You had me from Adventure Time, big man 😮‍💨 a man of culture

Andrew, not only do I love the messages you’re putting out into the world, but you’re also SO good at expressing your ideas in a clear yet beautiful way “The flawed figures that fill our collective consciousness with spectacle and mislead our memory of history” LIKE JUST LISTEN TO THAT PROSE

"The Nobodies, the no-bodied... Who are not, but could be. Who don’t speak languages, but dialects. Who don’t have religions, but superstitions. Who don’t create art, but handicrafts. Who don’t have culture, but folklore. Who are not human beings, but human resources. Who do not have faces, but arms. Who do not have names, but numbers. Who do not appear in the history of the world, but in the crime reports of the local paper. The nobodies, who are not worth the bullet that kills them." - Eduardo Galeano, Nobodies/1, The Book of Embraces

Understanding Great Man theory, I think, is key to understanding certain kinds of authoritarian mindsets. It's easy enough to look at history and point out that it wasn't REALLY the "Great Men" who built everything, but it's also important to acknowledge that a lot of people deeply want to see the world that way. Heroes are a source of aspiration, hope, and comfort - avatars, embodying the merits of whatever system someone might believe in. So, in a way, "Great Men" do kind of exist - in the sense that people create them. We carve out positions in society, formal or otherwise, that allow individuals to claim tremendous amounts of power and influence, actually allowing them to shape history, at least to a certain extent. The Common Man creates the Great Man. The important thing to note, though, is that these "Great Men" aren't shaping history through the sheer force of their will and intellect. While they may indeed be great minds or charismatic leaders, those things are just qualifications for the job. At the end of the day, they're no superhumans - they have just as many flaws and shortcomings as anyone else. That shouldn't come as a shock or even a disappointment to anyone, except that "Great Men" have been put into a position where they're SUPPOSED to be superhuman. SUPPOSED to be flawless. And that's the failure that believers in Great Man theory keep endlessly falling for. Superhumans do not exist, no matter how much they may want them to. Anyone made out to be a Great Man will inevitably disappoint. A love for "Great Men" is often paired with a disdain for common men. But we're all "common", and pretending otherwise has led to disaster and disappointment over and over again. It's better to be a good human than a bad superhuman.

Reminds me of how I've always had a hard time whenever someone asks me something like "who are your role models?", as if I must, or at least should, have role models. Sure, there are plenty of people I respect and acknowledge for the great things they have done, but I see no good reason to consider certain individuals as people who I should emulate. I learn from many others and they shape who I am and who I want to be, but ultimately I am merely aiming to be who I am, not striving to be like other people.

"Faithfully i wish to be, the one to save this world from evil, but I'm only me, and we need everyone for this"

This is always in the back of my mind…Debord’s work is always lingering in my brain space. As an anarchist artist, I think it isn’t aspirational to be turned into a commodity-both due to the obvious things you’ve stated and the inherently dehumanized position it makes of art and being an artist. Thank you for all the work you do, thank you to everyone here for your care and consideration and work as well❣️

Homelander's "you guys are the real heroes" quote is starting to sound all too real now, and not in the way he intended.

The mentioning of the "slow, patient process" that is building power WITH people makes me think about how thinking of history being shaped by individual Great Men isn't a trend only in Space (individuals), but also Time (events) - How people like to think back on "moments that shaped history" like a war, the birth of a Christ or or the day someone said "no more" as being what directed history to its course, not only not recognizing the effort and work done in order to get to that event but also how it isn't the death of an enemy or the signage of a law that actually changes the lives of the people, many things haven't really changed to this day even after being proclamed as having so. And recognising this is important to remember and better understand the reason people subscribe to this line of thought, giving power to people they see as their Messiah to save them on a big judgement day (something representative democracy incentivizes) as being not only the want of solving everything in one fell swoop, through a god-given plan of perfection that wuld bring peace if we only had the power to implement but also the feeling of powerlessness that comes from seeing reality this way, understanding that the only way to affect change in one's life is through the accumulation of power (and the necessary subjulgation of lesser man in order to do so), which excuses people of channeling unchecked power to anyone they see as being able to change the course of history to the direction they so wish, which, obviously, only ends up perpetrating the power structures that got them in that situation in the first place, maybe changing people at the top but never truly making a change for the people at the bottom - the commoners, the nameless.

