Why Asking for "Definitions" is Stupid

so you're the one talking all this shit

let's hear your voice

g'day what's that

did you hear me yeah i can hear you all

right

what's going on what's going on what's

going on you wanted to come here you

wanted to debate me

you said you wanted to give your

definition of fascism go ahead and give

it

yeah i as somebody who thinks that the

meanings of these words

what country are you from that's

irrelevant

no no i'm just curious i'm just curious

it doesn't matter mate i'm curious okay

you're australian okay go ahead

anyway before we go any further though

no go ahead go ahead sorry i don't

interrupt you what are your pronouns

i don't i don't care i don't give a fuck

okay well that's right i'll just defer

to they them

okay go ahead anyway so very simply

fascism

is a system that is ultra right-wing

ultra-nationalistic

okay which involves a highly centralized

economy

a highly centralized government um

a strong combination of military and

secret police rolled into control of the

government

that seeks to create and maintain and

protect

hierarchies in australia okay

in the country okay so those hierarchies

can be based

on gender race political affiliation

whatever right hierarchy is what's

important in fascism is that hierarchies

exist and those are protected

okay by this definition nazi germany

italy china and russia yeah would be

considered

that's what i was going to get to that's

what i was going to get to besides the

whole right wing thing which is a little

bit ambiguous

it sounds like you just want to say

every non-liberal country's fascist

no so but i want to run it through to

you again you said a highly right-wing

country okay define right we can we can

yeah because we can look at why russia

and china are right-wing

before we do that i want you to define

right-wing go ahead

yes so a system that seeks to

become as centralized and hierarchical

as possible

it's better to the only um spectrum that

exists

in politics that matters

is uh on one end anarchy and

libertarianism

the where you seek to abolish the

existence of unjust hierarchy

okay and all the other others you just

said unjust hierarchy i it's a little

bit normative and

i don't you know what's so unjust about

it can you explain

what do you mean you have to be more

specifically said unjust hierarchy

uh why should i care about which you

find just or unjust can you explain why

i should care

if you could get it with all that shit

you were talking it sounds like you

don't think i'm a human being so i don't

know what you

why should your notion of justice mean

anything to me

because my arguments are better than

yours why is it

well if you let me continue if i'd enjoy

anything that i'm happy to explain

sure so the idea of anarchy pretty

simply

is the abolition of unjust hierarchy the

idea of libertarianism no i want you to

go into justice

what's so unjust about so-called

hierarchies

so a hierarchy isn't necessarily unjust

there are just higher yeah what's an

unjust hierarchy go ahead

yeah so for instance uh a government

where you don't vote on your leaders

that would be considered an unjust

hiring democracy

why is it unjust to not vote on your

leader

yeah yeah because that's a clear example

of authoritarianism

where you said it's authoritarianism i'm

asking why it's unjust

because the will of a small group of

people is exercised over the majority

rather than the majority having to say

over everyone but according what if that

small

group of people exercise claims to

exercise

on behalf of that majority and the

majority doesn't actually express in its

capacity as the majority of people

any dissent can you justify how that's

the there's a conflict of interest there

how do you define an antagonism between

that minority and the majority

in that case so you're you're asking me

that

a um a dictator is

acceptable if it's a benevolent dictator

no

don't put words in my mouth i'm just

working that's why i'm working with your

idea of justice i'm asking you you said

an unjust hierarchy is one you gave the

example i'm gonna

be in good faith and just say this was

an example it wasn't your absolute

definition

of what constitutes an unjust hierarchy

you said it's when a small group

exercises power over a majority now the

reason that's

one example okay yeah i just gave you in

good faith that this was your one

example because i'm not like vlosh

i actually try to do this i try to

discern the meaning of what my opponents

are trying to say

and then address it accordingly i don't

try to that's hilarious considering

vosh wanted you to define fascism and he

refused no he didn't

no okay well then you in your own words

right now

define fascism to define it

by giving a static and eternal string of

words now i'm letting you do that

because wait what

that's what you want to do hang on hang

on here now i have a really quick

question i have a really quick question

okay you want to switch the argument

switch debate go ahead switch it

do you believe in the objective truth

yes sure why not

uh why not because uh there's no like

what like

objective truth do you believe in god do

you believe that these words were given

to us

by our creators like six thousand years

ago when the earth was created

is the experience of truth reducible to

the form of expression

given to truth uh in the in the narrow

way

of a definition in a dictionary because

why isn't a work of art an expression of

truth

in your view so the definition of words

is dependent on

geographical location time and culture

the definition of word changes what is

the definition of a word

the definition of a word is dependent on

time

is it what it's dependent on what is it

of which word what is the definition of

a word

what is it that defines a word

what defines words

the definition of a word is dependent

what defines words

stop repeating the same fucking thing

yeah if i continue then

what defines words don't give me what

it's dependent on

what defines words i'm not triggered

you're triggered

i am triggered you talk so much shit and

you're fucking idiot

stop repeating the same thing what

defines words

go ahead the geographical what defines

words

what the local populists agree on them

to be

which is dependent on geographic

occasional time and culture so what the

local populace agrees on them to be how

do they express that agreement

you have to be more specific how does a

population express its agreement that

according to you

gives uh gives meaning to words and

defines words

how is that uh how is that agreement

