban American. They have to carefully craft their image to portray middleclassness. Their house, clothing, decorating, interests and yard are all scrutinized continually. Planting the wrong sort of flowers, or having the wrong kind of hobbies or interests got people rediculed, berated, and othered. (Fussels book on class has more about this) I don't see how this is any different than someone carefully crafting their online profile. The difference now, however, is that we are more free to chose which community we embed ourselves in.

"The opposite of love is not hatred, but indifference."

I'm thinking along similar lines like he seems to believe that these soulless, corporate reality TV shows are the pinnacle of representing love even though you can't get any less artful than that

and yet you are here posting comments.... the fucking irony. you are PART of the spectacle you are trying to not be part of lmao

I don't find it relieving, personally. I find it to be defeatist.

​@@dunningdunning4711 I get why you'd call it defeatist. At the same time, academics from the humanities (for whom I think this is the core audience of this critique) become trapped in a perpetual state of elaborating their moral revolt, and treat their expository work and theorizing as the groundwork of change. At a certain point, ya gotta wonder why the business daddies don't take theory as a serious threat to their hegemony.

@@feruspriest “trapped in a perpetual state of elaborating their moral revolt” might be my favorite phrase since “intellectual masturbation”

@@Nich0Latte thank ya kindly!

@@feruspriest Not necessarily the groundwork, but useful for identifying issues, such as why revolution doesn't come (Gramsci, Althusser). There's definitely a lot of intellectual masturbation, but I think philosophy and theory both have important, although very modest, jobs. So much of "common sense" is simply the corpse of dead philosophies.

Giodarno Bruno has the best breakdown for love I've ever read. 17th centiry occultist/philosopher.

@@feruspriest thank you for the recommendation! Im excited to check it out

@Annie Mouse thank you for the recommendations! I will check out those episodes

It is because these are the observation theorist see in the 1st world. The 3rd world, on the other hand, is doomed to harsh conditions, and capitalism will only make it harsher. People in the 1st world may sit there with their own little spectacle, sure, but there is no more obscene than imperialism.

How do you know you see things as they are? You mentioned a Buddhist monk, but letting go of desire is at the core of Buddhist enlightenment and the Left, almost by definition, has not done that. Having a vision of "the world as it should be" will always cloud one's vision of the world as it is. Desiring to own the means of production as a collective is still desiring to own the means of production. Collective desire is still desire. Desiring to form a collective to seize the means of production is still desire. Desiring to establish a perfected democracy to manage the use of the collectively owned means of production is still desire. When your sight is clouded by desire, the innocent actions of others will appear as intentional subversion-see Lenin and his fixation on "wreckers." What did Lenin's vision of Communism produce? What did Mao's vision of Communism produce? Let go of the vision; focus instead on the rules for right action, acting in accord with them for their own sake, and letting that be your happiness. True power is the power of contraction. There's a video on KZfaq by Rabbi Simon Jacobsen entitled "Black Magic: The Dark Side of Kabbalah" that explains this in depth beginning at about the 13 minute mark. Powerful action is characterized by a combination of fervent hope and perfect resignation. If you desire nothing, no one can have power over you. They will always need you more than you need them. As Jude Law, in the role of Pope Pius XIII, says in The Young Pope: "Absence is presence." This shouldn't be alien to Leftists, given the history of the general strike as a tool of organized labor. If living as a collective is the way and capitalism is bad, then find like-minded people and form a collective for the purpose of minimizing or eliminating participation in capitalist society at whatever scale is possible in the present. Instead of trying to convince society to provide a certain standard of living, be willing to embrace asceticism as necessary for the purpose of depriving capitalist society of however many workers and consumers you can. Look up the short story, Beggar Prince, from the Elder Scrolls games. Look up chapter 27 of the Digha Nikaya, Aggaññasutta. Meditate on these. Then you'll see things as they are. As importantly, embrace diversity on superficial points rather than trying to change hearts and minds to exactly match your views-don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, the tree that bends doesn't break, and so on. I referenced both Jewish and Christian ideas above perfectly aware that the Left hasn't been on the greatest of terms with them, historically. Despite that, I think you'll find the ideas themselves to be consistent with the overall idea I'm presenting here. Other relevant and similarly bite-sized artifacts of Christianity include the story of St. Mary of Egypt (famous for her asceticism) and the Our Father prayer ("give us this day our daily bread"). If you can vibe with those, some longer form stuff worth considering includes a video from the School of Life channel called the History of Ideas: Consumerism (which paints a very different picture of the relationship between Christianity and capitalism than most Leftist literature), the Abolition of Man and the Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis, and the Everlasting Man by G.K. Chesterton. To close, a particularly poignant line from the Abolition of Man in light of the general topic of postmodernism: "You cannot go on ‘seeing through' things for ever. The whole point of seeing through something is to see something through it. It is good that the window should be transparent, because the street or garden beyond it is opaque. How if you saw through the garden too? It is no use trying to ‘see through’ first principles. If you see through everything, then everything is transparent. But a wholly transparent world is an invisible world. To ‘see through’ all things is the same as not to see."

Mate, what Pills is talking here is UTTER GARBAGE! This is just someone in the comfort of his home neglecting the material for the idealistic metaphysics of post marxism and post modernist narrative of a world without structures (which a fabricated lie and a naive form of thinking). Go with Marx and marxist thought mate, you can't go as wrong as you can with Pills.

You're 100% correct. There is a reason the CIA opened a firehose of money at postmodernism. It's an utterly impotent pseudointelectual collection of nonsense words practically designed to alienate any sane person

I cant see the replies on this comment for some reason

Why should you want to make your community better? Why not make it worse just for the lols

@@HumidPuzzleWagon because I’m not a 14 year old edgelord

At the very least, I feel like it must only be dominant in the more culturally postmodern, core regions of the capitalist world system. I have reservations even there, but I really just can't see how Baudrillard's theory would be more relevant to a garment factory worker in Bangladesh than Marx's, for example.

But people know who the billionaires are, know how fucked inequality statistics have become, and arguably, there's more than enough easily digestible leftist content on youtube to "wake the consciousness of the masses". At this point, it's safe to say they don't care. Or rather, will not care unless they're starving. And even then, they'll probably turn to fascism, cause that's the easy choice: just keep deferring responsibility to a political grand daddy figure who'll take care of you and do all the complicated stuff for you.

@@alynames7171 Nah, Marxism might not be relevant to them, but the Marxist that provides in the historical moment (starvation, enough frustration, fear) a direction for change wherever these "change" might be leading. Since its almost guaranteed that the "change" gets perverted from the outside or within it doesn´t really matter.

@@alynames7171 Totally agreed.

... not believing the old narrative, in what has become a lie, any longer ... feeling excluded, ignored, run over

The revolution against sanity and the working class. It's been doing a pretty good job as far as I can see

He mentions in the video description what chapters he was using as source material

I have tons and tons of quotes that I've collected over the years in various text documents, but I don't think unfortunately that I have one specifically from Plato on that, or maybe even in general, although I have a lot of interesting quotes obviously, from Baudrillard, and also Terry Eagleton, Zygmunt Bauman, Michel Foucault, Mark Fisher, etc. ... Maybe I can leave you with this though: "Faith is not the opposite of doubt. In fact, doubt is a sign that you genuinely have faith." - Paul Tillich

bro is shopping quotes for them goth chicks :DDDDDDDDDD

Why not use monism instead of nondualism?