Marx seems like such a “Great Man”. don’t get me wrong, his analysis of capitalist development in europe is, from my understanding, very spot on. That doesn’t mean his thought is this universal “rule” that holds the answers to understanding all contexts through time and space! For example, his analysis of Iroquois economy was based off very racist theories and writers. Or, all the complexity it has been necessary to add to his theories as we have updated his analyses through time. Any form of “Marxism” worth it’s salt today is a rich tapestry of decolonial, feminist and many other forms of thought. Even at it’s inception, Marx was not given “Kapital” by pure insular genius like Moses upon a mountain. We know his friend Engels had great influence, also, his wife and daughters (surprise! women are historically relevant) and the larger ideas of society all shaped “his” writings greatly! His perhaps 2nd most known idea, dialectics, comes directly from a german philosopher a hundred years his prior, Hegel. Marx was 100% a product of his time and place, like every other flesh and blood creature in the world!

"We live in a society" fucking killed me Amazing work as always friend, I grapple with this a lot as a musician. The age of the "rock star" is dead, where a guitar could make you into a rich sex symbol. And I couldn't be happier about it, art exists to bring people together not make money.

My primary objection to the Great Man theory is that a casual look at history will tell you that major events hinged on mistakes, screw-ups, and random chance. WWI, after all, was launched by the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand. The whole scenario initially reads like a Keystone Kops script, constantly on the verge of being foiled at every turn, yet it wasn't. What doomed the Archduke was that someone failed to give his chauffeur the proper directions, leading to his car stalling out not far from the sandwich shop where Gavrilo Princip, having already tried and failed, was getting himself something to eat. Because of bad directions, a shoddy automobile, and a teenage punk, we wound up getting WWI, along with WWII. Nearly every major event of the 20th century can be traced directly or indirectly to that assassination.

As an artist that's even gone to college for storytelling I can tell you that beyond just pop culture & history but down to our conceptions of narrative, a way many have to lean on to understand certain aspects of the world whether we like to acknowledgement it or not, in the west is deeply steeped in the concepts of the protagonist's story of conflict & subsequent conquest. Of the makers of the fate & those left to be victims to the will of those dained with the blessing of the great spotlight.

Creators like yourself have enlightened me and given me the confidence I need to act. So I went online and started my town's first and only Anarchist group. We have 3 members since I created it a few days ago... ☮

i really like that you also pull examples from non-Western cultures

Just starting to watch and already can confirm it’s another banger

"Their individuality has been sacrificed, in order to mold them into projections and figureheads, of individualist, capitalist aspiration." I really like the way you write. Dense and academic (for KZfaq, I mean), but without completely sacrificing aesthetics and emotional/intuitive expression/engagement. edit: It's hilarious to me that the person who officially named this theory/line of thinking was actually endorsing it, arguing positively for its correctness. I had honestly always assumed it was named by modern historians critiquing the work and biases of more traditional historians. It is also very enlightening about the general trend of thought in the past, that this wasn't merely an academic name given to the biased way in which historians focused only on the rich and famous, but rather a genuine idea that even 'serious thinkers' of the time actually believed. And of course there are extraordinary individuals, or individuals who were put in extraordinary circumstances and acted well, and people whose individual contributions to human history are unique and irreplaceable... but they are artists, inventors, scientists, etc.... not rich captains of industry or warleaders. Those people are just filling a role that someone else would fill if they weren't doing it, a role which is about masses of people working in unison towards a common goal.

so much love to your videos, there's a lot of amazing creators on here who are teaching/explaining important things but your particular perspective on the world and how we can move forward is always so, so thoughtful and community-oriented and it's so heartening to be reminded that there are people pushing for this in our communities and around the world. thank you as always

I have definitely seen the damage of hero worship and putting people on a pedestal.