measured

how is it something how can you know

that agreement

why can you measure it i suppose you

could survey a bunch of people and say

is the is the definition of where of

this word x or y

and then depending on what the majority

chooses that would be generally accepted

as the definition

so in your view in order to this is what

defines the meaning of words

you take a survey of a given population

and it's a democratic poll

and they ask you what is the definition

of this word and then

the population is going to agree on the

definition is that what you're saying

so to put it more simply yeah what the

what a population

generally agrees on as the definition is

the definition of a word

but okay but but you're ignoring the

argument i asked you

how do you determine that agreement how

do you know

what they agree upon how do they agree

how is that agreement

actually expressed in reality

stuff like that is uh just part of

culture of how culture is developed over

you're just you're just you're just

giving me other words i'm asking you a

simple question

now we have to talk about what culture

is can we please just stick to this

i don't do you want to talk about what

culture is now or what

you wanted me to move on to this topic

man i was happy to define fascism

no no no no we got to this round the

definition of work got to this rabbit

hole because we began with a thing no no

no you

took us down this rabbit hole because

you're the one that asked me oh where

does the definition come from

that you would go around calling

everybody a cock and saying blatantly

and i dominated you little bitch i

dominated you

i'm dominating you i'm dominating you

little bitch

i'm dominating you you little bitch i'm

dominating you you little bitch

you surrendered to me you surrendered to

me

you surrendered to me in your words

in your own words can you define fascism

no

i already explained myself you wanted to

come on because you wanted to define it

and i'm going to fuck your definition

i'm going to fuck you okay okay hey

explain okay no i'm happy i know hey

whoa whoa really quick really quick

please go ahead

explain why my definition is wrong we

began with all the elements

first you said it's an ultra right-wing

government we're got into what right

wing is

and you said right wing is the promotion

of unequal hierarchies our unjust

hierarchies and i said what is justice

and then it got us down the rabbit hole

of what is how what is it mean to define

a word

what is the definition of words how are

words defined and you couldn't answer

the fucking question

you were mumbling and stumbling and

stuttering what do you mean you could

identify the fucking question i did i

asked you

how is the agreement that gives that

proves what the

common agreed meaning of a word how does

that express in reality

you told me a poll people vote on it in

a poll so everyone votes on the

definition of communism

and it turns out oh my god evil do you

think that do you think that every time

a word needs defining we

like submit a poll to the world is that

how you think of a word you said that

actually

that's what you said you wanted an

example of how you could tell the

definition of a word so on the spot i

thought

oh i guess you could do a poem example

yes you did roll

back the title i asked you what is it

mean

for a word to be defined and you said

enough people in a geographic region

agree upon it

i asked you yes how is that agreement

and you weren't happy and you talked

about culture

what does that have to do with it does

that clarify my question you just saying

culture

hey do you think that the definition of

a word could

be different depending on culture let me

tell you what i think louis vuitton do

you think

that words could have different

definitions depending on culture

do you think the culture of indigenous

australians had words that are different

to the culture medieval britain listen

louis do you seriously think it shut up

for a fucking second

shut the fuck up shut the fuck up i'm

gonna answer your question

when you shut up shut up shut up bitch

shut the fuck up and let me answer your

objective shut the fuck up and let me

answer

the definition shut the fuck up shut the

fuck up and let me answer

in good faith i would love to know what

that feels like obviously

different regions there's different

meanings of words

based on different regions but that

doesn't address the fucking point

you want to know what i think louis

baton i think the

the way in which you can tell how it is

people agree upon words

is how they fucking use them isn't that

a simple thing

so much muffling so much stuttering and

muffling and dancing around the point

just to avoid the simple truth

where does the use come from where do

they get the use from where do they get

it from where do they get it from where

do they get what from

where do they get the use from them you

said how they use it where do they get

the user where do they get the use from

because those were would it be time

location and culture

that that's that you're just talking

about the different types of context

i'm getting more deep into it you

fucking idiot what is

why is it that different cultures and

times so this is why you can't define

words

you're so scared of definition i just

fucked you mentally i just fucked you

yeah

okay sure i accept your surrender you

just considering how sex negative you

are

mentally fucked mentally and dominated

damned and you talk

you lost mate i have 120 subscribers and

i'm doing better than vosh

oh yeah oh yeah oh yeah i have 120

followers on twitch and i am growing

faster than fucking vosh was at this

time and here's a fucking

original channel growth i am no no you

can you can go back and look at social

blade and you'll see that you're wrong

we're in hyper growth

vosh was dick riding destiny he came

from destiny's community and stole his

viewers

we came from scratch fucking idiot

do you want to get back to the actual

discussion take the fucking hell yeah

let's have the discussion

you lost you could you lost on the thing

about defining words so let's roll it

back

you can't actually tell so i'm still you

can't yeah what right wing means so it

means nothing then right

because you can't tell me what it means

therefore it's meaningless that was your

boss's argument if i can't define it in

a perfect way

it's meaningless you couldn't define

what right wing means my god

you couldn't define what right wing i

can define it right now

go ahead so right-wing ideology

is like unjust hierarchy is intrinsic to

