Thanks for the video JT, here's hoping it doesn't get buried by the algorithm once again

@Second Thought ~ since you’re obviously interested and all, standard political models are based upon subjective rhetoric, not objective laws.. where objective laws are applied, political theory instead emulates physics. Understanding accretion and dispersion are key.. You see, there were ancient civilizations that knew what “Co”mm”Uni”sm was before the U.S. founders did, “We the People”, and then Marx. It means we’re dealing with a timeless empirical science of no one’s invention.. When your curiosity gets the better of you. Lmk.. I’ll be around.. ✊🌎✊

How come your previous video isn't on nebula???

JT i wanna have ur kids

"Okay, maybe not the Trot" 😂 Real Left Unity is in hating the Trots! I've heard rumors that the PSL is descended from Trots, and gets their people kettled by police as if on purpose. Can I get some informal input about this?

Yep

This is exactly how I see it. I took the test ages ago when my views where very different and it's fun to see my dot moving towards the left lol

Yet like the MBTI, people do.

It's a very good reminder that it is not about pure left or right, it's about idea by idea, problem by problem

Your framework for life should never be based on a single test, book or manual.

Or you hear "I have watche TIK History and am, like him, to stupid to distinguish "Gleichschaltung" from seizing the means of production"

In history class in 2004, we looked at the initialism for the Nazi party from back to front. By our teacher simply commenting on each letter in combination with the one that had come before (while going from back to front, as said). While it's not like we students needed to be told that the Nazis weren't socialists, it still was a great way to make clear within less than a minute, that they were very much not socialists. This would work less well with the English initialism/name for the party, but with the German one, it worked. (Most of us were at least moderately left-leaning 18 and 19-year-olds in Bern, Switzerland.)

To be fair, it's often more so because they think having ,,socialist'' in name makes you a socialist - specifically in this example. Though sadly this sort of thinking is not limited just to the right or people who are not engaged in politics, you'll find plenty people on the left - or atleast they claim to be on the left - who endlessly simp and defend any regime which calls itself communist or socialist, even when nothing they do has anything to do with socialims or communism in the slightest.

Reply to add: Just in general, it's an issue to look at the party's name in English. It's unclear which words belong together or are what kinds of words. The fact that "nationalsozialistische" (national socialist) and "Arbeiterpartei" (worker's party) are compound words - one an adjective, one a noun - is vital. There are ways to misread the name of the party when translated into English.

He said he was. He lied. I dont think you can describe his economic theory as anything but stealing from everyone and anyone.

3D compass time

I think you probably meant a flux value or direction finder. Some compass systems use gyroscopes but compasses and gyroscopes are not similar.

@@James-mb3jehere I was trying to be a smart, and you come along and outsmarter me. well that's life

Political Motion Control+ is where I'm putting my bets.

What about a sphere?

And it was inverted upside-down for some reason lol. Observador is THE liberal shit-fest.

That totally makes sense as the whole reason these specific two-axises tests became popular in the first place is because the Libertarian party of the USA wanted to "show" people that their party is not only different from the Democrats and Republicans, but that a lot of people "naturally" fall closer to them ideologically. It is kind of true that a lot of Americans are less authoritarian than Republicans but it was also kinda true that a lot of Americans were (much) further left than the Democrats or the Republicans. The libertarians test "corrected" that unfortunate finding by loading their questions as you demonstrated.

*adjusts tie* "You disagree because you don't want the state to intervene in corporate business. I disagree because I don't want a state. We are not the same."

For anyone interested in Portuguese political parties at the moment (from left to right): -PCP (commies) -BE (a block of diverse left wing parties) -PAN (an animal rights party) -PS (the one currently in power, are social democrats) -PSD (call themselves social democrats, they are center right) -IL (neo liberals) -Chega (the big conservative party, a bit fascistic if you ask me)

Weren't those the guys that practised the quack science of praxiology?

Tru ! Nothing hurts more than trying to figure out where to put myself on a line from “very conservative” to “very liberal” ☠️

Yeah. Thats no scale at all. Fact is.... In policies, there is almost zero difference between the two. Neither of them will push for ANY kind of reform of legal & justice, prison systems, or police. Neither of them will give people proper healthcare or education. Neither of them will ever reign in the insane military spending, fix poverty, homelessness, nothing at all. There is a reason they are called "Corporate Democrates" Because the Dems are exactly as in love with corporate money as the Republicans. These people go to the same countryclubs to play golf. They are in on the same grifts, scams, and money hustles. THey are extremely opposed in CULTURE, but almost the same in actual policies.