Two thoughts: I was once involved in a feminist org. and we always took down any president or leader who became too powerful or notorious. This helped us distribute power better, but outsiders always thought we were unorganized for our lack of recognizable leaders. Our org. was quite influential, we managed to formulate and instate two new laws. But we didn't have a face, we had no public visibility. My other thought was that, when I was a scout leader, I always tried to make the rest of the team feel like I was not an authority. This always helped me receive better criticism AND make sure everyone's good ideas were being put forward. In short, being the leader was being the one that put the team's best ideas into practice. Self doubt and low self esteem make for a good leader 😂

That Lebron James delivery was perfect 😂

what good timing! im doing a small project in one of my classes on cultural hegemony and how it enforces hierarchy. the three sections of my argument are atomization, alienation, and the idealization of personal responsibility/success, and this video really ties into the ideas im trying to summarize in the third section :) very cool video p.s. i loved the joke with gilgamesh and enkidu enkidu’s lack of gender makes them one of my favorite semi-human mythological characters even though i don’t know that much about them

The human psyche craves archetypes, which is why myth is so vital. Movies and celebrity culture are cheap counterfeits. I see celebrity worship as a side effect of hyper individualism under capitalism. Celebrities are merely commodities to be consumed.

Heroes are great in stories and games. It's always fun to witness a larger-than-life tale of mythic proportions. And that's exactly where they should stay: in the halls of fiction, not history. By far your best video, greatly looking forward to the next one!

0:29 okay youve opened my eyes to a new way to think of that myth

im glad youre getting bigger man, was a pleasant surprise to hear you on the "it can happen here" podcast

Love the little flourishes of humour you've slipped into this one. Keep it up man, your videos are great.

Mozart, as far as music stardom is concerned, was a prototype to Micheal Jackson. The reason he wasn't as famous or powerful is the lack of radio and travel technology.

Big fan so far - recommending your channel to anyone I can :)

My present self and my third-grade self commend you. I wrote in answer to an essay prompt to talk about one of our heroes, an essay about why I don't think people should have heroes at all. Great video.

I'd love a deeper dive into examples of how collectivist groups stay collective vs how sometimes individual leaders take over a bit too much. It's a huge topic.

Remember folks, this goes for all KZfaq personalities as well. We can watch for inspiration, but without just ending up consuming the work of our "favorite" (hero) KZfaqrs. We have to do the reading, thinking, (possibly writing) and organizing ourselves too. I also think it's important to be able to reach a point where one can be critical of even our most beloved and seemingly well-researched semi-professional online influences or the actual authors being conveyed through them, then we know we're on a path of balanced intellectual self-reliance (under influence always of course). Peace

Great video Andrew! As always. There's a quote from some random Twitter user I always keep in mind : "don't put anyone on a pedestal, you'll always end up disappointed". I think it's in our nature to have heroes and "great men" even you when you name all these author is a form of great man theory in a way. I'm not saying this like "haha! got you" but more to underline that admiring people who made great things, even if it means forgetting everything else that helped them is something we do as humans. It's almost like a cognitive bias. In social psychology, I learned that leaders are always decided by the group and not their position. There's also a type of leader that we call transformative bc they provide good relations within the group and also get the job done if the group is working on something. This combination make members of the group push themselves higher but not in a forced way. I believe these leader must be often considered as great mean and this is the distinction we have to make. There's are leaders who wants power and leaders who just want people from their group to be at their best and organize the relations between the group. But even then it's still the group that deserves all the recognition.

Joker Andrewism is truly terrifying lmao

This video is a masterpiece, but that's normal for you.