right-wing ideology the further right

you go

the more unjust hierarchy is protected

in your society innocent question

what is unjust let's go back to it you

want to keep going in circles i asked

you what you want me to go

through every single hierarchy that

exists aside and explains which one to

just

which ones are unjust no that's how i

i was acting i was responding to vos

that way i said we can go and see

which countries are fascists i'm i'm i'm

playing voss for you right now

i'm saying what makes hierarchies unjust

so it really depends on the hierarchy

for instance what makes it unjust

don't give me a context i i told vosh it

depends on the context and you call me a

fucking idiot

so what makes a hierarchy unjust give me

the definition

generally what would make a higher aki

unjust is how undemocratic it is

okay and why is that what we're going

back and forth why is the lack of

democracy

let me be more specific with that one um

how

undemocratic and unegalitarian that

hierarchy is

and why does that make it unjust

why is not being egalitarian unjustly

i'll go down that road with you if you

want to why yes why is it that justice

is dependent on

so-called egalitarianism

okay dude because all races deserve to

be treated equally or genders deserve to

be treated

or racist all people deserve to be

treated equally is that what you're

saying you just said you just said

why is he gonna like terrorism good no i

didn't say why it's good

i didn't say why you fucking dude no

i didn't say anything about moral good i

said why it's just

you just you think justice and good are

the same thing

do you think justice and good are the

same thing are you think justice and

good are the same thing

um yeah i would say so well you would

probably say that they're just saying

egalitarian

would probably say that something that's

just is good but it doesn't mean they're

the same fucking thing

i asked why it's more just i'm not

talking about good

because when you talk about good then

you get into pragmatism then you get

into utilitarianism

i'm asking you why would you want just

things go ahead explain why it's more

just go ahead

explain why what's more just explain why

egalitarianism equals justice

because uh no one should uh stand or

over anybody that is not in an unjust

hierarchy everyone should have equal

rights

tautology you just said unjust again and

we're dealing with the definition of

justice according to you you just

repeated the tautology and referred back

to the fact that it's unjust

but i don't know what's just to you or

unjust so stop being tautological

why is it that's why that's why i made

this why is the point

why is the linchpin of justice why is

the linchpin of justice

based on how egalitarian it is go ahead

and explain

why is the linchpin of what's just uh

depending on how we get like tearing it

in yes that's what you're

that's what you put it as right that's

what you said i asked you

what makes a hierarchy just or unjust

you said how egalitarian it is and i'm

asking you why is that that's right

why is it that egalitarianism defines

how unjust or just a hierarchy is go

ahead

because egalitarianism is a good

principle that's all society should

attempt to live up to

but what does it mean what makes it so

just what makes that just

because nobody should have should be

deferred more rights than another

what makes that just

i just said because no one should have

more you're telling me you think

no one should you're not telling me why

that is objectively just since we

believe in objective truth

why is that i don't believe in objective

truth you don't okay that's fine

i'm not some kind of i'm yeah i'm not

some kind of mental loser who

believes in objecting okay so you don't

believe in objective truth okay

of course not truth is subjective okay

okay that's fine why is it then

okay then why is it why is that the case

go ahead not the objective truth thing

the other thing

why is it that everyone should be

treated equal as whatever you were

saying

why is that just can you explain to me

why that's just

because any kind of treatment to that uh

you would afford somebody that's

not based on egalitarianism would be

based on some kind of bigotry

well okay what does it have to do with

justice

because everybody deserves the same

rights as everyone else why base

what does that have to do with justice

why why you're saying everyone should

this or that

why why should they according to justice

why should they

because egalitarianism is a good

principle

why is it just

i can't like i just go around in circles

man egalitarianism is a good principle

that we should strive to

look after like to reach in our society

you guys see this chat

you see this chat you see this chat

he won't give me a fucking simple

definition of why it's just

a definition of what egalitarianism no

i'm not asking your definition of

egalitarianism i'm asking you

what your definition of justice was and

that led us down the royal road to

egalitarianism now i'm asking you the

question

of why measurement of how just something

right

why is why a hierarchy is just or unjust

defined by how egalitarian it is

what makes that just unjust

because that's the only measure that uh

is fair

okay it's it's more fair why is it more

fair now we're getting somewhere why is

it more fair

oh my god because it doesn't go into any

kind of

like characteristics or classes that you

could describe to somebody

um okay and why is that why is that

necessary for justice and fairness

why is it necessary for fairness because

it's egalitarian no one's

like afforded anything you're saying the

word again and it's a tautology why is

it more fair go ahead

yeah yeah i know you like that you got

that i got you a little cupcake well i

am beating you right now if that's true

because it's okay

okay you're bidding yeah um

you have to repeat the question okay

we'll we'll go ahead why is it more fair

that everyone is treated in an

egalitarian way simple question

why is it more fair yes simple the

question is the answer it is fair to

treat everyone equally why

like you can't say why do that yes i can

i can say why

okay sure because otherwise if you're

not treating them fairly in an

egalitarian sense no no you're not

you define fairly by eagletary let's not

go and have tautologies

let's keep it how it is if you're not

treating them

in an egalitarian way then what go ahead

if you're not treating them in an

egalitarian sense then you're treating

them based on some kind of bigotry

okay and what is bigotry oh my god to

treat somebody in a non-egalitarian