Let me guess it didn't have a neither option?

@@nightfall3332 You have guessed correctly. 😄

​@@akorn9943I kinda don't mind it as "liberal vs conservative" is mostly a culture war and has nothing to do with economic systems. You can very much interpret the "liberal" as being progressive and then be called "very very liberal".

Even within the West, there are certain political axis that are crucial for certain countries or regions, which the test does not take into account.

@@AholeAtheist I'm from Quebec, and a big political axis here is "sovereignist versus federalist", which has nothing to do with being on the Left or the Right, or being Authoritarian or Libertarian.

Bullshit. The map of the world is the same wherever one lives. All that changes is one's position upon it.

​@@princevesperalmakes sense. In Europe a lot of it is also pro federation or anti. Some good greens are anti nuclear and Salvini is pro nuclear You have socialists who are also anti vax and proeurope. It's a mixed bay

Especially in the question of "Religion". Religion and Culture are INSANELY different per each places. In the US, religion probably more connotative of "Televangelists" or "Megachurches". In England it might be "The English church". In Iran it would be "The Ayatollah", in most state in Africa, it might mean "Family" or "Tribal Culture". A lot of variable to discuss besides "Your Agreement to religion puts you on Authoritarian and Right wing Side of the Politics". Imagine calling the incredibly egalitarian idea of "Zakat";and "Qurban" of Islam or the Salvation Army as """"right wing"""",

​@@rabbitcreativeveganism is hypocritical

I agree. It's kind of annoying when people pose an argument against me that is basically like "oh, you bought something. You couldn't possibly hate capitalism then!"

@@azieg9ygeb many communists detested homosexuality

@@Supernimo735 as an ex-vegan i empathise a lot , i really do. but it's actually quite inane, hypocritical, unhealthy and just reality-defying to think that living organisms do not consume other living organisms. people keep cats and it's okay if their cat eats rats or birds or their pet lizard eats maggots or whatever the fuck but god forbid if a human consumes the flesh of another creature for food!!! that being said i want factory farming to stop because it is abhorrent and needlessly cruel.

most people just wanna fucking grill you know? i adore the tenacity and courage of those who fight for a better world for us to live in but at the end of the day, those activities will often give you fines or prison time. it's kind of difficult to have a livelihood while being politically active as well, unless you're entrenched in the system of parliamentary or municipal politics and trying for praxis that route, which is a lot better than what i do (fuckall except trying to spread the word) but still very close to "fuckall".

How can you not be mad when the entier world is build upp to destroy itself and it keeps deny that it does every time we point out the wrongs

He's just so incredibly based

It's not easy, but you have to learn how to emotionally detach yourself from the world's problems. You'll still be able to care about them but it won't be such a burden on you

@@ispilloilthats true, theres a mindset of accepting the things you cannot control

Still struggling here in enjoying life while getting educated in politics and sociology. 🥲

I'm a fan of capitalism with very strong unions and regulations. Personally, I'm just trying to live a decent life, and I think most people are just trying to do the same. Personally, idc if the grocery store owner makes more than me, but I want that money to come from maintaining an innovative enterprise and not from controlling markets, exploiting workers, and bribing politicians. Ofc, whether this is achievable is up for debate. After all, history has shown that people with tons of capital try to do all those things I mentioned. Although, I do think the best quality of life can be found in countries which use capitalism to efficiently generate resources while using regulation (and in turn strong union) to help reduce some of the negative side effects.

@@monkemode8128 As much as I understand the "push towards Denmark" and I think that it is a preferable situation of capitalism, but it still pushes negative externalities onto developing or undeveloped country. It's not about the jealousy of somebody earning more money than somebody else, it's the power imbalance that creates unfavorable cost-shifting due to the authority of private property and incentives of profitability. Cooperatives that cooperate with other cooperatives allow people to arrange production and distribution in ways that allow for people to take care of each other without the underlying need to maximize profit for a few capitalists. As a Democratic Socialist I am not opposed to social democracy as a form of transitional change that could last a while, but I think eventually we will need to reduce alienation by allowing labor to control capital. Not about jealousy it's about liberation.