Not just great Men, but also great nations/ countries

Man thank you that's exactly how I feel about superheroes

We’re talking about this right now in my org, thank you for this vid! 🥰

Absolute banger

Hey just some random thought Really liked the video You usually make it seem as if hierarchy, as in the power to prefer one over another, is individualistic. but as I experience it, the hierarchies of state and capital are generalising people into collective groups and are preventing expression and individual will. Power over people is putting people in the boxes of "I and people like me should serve" or in those of "I and people like me should be served and obeyed". It's not individualism or living as yourself and no more, commodity based identities are collective in function. Capitalism doesn't make us solitary, it makes us dependant on it to experience empathy or experience bond. Atomisation is more of a dissociation than any form of autonomy or focusing on your own needs and will.

As a former Elon Musk stan, I say hell yea! We, the People, the Workers, have achieved greatness throughout all of human history! And without standing on the shoulders of those who labored before our time, we would have nothing!

Your statements on Che Guevara, especially in reference to the notion that the heroic status of Che is an expression of Great Man Theory, belies a deep misunderstanding of the difference between the heroization of national leaders of colonial nations versus that of colonized nations. To use Che Guevara as an example, he is first of all someone who had tangible and real relationships with the people of Cuba; he is not seen as somehow above or greater than the Cubans, he was and continues to be viewed as a member of the Cuban community. Nobody believes Che had any kind of divine right which gives him his heroic status, rather there is a large proportion of people who very literally knew Che personally, or at the very least continues to have very tangible benefits from the medical system he helped organize. Glorifying Che in Cuba is not seen as elevating Che onto a level above the people of Cuba, but rather elevating the whole of the people of Cuba, as Che was a member of the community, and the two worked in tandem for the national liberation and improvement of conditions of the people of Cuba. Celebrating Che is celebrating the Cuban people. This is completely and totally incomparable to the glorification of the national icons of the United States. Not only do people actually and directly make use of Great Man Theory to elevate these people to high levels, often literally considering them martyrs and saints of various sorts (and thus revered above the average person), but the fact is that these were not national icons in a liberatory sense, but in a colonial sense. The efforts they led for the development of the United States was an organization of violence, slavery, segregation, and expansionism, stealing land from the Indigenous people while forcing disproportionate amounts of slaves to toil the stolen land so they may maintain their revered status. Glorification of these icons is upholding the colonial rule of the nation-state that they organized. Comparing celebrating Che Guevara to celebrating George Washington is colonizer nonsense which only supports the colonizer's efforts in undermining the human rights of Cuba.

To a degree this is why, for the longest time I've been kinda burned out by the concept of adventurers or fantasy heroes in many RPGs who single handedly solve all their worlds' problems because for some reason they're expected to move literally heaven and earth. Meanwhile the masses of people from these settings basically exist to be utterly helpless, useless, and at most just prop up the egos of the "great figures" i.e. player characters who are the only ones allowed to have any illusion of agency! So why not instead have RPGs that are designed around giving power back to the masses instead of jealously hoarding it, invested only into a few hands, namely the players. Why not instead of a few legendary, unrealistic heroes taking down a *dragon tyrant* instead it is the community that defeats or "depowers" this scaly icon of hierarchical society! This is why I've warmed up more and more to the idea of *"group magic"* or multiple 'weaker' casters or even "non-caster" participants pooling their power and focus together in order to accomplish something grand in scale, something that not even the singularly most powerful magic users could accomplish or atleast not as often such feats nor as lasting. I mean we always have in alot of stories or adventures that are about groups of demon cultists come together to try and summon their terrible demon lords to bring about the apocalypse or whatever else terrible. Why not instead have a movement of people dedicated to giving magic back to the masses, and they seek to do so through a mass ritual of siphoning magical power from elites that rule over society and imbuing it into all the people. *"Let the democratization of magic reign freely"!* -by revolutionary fighter and activist goblin woman

That was beautiful! I decided quite a few years ago not to have heroes anymore and then I saw how the idea of a hero is just bullshitty and kinda fetishizing. I wrote down the last sentence, about ''creating ways to share power and knowledge ...' and so on, it was gorgeous and it feels like it translates to relationships as well

It's an interesting dilemma. We all want to be known and loved. Some of us want to be known and loved by as many people as possible. I wonder how much of that is because we don't have fulfilling everyday lives.