sense

and and why okay and you're we're going

back in circles why is that okay yeah

because why is that unfair leading us to

why is that unfair oh my god because

everybody is deserving of equal rights

that's we have to we have to get this

straight before we can

come to this normative moral conclusion

we have to get this stuff straight from

like what is this like why is it fair to

be fair like what

no no you are you are equating

egalitarianism with fairness not me

you're doing it because you asked i'm

holding you have you determined i'm

holding it if a hierarchy is just

and i believe that hierarchy is in an

egalitarian

i'm holding you to it i'm holding you to

your equivocation

of egalitarianism with fairness why is

it more fair to be egalitarian go ahead

because if you don't treat someone an

egalitarian censor that

your treatment of them is based on some

kind of bigotry and and and what does

that mean

you want me to justify bigotry what is

so unfair about the bigotry is my

question to you

oh my god because i can't everyone you

define bigotry for me already so we

don't have to go back

down that road but what makes it so

unfair to uh to treat people according

to different

classes and characteristics and all

those things you were saying yeah

do you like are you okay with bigotry

like are you okay with no like right now

i'm a neutral guy asking for definitions

and i just want to know what the meaning

of what you're saying

is because i don't know what the meaning

of what you're saying is unless you so

you want me to

explain why bigotry is bad yeah no no

not why it's bad why why it's an

impediment to fairness go ahead

you can't be fair if you're treating

somebody differently based on

whatever characteristic you dislike well

uh okay so bigotry is based on treating

people differently based on

characteristics they dislike

is that the case

treatment cannot be egalitarian if

there's bigotry involved

you i i you've you've made that clear

that that's what your view is but the

whole fairness thing is what we're

dealing with

what makes it so unfair oh my god i'd

like

i just said i literally just said it i

can't explain it any further you can't

can you you're being obtuse at this

point you can't can you

i literally just did no you can't

happier i'm asking you what makes sense

so unfair that they're bigoted what

makes it happen

repeat it go ahead yeah sure so

egalitarian you can't like your

treatment cannot be egalitarian if

bigotry is involved

okay you made that clear but what does

that have to do with fairness

because egalitarianism is linked to

fairness why

because if you're treating everybody in

an egalitarian sense and you're treating

everyone fairly

according to you the only meaning of

egalitarianism is fairness then why

bring up egalitarianism when i asked you

the meaning of fairness isn't that a

tautology

no because you asked me how would you

determine what hierarchy is a just and i

said through regalitarianism so

i asked you why do you why would you

determine why hierarchies are just and

you're admitting that the question you

gave me is

based on how just or unjust they are

well we're asking what the essence of

justice is

you can't just tell me it's just and you

just equated egalitarianism with

fairness and justice

without explaining why that is why you

made that equivocation i literally just

did

no you didn't okay okay okay let me

explain the chat if you've been

in the chat if you didn't all right okay

all right i'll run through it

i will run through each point

and make it abundantly clear okay so let

me get through it

okay go ahead i'm the floor is yours

okay so to determine what hierarchies

adjust you would have to examine it in

egalitarian sense

okay egalitarianism is a good principle

to live up to

why why wouldn't you just you just look

hold up so you're saying

justice is based on to let me speak no

no no

and here you go for you justice is based

on goods

oh good faith good faith oh yeah sure

mate justice is based on the truth

i'm treating like how vast treated me

justice is based on goodness is that

what you're saying

no okay so why are you saying that okay

so let's run back what you just said

you just can i actually like go through

the definition of how you have remember

repeat it again

repeat it again okay notepad out so we

can what i can recall what you said

repeat it go ahead

so you asked me to determine how a

hierarchy would be just

i said to determine how a hierarchy is

just you would have to examine how

egalitarian

your application of that hierarchy is

you asked me

why is egalitarianism a good thing no i

didn't i asked you is just

don't put words in my mouth why is it

that you're bringing up egalitarianism

and your definition of justice

is my question do not put words and

bring goodness you literally did ask me

why egalitarianism is

no i said why is it just don't put words

in my mind

they can look at the type they can look

at the tape i asked you why it's just

and fair go ahead

all right so egalitarianism is a good

principle to look up to

because nobody's deserving of more

rights than another nobody's deserving

of less right than another

you asked me why is that a good thing no

i didn't i said

that not once did i ask that once not

once that i did that

not once did i do that no you did not

once did i do

that i asked you why is it that

egalitarianism is wise

when you just lie about what you said

why is egalitarianism

justice we can have the chat and the

audience determine whether goodness has

been my point

have i been honing you in about goodness

or justice and fairness

in good faith louis bataan which one oh

whatever mate you're not in good faith

stop trying that uh

whatever i'm just asking for definitions

why are you getting mad which definition

you're off to now

i was asking you we're dealing with the

definition of justice and unjustice in

regards to hierarchies

yes okay and you said it's based on how

egalitarian they

are and i'm just asking why

and as i already explained if you don't

examine

uh your people in your society in

egalitarian sense then hierarchies are

created

based on bigotry okay and what makes

bigotry accord well as you've defined it

already and i remember how you've

defined it what makes it so unfair

because no one's deserving of more

rights than another or less rights than

another why

what is

what does that have to do with fairness

that's literally the definition of

fairness

if somebody is disabled if someone's

disabled then they're not deserving of

less rights than someone who's