I don't think the employer-employee is naturally insidious, it's just naturally insidious under capitalism. Power dynamics will always naturally form under any system.

@@sunphoenix1231 Power imbalances will always form, but the insidious thing about capitalism is the regularity that it creates capital bias even with union bargaining. It biases capital profits over workers, local communities, global communities, and the planet itself.

this is actually a good comment. bravo

I feel as though hiding behind nebulous terms like "Leftist" and "Anti-Capitalist" is just giving in to cold war propaganda and ceding ground to reactionary trains of thought.

Fear is an expression of ones lack of knowledge, thats why the greatest fear is of the unknown and those most fear-monger-y are the least knowledgeable or comfortable in regards to the things they fear.

true, it scares people less when you say that

​@@maya07_11and they won't bring up the Holomor unlike they always do when you say Socialism or Communism. The debate ends up becoming a Whataboutism argument. It's more accurate to see Socialism in the lense of the idea of Republics was back in the 1800's (like the French Revolution).

I've often chosen to go with social libertarian, or left libertarian. When I want to intentionally scare people I just say I'm an anarchist.

It's a seemingly apolitical topic, but once you look into it, there's many reasons why it should be covered on a channel like this.

Climate Town, Not Just Bikes and Second Thought discussing the climate and political implications of city planning? Sign me the fuck up for that 😂

Pfft, even the PMC can do better - largely won't, but could. That said - part of accessibility is minimizing the use of jargon. We can get around 'bourgeois' and 'PMC', for ready instance. And while doing so, also avoid condescension - people who aren't all that politically engaged won't have the theory and the vocabulary those of us who are do, but they damn sure will have the same sorts of brains.

If you agree with your own words, then you shouldn’t be encouraged by this video’s attitude towards the political compass.

READ THEORY, SECOND THOUGHTS VIDS ARE INTROS SO YOU CAN READ THEORY! THE WORKERS BEFORE US DID JUST FUCKING FINE READING THEORY, YOU FUCKING CAN TOO

Most workers in past socialist movements never read theory, or if they did they read distilled theory. The vast majority of people are unable or unwilling to truly study politics.

@@CarrotConsumer Well - depth varies. 19th century workers were frequently illiterate and texts weren't as cheaply available as now, but unions had readings of works that were not exactly lightweight. But yeah, that distilled theory plays a hugely important role in accessibility. It's not nothing and it should be widely promoted.

Good for you!

Well, I'd say there is politics that benefits a few (based on ancestry, religion, race, gender etc.) and nurtures the exploitation of the rest. That's fascism, it's generally authoritarian, even though it may hide behind a democratic front. And there is politics that try to make life livable for all people. You could call that democracy, humanism, something like that. Of course there may be different ideas or priorities for reaching one goal or the other. But effectively it's always down to the question which general direction you are heading towards.

Good thing you mentioned you attend political sociology classes, so we know your opinion is worthless and you're disconnected from reality.

Good addition!

also watch out for armchair theorists as sources! people will say “this important person said this, therefore it’s true”

Based

Yeah genuine conversations are how we actually build momentum. Even KZfaq, Reddit, or Discord is still towards that superficial level where you need to organize unless it's local or if you're at some higher organizational level.

Left: "It's not my job to educate you!" Right: "I'll educate you whether you want me to or not!" And that's how we get so many chuds.

@@ashkitt7719 You need to be educated

Hakim is a great aggregate of left theory imo. Also Spotify has a bunch of theory in audio form, reading capital with comrades made Das capital much more enjoyable

You put a lock on Fox News? 😂 A+, good on you.

@@Luke5100 right? I don’t know if we’ll ever find those commonalities. We can all recognize the same problems.: education, billion dollar corporations contributing to campaign finances, bailouts for some of the wealthiest corporations on earth, etc.. We all just want what’s best for our families, and especially our children. But as long as some insist on legislating from the pulpit, there’s always going to be some level of alienation that will be a roadblock. The tea party in the early 2000s and Occupy Wall Street were basically saying the same things about the problems, and the manifold that divided us was made up of rugged individualism, bootstraps, and religious affiliation. As long as those are informing, our political agendas and ideologies, we can’t agree on anything.