Much like how imo the use of Heritage, great men just condenses all human works and greatness to a few. It makes easier for certain ppl to take power

Do you have any ideas on how to fight individualism, and moreso how to move towards collectivism? Im a swedish anarchist, and the culture here is hyper-individualistic and gets more individualistic by the day. i notice that my dreams of how i wish to radicalise in my future tend to follow the idea of escaping society and building a more anarchistic life out in some small village, but that seems tied to escapism and individualism. Its a struggle for me to imagine collectivist paths i can take to improve my life and my society, as the society around me grows increasingly fascist and racist. every mutual aid project ive seen around here is either struggling or is already collapsed, and community projects are very rare.

You shoulda called me up for the lebron james line I woulda had it right

Great video! 100% agree about Brecht, the man had a knack for dropping bangers! "Questions from a worker who reads" and "die Lösung"/"the solution" are ones I always try to keep in mind :)

Lebraun James sounded like you changed cultures to pronounce that XD

Dang first video i’ve seen laid out so well and explaining so many sides for the issue

Always nice to hear how revered my home town's biggest author is by people all over the world.

Numbers 31: 17, 18 sums up why I'll never trust another Great Man myth again. Plus, Columbus. If those depraved sociopaths can be canonized as heroes, then how can I trust that same society to choose other role models? Sure, King is a dramatic improvement, but he would have been a victim without X's people protecting his marches. And he didn't do it on his own.

13:18 I have to compliment your choice of painting. One of the greatest in art history.

This is why I don't have hero They say when you meet your hero, you often face with disappointment, i find that to be the truth more often than not. Sometimes their title as heroes are merely masks to hide their true faces as monsters. Now knowing the role of heroes in maintaining the current oppressive structure of this hierarchical system, there's more reason to reject the image of heroes all together. It's time to become our own heroes, together.

a lot of the point Alan Moore was trying to make in watchmen was that if superheroes actually existed they would be hit with the human realities of having power and how its not great for the world physically and the person wielding it mentally this shouldn't come to a surprise as Alan Moore is an avowed anarchist with a chip on his shoulder

Another fabulous video. Thank you. There is a process that was used by indigenous people in Australia to come up with The Uluru Statement From The Heart, in response to a reconciliation process in Australia. It's an excellent example of a leaderless process. It's something that, as a white Australian, I admire enormously, especially because it's in contrast to the white way of doing such things. Check it out

i really love your words on how the great man theory relates to organizing and anarchist spaces.

We need to make corporations and restaurants obsolete and irrelevant, then eventually the state!!

ALL famous people are kids of famous people. You, your audience, and myself were never meant to reach their level of success. We are not supposed to get that big break. The concept of scraping one's way from utter bottom to fame and fortune is a lie we keep feasting on. We idolise the rich and desire what they have because we were always meant to. We were never meant to succeed only venerate THEM. If everyone is special then no one is special... see? I lost all my past "heroes". My biggest hero destroyed himself in my eyes. He is not a hero... he is a troll. I let go the other heroes, will not look into how bad THEY are because I frankly do not want to know what deep, dark, narcissistic crap behind them. The only hero I have is myself, those who treat me with respect and are emotionally and morally honest. Frak "great" people... they never were all that great. Peace to you too.

excellent vid and i appreciated your post script

What do y'all think about liquid democracy? It seems like a very pragmatic step in the right direction, assuming someone gets the code right for running it properly. (On my to-do list, somewhere after I get the component technologies built.)