able-bodied okay

that's an example the same thing if

someone's a woman they're not deserving

of you they're telling me who deserves

somebody's friends they're not deserving

of less rights than someone who's sister

and what makes if someone is in

government they're not deserving of more

rights than someone who's not

okay let's roll it back though before

you can get to these example of rights

rights is a different rabbit hole you

want to open up

we're talking about fairness you

literally asked me about egalitarianism

no but and yes

so guess what in hierarchies

so according to egalitarianism is

strictly defined within this frame of

rights

political rights is that what you're

saying are you asking me to define the

egalitarianism no but that seems like

how you're defining it

already pre-emptively i would yeah i

would define egalitarianism as

treatment of all peoples in an equitable

sense

uh okay but that's different from

political rights you can treat people

in and as so-called equitable sense you

know

i'm not so sure what's so egalitarian

about equitableness

or equity but you want me to explain no

no that's fine it's not no yeah

exactly right explain okay go ahead and

explain yeah exactly

so for example somebody who is uh

disabled

may need to receive a disability pension

that somebody who

an able-bodied would not be able to get

that's an example of something that

they're afforded

okay but you're making

i'm not done i'm not done okay go ahead

it's a right that they're entitled to

that the neighbor body person is not

however that is equitable treatment they

deserve this pension

because they are not able-bodied but you

are making the normative claim about

what they deserve but you're not

actually getting to the point of what

makes that so fair

you see the problem you're already

speaking for do you want me to explain

why looking after us

to political rights in the welfare state

and i was very humbly asking you

what makes egalitarianism so fair or un

uh or fair why is because we're

ultimately going back

to what you're saying about unjust or

just hierarchies

no we're completely away from unjust

hierarchies now we're talking about

equitable treatment

because of you because i mean

egalitarianism is linked you made an

olympic leap that you can't justify the

leap you've just made

i've had no you asked me the definition

of egalitarianism okay let me try to run

back

what happened actually was that i asked

you what's so fair unfair about

egalitarianism and then you said well if

people are equitably treated

then i made an offer literally guess

like then i made an offhand comment

about

i'm not sure why you're equating

egalitarianism with equity

you you did you literally are you've

tried you've got to be this whole

conversation this

whole conversation you've attempted to

lie about what i've said

what did i what did i lie about what you

said what lie

every time like i've we've gone in

circles over definitions because you

keep putting words in my mouth and i

keep having places

you're not answering my questions you're

making olympic leaps that aren't

addressing my actual questions

okay you can sure just keep guest

sliding me that's okay that's cool okay

okay we can run it back and we can see

if i'm gaslighting you and you we can go

back and do exactly what we did before

and then you can catch me gaslight you

want to do that go ahead i'm happy go

ahead people everyone look at the time

let's go back

you said right wing is based on

something blah blah blah that promotion

of unequal hierarchy there you go there

it is again unequal hierarchies right

i'm sorry unjust hierarchies sorry

unjust hierarchies

right the further right you go the more

unjust hierarchy

and then i stopped you there and i said

that's curious exactly because you are

scared because you know that means

no no no no no russia that's curious yes

you're terrified wait wait wait wait

wait

wait wait wait wait before we talk about

russia

i want to get our definitions in order

before we talk okay well hang on here's

the definition i want from you all right

i want you in your own words you don't

have to like no academic

you know whatever just in your own words

you are confused

in your own words you have no right to

control upon me

you need to calm down all right

meditation music all right louis vuitton

i never told you i'm gonna give you my

definition you told me you're gonna give

me your definition i merely promised you

i was gonna

fuck it which i am doing as everyone can

see

well i want a definition from you now

well fuck you

i'm gonna tell you the same thing i told

vosh i'm gonna tell you the same thing i

told vosh

the meaning of words and the sense we

give to words cannot be reduced to a

string of words we can apply to every

fucking context

because as i have proven in my life

that's an oxymoron as i've proven

in my encounter with you words are

metonymic

when we say words we refer to other

words those with words are going to

refer to other words

and there's no fucking end to it that's

why our conversation was so circular

louis bataan but let me actually so you

don't want to define it

let me know let me in good faith in good

faith

in good faith let me explain stop trying

to pretend that you're in good faith

in good faith louis vuitton let me tell

you how someone who actually knows

anything about philosophy or logic would

respond to what i said

they would say the reason egalitarian

they would say the reason egalitarianism

is fair define fascism

shut the fuck up and let me speak

they're active i can mute you lou baton

you want me to mute you you want to play

that game

damn sounds pretty authoritarian yeah

yeah but i'm not pretending to be a

libertarian like bosch now am i

so i can i'm in the full right to do it

anyway

damn what what a chicken anyway anyway

louise you can't hold up in the free

marketplace of ideas

i know you've lost this debate in this

conversation but anyway

what a person i just want to hear you

define fashion there's a person who

knows what they're talking about what's

louis up you can keep screaming to find

fascism but

all you're going to fucking do is i'm

very chill right now you're going to dig

yourself define fascism

define fascism and why do you think i

owe you that

because you you're too scared define

fascism okay you're claiming i'm too

scared and you're claiming so you i have

it

yeah you're too scared to define it

because you ever have to lie about the

definition

already you were coming to define

fascism

i didn't say yeah and i'm waiting to