@@Luke5100Exactly. I think it’s incredibly hard for liberals to become socialists. I think they’re further away from us than we are to conservatives

​@@tempejklNo.

​@@tempejklConservatives understand collectivism, common prosperity in a way

I felt this video lacked direction tbh. They have much better videos than this one on their channel.

Can I just say even though he sounds trust worthy, sites his sources, and is calm and direct, which is great. Doesn’t mean you can do your own research and find a credible source that juxtaposes him. Things can be spun in many ways

Nah you are a socialist lol

We asked the money and it said no.

@@nickanderson412source?

lol, we have way less money in Brazil and we have healthcare

Whitey won't allow it because it benefits Black and Brown folks.

It also does a great job of framing everything in terms of money.

Authoritarians up, libertarians down. Socialists left, capitalists right. Conservatives back, progressives forth. Like this?

This!! Love that channel!!

so you have no problem with big gov violating your consent? how can intervention ever be justified on an ethical basis? that's the kicker that destroys and legitimacy to any Marxist cause. you don't care how many OTHER peoples rights you people have to trample to get there, so long as you get equal results and to get back at your school bullies.

Hell yea brother

Това не е руски, просто ми се пише на кирилица за да обърквам хората ✊✊

based and commiepilled

cyka blyat comrades

As a leftie living in a small country that has been exploited and scarred by being a part of the soviet union, nothing makes me cringe harder than Russians advocating for communism.

Thanks so much!

It is because achieving anything significant requires large scale cooperation, and the part of the cost of that cooperation is horse-trading: I.E. I'll support some of the stuff that you want (even though I don't actually care about it), if you will do the same for me. That compromise manifests itself as a political party.

people keep making up shit nonexistent ideologies that go nowhere, and the ones that have existed for years are the ones who do shit

This whole statement only works for a broken democracy. If you want true democracies Germany is your best bet with more independent views and activity changing ideologies.

We should put bridges on the border so immigrants can cross the border safely without getting hit by border patrol.

If you're wealthy and have the connections, you can get into any career even if you are completely unqualified, as seen with certain members of Congress (ex: Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene)

tbh. your better of DISTANCING yourself from marxism. because historically they ALWAYS stabbed anarchist groups in the back whenever we were no longer useful to them. just a freindly heads up from a fellow "organize however you want" anarchist.

ML groups have always tended to be the one stressing different lifestyles outside of your organising, especially MLM groups with cultural revolution. Though a form of it exists in ml groups, namely, actually taking of your body; exercising, taking self defence classes, not abusing drugs and alcohol - far too much of the left socialise in unproductive manners and in ways that numb you from the reason you might've actually gone into politics. Anarchists in our country just do their little book fair, invite trade and tenant Unionists, and smugly shat on them asking questions like 'do you not feel bad being a paid Unionists, aren't you exploiting your members with that?!' Luckily because they have no historical roots in my country they tend to be small patches of weirdos completely disconnected from their communities

It's a big problem. It - and divisiveness - can make for really miserable left communities, especially the easily available online ones where engagement incentivizes complaint. I try to remember and practice that the core of socialism is thoughtful, practical kindness and that it's something we can apply with each interaction.

Organise. Join a union or another kind of social organisation. Doesn't need to be communist. The basis of socialism and anarchism are mutual aid and it is very fulfilling to practice that.

I have no hope. I'm a socialist, and have been for years, but I know we're all going to die without accomplishing a damn thing.

@@aetherkidThen you are not a socialist. Being a socialist is having the goal of working towards socialism. What you are is a doomer. If you need therapy I recommend that and if you need to find some hope. Well, there's hundreds of good people out there. Talk to them.

@@aetherkid You would rather die on that old rotted dung hill of an ideology than consider much more practical alternatives and pat yourself on the back for loyalty to the cause than have a chance in hell at actually improving peoples everyday lives you claim to care so much about? Jeez that's sheer self-righteous attitude in the face of being patently wrong on everything, even when its hurting your self esteem, sums up everything wrong with Marxism. its Christianity for people who think Christianity is too soft and offers unsurprisingly the same real world results.