This is a truly comprehensive perspective Andrew. I appreciate your look into both the public AND the individual's responsibility in creating change. The "What about Leadership" section of this video tied a nice bow on the hero narrative we've all heard and grown sick of hearing. It's very important to acknowledge the leaders, such as yourself, that work tirelessly to bring these types of messages to public awareness. The Goal of the movement is the most important factor, not our commonalities of repression. Opportunists exist within the proletariat itself, so it is paramount that we leave room for those lone leaders that support the movement on high.

just wanna add: celebrity culture has been a phenomenom in japan since the 17th century since the advent of popular theatre in basically capitalist-esque run cities. Although not comparable in scale to today, you can still find the remnants of gossip culture and almost obsessions that some people had for actors in books, actor critiques (which you can pretty much call magazines) and even ukiyoe art

Great video with some much needed bonus info at the end.

Irregardless of how eloquent you may be, it cannot change the fact that the statement "our heroes are deeply flawed" is not the same statement as "our heroes are not heroes". It would appear you are making the same mistake as the very people you criticize - you require people to be inhumanly flawless and capable in order to be considered heroes at all. In that sense, your entire premise is flawed, which naturally leads to flawed conclusions. Now, I do strongly agree that all too many of the people our society holds up as "heroes" are simply not worthy of that name. Celebrity culture has perfected the art of lying by omission, and knows how to make someone appear as they are not. Likewise, most modern politicians (on both sides of the aisle) who we uphold as "heroes" don't actually accomplish very much, regardless of their political ideology and campaign goals, if only due to the violent nature of modern partisanship. But rather than look at this and conclude that they are representative of heroism itself, I instead call these figures "false heroes". And our culture today has many false heroes. I also agree that all people should try and take initiative in projects they are involved in, as well as the lives of those around them. But I think you are confusing "initiative" with "leadership". Simply taking initiative, simply pushing forward, does not make you a leader. Leaders guide, and good leaders guide without excessively controlling; by the very nature of guiding roles, only at most a minority of members of a group can be the guides for the whole. Guiding is one skill among many - a skill that not everyone need have, and a task that takes up enough time on its own that it makes it difficult to do any of the equally important jobs that make the project "tick". Now on some projects the guide can also take on other roles in addition to their guiding role, but some projects require you to "guide" full time. For example, the very idea of a judge in a courtroom is to be a "guide" for the courtroom, and is intensive enough to be a full time endeavor. The other people in the courtroom, such as the prosecutor, defense attorney, and bailiff are all extremely important as well, but they are not leaders, simply because their job demands that they cannot be in the interest of total fairness. (Granted the court system is not perfectly fair, but it's impossible to create a perfectly fair system, simply due to our world's natural complexity.) Now, I don't like how society likes to equate "the guide" with "the hero". The most important role, or alternatively the role which sets the entire project in motion, or alternatively the role by which the entire project moves forward, CAN be the guiding role, but also CAN be any number of other roles. It depends on what's happening, and why. It would be much more logical to equate the hero with "the engine", that minority of people who shoulder the heaviest burden or strongest risk and therefore by which a project simply cannot move forward. But again, disliking how heroes are typically defined is not the same as disliking the very idea of a hero. Same with the idea of reward - those that shoulder the most risk and burden should have the greatest reward, but our society likes to instead prop up any and all guiding roles as the most essential, when very often that guiding role isn't very risky or even difficult. I would also note that it is impossible to make everyone, everywhere, have an approximately equal risk, an approximately equal reward, and an approximately equal amount of leadership for a particular task. Anyone who's worked with a large group knows that you simply cannot match everyone's vision simultaneously, regardless of how much you may want to; in that sense, every project needs a guide, and no project can have more than a minority of people who guide. As stated before, the guide should rarely get the greatest reward (especially if, as is the case with many CEOs today, they don't actually do much guiding). But of course every project of more than two people needs a guide. I could go on but I've made the point I intended to. No need to complicate things with other philosophical topics.