hear why that definition is wrong all

you've been able to say is

uh we do not know the meaning of words

that is why your definition is wrong

we're going to work through why it's

wrong i'm going to explain to you why

it's wrong

i'm not going to give you i'm not going

to i doesn't mean i have to give you an

alternative definition that definition

could also be wrong

see okay well then mate the floor is

yours why is my definition of fascism

wrong

okay well i was working through it with

you

the reason it seems to me that your

definition of fascism is wrong

is because you can't actually define

what is just or unjust

and second of all louis batan how i

would have responded to my own question

would have been this

the reason egalitarianism would be more

fair is because on some fundamental

level

people are equal they're objectively

actually equal on some fundamental level

that is what would make egalitarianism

fair because if we're objectively equal

therefore it would be fair it would be

fair for us to be treated equally

that's what justice means justice is

about balance

right you have one thing in the fucking

scale of justice in the other

one is the objective fact that we're all

equal the other side of the scale is

being treated accordingly that's what

fairness means louis vuitton

but you're such a smart guy you were

stumbling and mumbling all around my

fucking simple question

and couldn't give me that simple fucking

answer how does it feel to be a fucking

idiot go ahead

so ask again why is my definition of

fascism incorrect because you cannot

define to me what

as far as i'm concerned so far based on

my encounter with you

you can't even tell me what justice or

unjust you can't tell me why

hierarchies are just or unjust

i've literally done that about four

times now this conversation i just

demonstrated why you didn't precisely

all right can i okay i'll do it again

then let's do it again

and you're gonna you're gonna copy

answers from me i just gave you the key

the answer to the test and you're going

to use that answer

and that's fine and i'm going to show

you i'm going to give you a response to

the answer too

all right we will see how we go all

right okay all right let's go ahead

use okay so according to you fascinating

right wing i want no no no no no okay

hold up i'm not going to put words in my

mouth let's go

let's go again so what the definition of

fascism is a system that involves a

highly centralized government's highly

centralized economy

and strong combination between the

military secret police and control of

the government

um by that definition that makes it

right-wing

oh wait wait wait wait wait why is it

that that makes it right-wing i'm not

satisfied with that assumption

because anarchy is a left-wing ideal

and anarchy is the abolition of unjust

hierarchy but even if

even if anarchism was a left-wing ideal

that doesn't

mean the opposite is right-wing so do

you think that uh

anarchy stands in opposition to fascism

listen even if it did we could also oh

yes or no yes

you could also say yes or no yes or no

okay on what basis does it stand in

opposition to fascism if we implicitly

agree

if anarchy is the abolition of unjust

hierarchy and fashion

okay let's go back to justice protection

i don't know what you mean no no no no

no no

i'm gonna let you weasel out of this i

don't know what you mean by unjust

hierarchy i'm not gonna let you get away

with the definition

please define yourself why didn't voss

let me get away with my definitions i'm

not going to let you get away with your

definitions either louis bataan

so let's run it through again you said

anarchy is the abolition of unjust

hierarchies i'm asking you what makes

hierarchy so just or unjust let's run

well i've already explained that is this

like is this your debate tactic to just

have me repeat definitions over and over

again until i've just like exhausted and

leave like is it

is that like precisely didn't do that

you probably so i give you the

definition

you dance around it gasps like me have

me repeat it and then just rinse and

repeat until

louis baton at no point did you tell him

you're talking you're just quick

at no point did you explain to me what

makes a hierarchy just

or unjust you said it's be yes i did

you're such a liar i said it's based on

egalitarianism why

why why

wait calm down man now listen jack

so explain why explain yourself

why eagle explain

explain explain why um

damn pretty ableist of you mate yeah

yeah

hey well we already know that you're

cool bigotry so yeah i'm not surprised

go ahead

what explain that why egalitarianism is

good or explain why hierarchies

are i didn't say anything about good

please stop mentioning good

why is just unjust go ahead why it's

just a base hierarchy on egalitarianism

yeah yeah

because everyone's deserving of uh

equitable rights

okay and what does that have to do with

fairness

that is the definition of fairness

equitable treatment

according to you fairness is equitable

okay everyone is deserving of equitable

rights

is that what you're saying yes okay

everyone is deserving of equitable

rights and rights are what are rights

political rights

every right every right okay and what is

the right

oh my god

you're saying the definition of fairness

is fairness

is that what you're saying no oh my god

you're doing it again

i literally said the definition of

fairness is everyone who is deserving of

equitable rights

why are they deserving of equitably

equitable what makes it so fair

that everyone gets equitable treatment

you said that

so are you admitting to saying that uh

the definition of fairness is that

everyone is treated fairly

i said that the definition of fairness

is equitable treatment

and what is that that's treated fairly

right so what does equitable treatment

mean

besides that it's fair so depending on

whoever you are what demographics you

fit into you're afforded the rights that

you're needed and are not afforded

any rights extra that other people are

not

and other people are not afforded less

rights than other people so you should

be treated

fairly okay but you haven't actually

explained what that is

actually you just said you just said

everyone should be treated fairly

of course no i didn't no i didn't i

never fail that everyone is

no idea i said incredible treatmentology

i never said that you're such oh my god

are you an abuser mate seriously the

amount of gaslighting that is coming

from you

go ahead i never said treated fairly to

meet your tautology because i knew you'd

use that meme again