Ok

Can confirm ^^ They also have a really good episode about the political compass and other tests

Absolutely love SRSLY WRONG. Their Social Ecology trilogy is super informative, very funny and even has some heartwarming moments :) Their episodes on the “imaginary tragedy of the imaginary commons”, mutiny and “the revolution will be hilarious” are great. The episodes with David Wengrow or Zoe Baker are also super interesting

Can you give a link to Capita's illustrated version? Sounds interestingly weird

@@brandonmorel2658 Just Google "Marx's Capital Illustrated". There should be some non-Amazon sources to get it from if that's your thing.

I like 12axes best

Just a joke, mostly

Trotskyiest are neo-Fascists, disregard yourself from those people

​@@qunituabastard1754relax don't insult fellow comrades

Ayyyy we’re glad you like it!

You should make a video, because to be very honest, words are imperfect and that word salad is pretty incomprehensible. Libertarian classic, or american libertarian? Virtue dialectic? As in.. virtue ethics? In place of material dialectic? Why? Explain yourself in greater detail please.

@@stevehansen4112 These worlds will still have ambiguity even with a video. That's not a Word Salad, just the faults of Subjective Interpretation. It's not my problem that people deliberately appropriate words for a specific agenda.

@@stevehansen4112 I will define one thing. I use the word Virtue as a mean between two extremes. This is the Classical Definition, but it is most frequently used in Ethics. But it can apply in any situation, even physics. Room Temperature is a Virtue between Hot and Cold.

Oof, hang in there! That’s often how it goes

@@SecondThought my Marxist literary theory professor told me that poli theory wasn’t a good idea… I wish I listened to her Great vid btw ❤️

I disagree with mask mandates though. I still wore them, but I think people should choose, unless they will be staying in a place for a long time, and a very close space.

​@tempejkl I think there are situations and circumstances in which mask mandates are necessary. But not in the way liberal democracies enforce them. A few points of criticism: 1. Framing: ppl need explanation of the pathogens and the danger of e.g. LongCovid. Reducing it to a temporal nuisance to protect "the vulnerable" leads to hate and opposition in an ableist society. 2. Costs. You simply can't enforce mandates without providing masks for free. 3. Availability of good masks. Try finding an FFP2 mask that fits on small faces like children's or short people's faces. 4. Alternatives and breaks. Masks are not designed for wearing them for 8 hrs straight. Also, some ppl can't wear them (newborns, toddlers, some autistic folks, people with feeding tubes etc.) There have to be other measures of protection, e.g. air purifier systems, ventilation, free pcr testing for everyone. And more breaks for all workers and students, where they can go outside and take their masks off. Mask mandates under liberalism are limited in their efficiency bc they pit the need for safety and the accessibility and human needs for comfort against each other. As a high-risk person, I still wear a mask indoors tohave a minimum of protection.

@@chrisbe4655 Agreed. If mandatory, they need to be provided for free as well as tests and air purifiers. The individualist framing of "freedoms" creates an opportunity for libertarian whinging.

What's the problem with trots?

@@gkk116 that's the kind of thing that's really complicated to explain through a KZfaq comment; I'm nowhere near the best person to explain it and there'll probably be plenty that disagree with me, but overall, it has to do with Trotsky's position related to Marxism-Leninism before and after the revolution. From what I understand, initially, he was a Menshevik, believing that Communism could be achieved with the help from the bourgeoisie to depose the Czar, and didn't believe in the farmers' power. He in some moment changed his stances, but overall kept an opposing view, creating groups, magazines and dissidence that fragmented the party (that's not a problem per se, but one of the bases of the Leninist party is that of democratic centralism, that aims to keep cohesion on their ideals and public stance. As I understand it, critic and dissidence are more than welcome, but after those things have been voted in committee, they shouldn't be point for public debate anymore, in favor of cohesion). Trotsky also believed in something called the "permanent revolution", that would aim to bring the revolution everywhere at once (forcibly so), in place of establishing it to one country and the rest following. Among other things. Despite the "Orwell narrative" that Trotsky was Lenin's chosen, many of his mentions seem to suggest he wasn't much of a fan. Also, one point of criticism from MLs is that trots don't see our socialist experiences (USSR, Cuba, NK, Laos etc.) as "true experiences", but that is something I don't have a lot to say about, so I'll leave to someone with a little more baggage.

@@johnnylouro Sounds fair to me. Was expecting claims of hiom being a CIA shill, but those reasons are sound. Thanks for the summary

@@gkk116 you're welcome :)