Yessssss channel your inner billy butcher!! Honestly I’ve been obsessed with this conversation forever

A very good video. Wounderfully constructed and extremly relevant. Heros are difficult figures. The only thing i would not put at the count at 2:45 are the Gladiators. Them often being slaves or war prisoners and rearly free.

I recently read the narrative of the life of Frederick Douglass, I'd say it's the most important book I have ever read.

Fascinating!! Love it!!!

I agree with your point, absolutely but why its always the people in power who always framed as the source of problem, they sure the one who benefit the most and will likely to protect status quo... But these celebrity worship and glorification of great men is simply the results of our own nature. The fault of human nature. Part of our instinct that we need to surpass in order to become better human being. Just want to share my opinion. Peace.

Tarsila do Amaral.... great choice 👏

I hesitated to watch, because most YT essays tend to ramble or endlessly repeat themselves. Well done on this one. Well written and well read. I am reminded of a scene in the classic sci-fi series Babylon 5. A ruling council (Minbari, an alien race) that had been composed of 9 members, 3 from each of the 3 castes of that society, was broken apart by conflict created between the 2 dominant castes: Warrior and Religious. It was later reformed, again with 9, but this time 5 of the 9 were of the "forgotten" caste: the Workers. The ones who built the temples and assembled the warships. The ones who had been overlooked and trampled under foot throughout the conflict. I've always loved that aspect of the show.

Some argue that David and Goliath, have it backwards, wherein David was the “giant” as he was a marksman and was skilled in using the only weapon of the times capable of “firing” projectiles...the slingshot Just saying

It's also a reflection of a person's character when they think they need to be saved by their hero. If you don't act on what you think is right, no one else will.

That "LeBron James" took me out 😂😂😂

I have a few problems with this video. Firstly you don’t actually in any meaningful way disprove great man theory only saying that great men oppress and kill and that the people are to be upheld and venerated as the makers of history. However the people only did those things because they were ordered to. Babylon was not built by “the people” because that would mean they wanted or the majority wanted to build it up the idea came from a single source and the leadership extended from that source and as such he is the great man as he is the source even though not the method through which all those deeds are achieved. Also great men are never good men, 19th century French men thought ceaser was the pinnacle of what a man is even though he slaughtered and enslavedtheir ancestors because he had virtues the average man did not posses such as higher intelligence, leadership capabilities and charisma, however they didn’t think he was a good man, they saw him as a cruel yet extremely talented person and idolised them because of that. Secondly you seem to think that “the people” is something to be embraced rather then overcome. “The people” is just a far nicer way of saying the Herd. However the herd is something to be overcome you must go from the herd to a man and put your own individual striving and affirmation over that of the average man even if your goal is to give back to the community. For some reason you also seem to think insurgents or people against the current order as somehow good inherently (I suppose this comes from our Christian moral system) instead of people against the order, Their is also a problem as seeing great people as being made up from their surroundings as it leans into the blank slate view which has been disproven by not just other philosophers (indeed even if man is a blank slate their must still be a slate no?) but scientists to. You seem to also be think it’s somehow unnatural and cruel for the high to oppress the low when it’s simple human nature that a few will control the many no matter what system. It’s called the iron law of oligarchy and even systems “for the people” will turn into oligarchies. Even that oh so precious anarchism will turn to this as a few great men in that system will be able to somehow convince others to follow them. Adding to that anarchism must be democratic which is the worst way to run the world (Hans Herman hoppe points this out fantastically) Theirs also stuff like calling the originator of great man theory as a fascist which as someone who has actually read fascist texts I can assure you isn’t the case. And implying it’s bad that our history books is filled with great white men when, who would of guessed we live in the west who’s citizens (barring America) are mostly extremely white.

Damn just went to your twitter and saw you’re trinidadian, I recognized the accent lol, i’ve been seeing a lot more trinidadians online recently 🇹🇹 We getting relevant frl

Moten and Harney talk about the black (ante) hero in the book "All Incomplete" pointing out that there is something that is prior to and that outlasts the memorial of the black hero. This something is in part the refusal of memorialization. I feel like their writing on this adds to the discourse an afro pessimist/ afro optimist lens.