okay i said equitable treatment the

definition of fairness is equitable

treatment

and you haven't defined equitable

treatment and i never said oh fairness

is fair treatment

specifically said but the definition is

and you said it's the definition of

fairness my god

i asked you why and you said it's

because it's the definition of fairness

is my voice i said equitable treatment

is the definition of fairness

okay that's not answering why though

you're just telling me it's equitable

treatment

fairness is fairness that's what you're

saying no i never said that

okay so let's run it back for you

eaglet is for you the reason

egalitarianism

defines what's just or unjust is because

with egalitarianism everyone is treated

equitably and i said what makes that so

fair or so just and you said well that's

the definition of fairness and justice

sounds like a tautology to me

doesn't it equitable treatment is not a

tautology for the definition of fairness

but you haven't given me what equitable

treatment means

beyond the fact yes i did the definition

of fairness okay why is it no

why do you equivocate fairness with

equitable treatment go ahead

so i'll explain it again an example of

equitable treatment would be

if you have a disabled member of your

population that is paid a disability

pension

that is not paid to able-bodied people

that's an example of equitable treatment

the person who is able-bodied is not

eligible to receive the pension

so technically the disabled person has a

right that the able-bodied person does

not enjoy

however that is equitable treatment

based on their disability

there's an example about that

because the disabled person is not as

able-bodied as the able-bodied person so

they're not able to provide for

themselves

to the same degree so what what makes it

fair that they're uh

that they that we've made an olympic

leap to the welfare state but what makes

it so fair since we have to do this

olympic leap

and you couldn't get past my simple

question you have to make this olympic

leap what makes that sort of good

no you asked me for an example when i

gave you one sorry i guess that's an

olympic player no

no i've asked you we'll keep asking

going back to the question of why

we're going back to the question of why

what makes that so

fair are you asking me why we should

treat people equitably

no i'm not i'm asking what makes it fair

and just because yeah as i already

answered

the disabled person i already gave you

the answer to this test

and you can't even give me the simple

answer well i'm trying to

be speaker but you've got to talk over

me to keep gaslighting me so i already

gave you the answer

and i gave you the answer to the quiz

because that's all you can think of in

terms of uh

academic pass or fail well i gave you

the answer yeah you want me to you only

give the answer or no you're happy to

talk about go ahead give the answer

so the disabled body person is not able

to provide for themselves the same

degree as the able bodied person

therefore they should be they should it

is equitable treatment for them to

receive a disability pension

why because they're unable to provide

for themselves to the same degree

so what what makes it so fair oh yeah i

guess we should just let them die then

the linchpin

just i'm going to give you the answer

because you're so stupid you can't

arrive it to it by yourself

the answer is the answer is you are

saying in some fundamental sense

in some deeper sense the disabled person

and the un uh the ably body person

are equal

that's the fucking point louis vuitton

and for so long

they're equal in terms of their

deserving of the same human rights

but there is some treatment fundamental

level beyond their differences

on some fundamental they are objectively

equal

what's so fair about the fact that uh

that a disabled person gets the disabled

benefits and a non-disabled person

doesn't go ahead okay as i've already

said twice now because the disabled body

person is unable to provide

themselves to the same degree as the

able-bodied person who cares what makes

it so fair or just

what is it just let them die then huh

which is if you know you're in a

wheelchair

tough luck yeah you've got ptsd i'm

being unemotional

why are you being so emotional i'm

asking you to tell me why that's fair

why am i being emotional that's rich why

is that fair or just i'm being like vosh

i was being too emotional and i've lost

vastly stream too much of a human being

and you've been more emotional i suppose

i'm not going to afford you the

assumption of being of decent

human common sense which it was just

obvious

common sense is a felony not going to

afford you the assumption

of basic human decency and basic morale

common sense is an anti-intellectual

concept what's that

common sense as an anti-intellectual

that's even better louis vuitton

so why should we care if people die or

not we have to define all these things

in abstract axiomatic terms you've just

admitted that because common sense

according to you

is a anti-intellectual term so we're not

going to deal with any more common sense

all morality is out the window in terms

of common sense yeah

so i can say in a subjective yeah i can

i'm happy to go ahead in a subjective

sense

we are now in the realm yes subjectively

we have decided

that disabled body people need to be

afforded equitable treatment why

why because we have subjectively

depending on

time location and culture yeah decided

that egalitarianism which is a good

thing so that we need to look after our

disabled bodied residents so what's the

reason

i just did actually no no you told me

based on time and

we have yeah we have so we have socially

decided that uh

it is a good thing to look after our

disabilities what is

not what's ought why what is what do you

have to repeat that

you told me based on geo you said this

is what we have decided i'm asking why

have you decided that

why have i decided that why why has it

been decided in other words why has it

been decided

subjectively we would have to examine

the

historical uh way that we got here we'd

have to look at this and i'm gonna just

and after you examine that i'm gonna

look at like i guess

um the progression of liberalism we

would have to look at the

um different waves of feminism and the

push for workers rights uh all of this

stuff you're giving me more

the rise of leftism which is really how

we're determined to get into a more

egalitarian

so i can ultimately ask the question of

why oh hang on you asked me

how did we get to this point and i said

we have to look

[Music]