I can't help but to see that the positing of Che, Sankara and the "Founding Fathers" in your example is lopsided. Of all the flaws of Sankara and Che they didn't advocate for wholesale genocide of whole groups of people, they didn't build their systems on the cruelest chattel slavery. Comparing flawed individuals being raised up as symbols of a movement is not the same as the aggrandizement of colonizers. There is a reason the EZLN still hold up Zapata as an example to follow despite organizing using communal democratic principles.

My good man, here's hoping you be famous. The last famous individual and the gates to a new age of social capital for all!

Andrew, I've been on that no infallible heroes page for years, publicly, but I still had a few heroes hidden away. Sankara is one. Calling me out like that! Not cool!

I don't know if you'll read this, but I want to ask, as someone who keeps spending time watching video essayists talk about social change, about establishing communities and caring about one another, I want to know what I'm supposed to do. I want someone to stop talking theory for a moment and give me ideas for what action to take beyond voting or donating to a random cause. At what point have I watched enough videos to know what I'm supposed to do? I have no intention of enacting violence to overthrow my government. I want to participate in a smaller community, to cultivate one, but I don't know where to look. I feel connected to my family, I'm part of many a fandom, and I've lived in an intentional community my whole life, but I still feel like something's missing. I don't feel like I'm truly part of the communities I align myself with. What am I supposed to do? What are the first steps? Do you know?

I also don't think it helps that most people are unfortunately raised to be pro-authritarian. Even after leaving traditional hierarchical structures like a religion one was raised in that same mindset or ideas about submission to a higher authority aren't easy things to let go of. So even long after one doesn't believe in the old higher authority figure like ""God"" or rather its "appointed leadership" people can still have this idea that there's still such a thing as a legitimate higher authority out there they just have to find it and then submit to it because that's what they think they should do.

Great job. 👍

mans compared sankara and che to the fucking founding fathers

Look, I'm not an anarchist, but saint Andrew stays dropping heat, even if don't always agree with his methods to reaching a post capitalism world.

Andrew? I hate the term "Don't be a hero." It feels like it tells people that we can just stand by and let injustice happen before our eyes because we can leave that response for the authorities who often just make things worse when they get there. I don't care who you are, BE A HERO, I'll have your back. I think it's a SolarPunk idea for people to respond to violence with shields/armour and nonlethal weapons instead of hand-cannons that can end a life in one shot. Where is my right to bear armor?

Idk, I don’t disagree per se, I just wonder when we’ll get around to making some place we can go to instead of just “envisioning”. Over the past 3 years all I’ve seen and done with other anarchist in my area is do basic small scale charity work, and just endlessly talk about political theory. Like at this point, I feel like we’re just walking in circles. I’m not saying we should start some vanguard party to plan an eventual capture of the state, but I can appreciate that there’s something tangible to that project. Is there a KZfaqr out there who is part of an actual community of people who are progressing towards detaching themselves from relying on commodity production? I guess the Amish sort of do that, though I wouldn’t really call them anarchist. I’m just tired of the cycle of do generic full time job, help poor in charity, talk politics, repeat forever.

WTF I keep getting unsubscribed?! 😤😤😤 This video was amazing!! 🎉👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽🎉 This needs to be a topic of conversation. We rely too much on "the big man" for solutions. If we build a community, anything is possible!

Andrew, could you get better sound or edit it so it doesn't go up and down between utterances? Good content, hope you improve further

Loved the video. So much to think about.

Brecht was first a playwright rather than a poet. Great video apart from that!

Amazing video

Well said, thank you!

Omg Crouton & Baguette just made me smile

When do we eat the rich? I'm hungry.

Excited to watch this!

I love your ideas :)

Hell yeah Community power!✊