sporting these ideas like democracy and

ideas of

fairness equality fraternity justice

and then going forward we had the

workers rights push during

the industrial revolution and of course

we've got to the waves of feminism

throughout the early 20th century midway

through the 20th century

you're saving yourself by talking right

you're saving yourself from my

my point that's going to rip you apart

well you asked me how we got to this

point

no i didn't i asked you a simple

question i asked you why

not how why why do we get to this point

if it's not based on common sense and

objective things we've inherited from

history

why is it subjectively from from your

individual

axiomatic whatever why is it

subjectively that we arrive at this

point

don't make excuses by throwing the

deferring to history

and throwing the responsibility upon

history i'm asking you

why it's a very simple question sure

if they're objective why do we inherit

them from history

listen if they're objecting why aren't

we just more knowing it's not even

subjective we should just be born

knowing right

now is history could it be that they

came from history because it comes from

culture huh

could it be that it's actually not

objective at all yeah

geographical location

is a um prolong the inevitable prolong

the inevitable

prolonged you've been saying that ever

since i came in so the inevitable

time i'm still waiting for you to say

why my definition of point that comes

crashing down

stop trying to escape this you're gonna

get this beating oh i'm trying to escape

you're trying to escape you definitely

shut up shut the fuck up

you've spoken enough now let me make my

fucking points

you're muted you stupid pussy now let me

explain it to everybody

you little bitch and then i'm gonna

unmute you louis bataan you fucking

pussy how does it feel to be gagged

i'm gonna unmute you as soon as i say my

fucking peace if it's subjective

if culture doesn't exist objectively if

history

isn't something objective and it's all

subjectively mediated then the point at

which it is subjectively mediated is

from your individual perspective

you are the subject that subjectively

mediates all of this subjective

phenomena

if you disagree with that point you're

calling them objective

isn't that the point julie bataan if

you're calling all of those things

subjective

they have to at some point reach a

concrete subject within which they are

mediated

that is you as an individual otherwise

you're saying

it is beyond my own subjectivity

therefore it is sub

objective subjectivity is something

objective

that's the fucking point i'm trying to

make louis vuitton so which one is it is

it subjective or is it objective

go ahead i'm gonna unmute you when i

talk about my ideology

you never have to lie i never have to

lie because i know it's true

i know it's correct and i've got the

arguments to back that up i don't have

to weasel out of

the point by obfuscating your debates

yeah yeah louis vuitton

you were muted i muted it the whole time

to make my point so go ahead and respond

to what i said

i just made wow what an authoritarian

yeah yeah i am louis bataan because

you think you're gonna weasel your way

out of the reckoning infrared and

taz is gonna be giving you the spanking

i'm giving you i'm not gonna let you

wheeze a lot of it

i'm gonna show the whole chat how i'm

demolishing your point your co-host

you're not going to return back to

russia in china

we're going to go bit by bit to the

original point then we can talk about

all these other things stop trying to

weasel your weight out of the

particularity

bro the view count is dropping oh my god

that's awesome this is so crazy we have

90 views it's not really dropping

we have 17 views on twitch i'm fine with

the view 15.

okay uh you're saying holy moly my end

shows me at 17.

i'm still waiting for you to explain why

my definition of fascism is wrong well

i've just

explained it to you you don't have an

adequate uh you can't explain to me

what justice is or what justice isn't

you don't have a definition of facts i

literally

is apparently meaningless you haven't

defined its meaning

so therefore your definition of fascism

is meaningless okay

sure you can just be a coward and just

be a weasel and guest light sure

okay louis vuitton i've never seen

someone fail so hard at the debate

as you i could have argued way better

for you than you did by the way

i could have done a weight job than you

did arguing from your perspective

you're such an idiot dude i guess that's

why you had to yell over me so much

yeah i do because you interrupt me as

soon as i make the right point

and i interrupt you when i know you're

going to repeat a point you already said

uh and just go in circles i i actually

do engage in good faith louis vuitton

that's and if i wasn't engaging in good

if i wasn't engaging you in good faith i

would have made you cry

i have been prodding you along helping

you along i've been holding your hand

because i'm engaging

oh my god

you've been fucked mentally that's the

point isn't it okay

still waiting for you to explain more

definitions professions it's meaningless

it's a meaningless definition

okay well so okay well hang on if i like

let's allow that i'm not saying i agree

but let's allow that

so if that's so what's your definition

of fascism

vosh has already established and you

agree with valsha's point

that my view of fascism is meaningless

would i put words in my book

okay well well i refuse to define

fascism and reduce it

because or string of words i refuse to

do that

yeah exactly because you know that if

you define fascism it'll make the

definition of russia and china

no it'll it'll meet the definition of

everything no no

no it won't it won't okay louis vuitton

if you create a static eternal

definition of any kind

sooner or later whether it's an index of

time or space it will be shown to be

inconsistent yeah good thing i didn't

like you that good thing i argued that

definitions are dependent on location

culture and time yeah but that's a

completely meaningless point do you

think that was literally the first we

already explained that's a meaningless

point because you said the way that it

spread expresses itself is in terms of

people how people agree upon the meaning

of words i said how do they agree and

you said they take a poll

no way your first thing you said is they

take a poll what a stupid thing yeah you

asked me for an example and i said

no i said how do they agree upon the

meaning of words and you said well

for example they would take a poll and

then he'd see who agrees on the meaning

of words

what are stumbling the definition of

words is just generally

mumbling cock if i go up to somebody and

say

hey um can you tell me what a tree looks

like they'll be able to describe a tree

yeah and how and accord they will be

describing a tree in accordance

their friends no matter how much you

relativize things

you're not actually arriving at the

decisive point the decisive point at

which the definition actually emerges in

reality you're just deferring it upon

other people

you're not actually getting to the

nitty-gritty of how it fucking comes

into being in the first place

it's better than being too scared to

define the word i'm not too scared louis

baton i know it's a vanity

it's a vanity to try and define a word

by some

written string of words that's already

pre-emptively i will not define words

for i am too humble

listen louis bataan do you think okay so

his humanity always existed

according to you no so at some point i'm

not the one that believes in objective

truths

where there weren't any words already

established and people actually had to

create words in relationship

to their reality how did they create

those words according to you if it's all

based

upon deferring it to the words that are

already contextually established based

on

geography and time and all the things

you're saying go ahead and explain i

didn't

yeah i didn't say that they already had

the words you said that well well

it logically follows that they had to

have already have the words because

when i asked you the question of how me

no i never

okay so how are words defined we want to

go back this down this royal road of

humiliating not really that's why they

hear you define fascism

i already told you i already told okay

then read what i did yeah

i owe you no obligation because you're

the one who came onto my show

saying you wanted to define fascism i

said i'm going to destroy your

definition of fascism

which i did pretty soon i'm still

waiting which i did pretty successfully

i did produce the wedding you're waiting

for what

all right well let me sum it up

basically so you think my definition of

fascism is wrong meaningless

because that's fascism no no no i'm not

done

i'm not done you think that my

definition of fascism is wrong because i

say that fact one of the characteristics

of

also the fascism hierarchy okay and you

don't want to argue what an unjust heart

he is okay

so let's see let's okay we can get rid

of that

you want to know what egalitarian means

i said that egalitarianism would be

based on equitable treatment

we want to know if that's fair i said

that to equitable treatment

would be fairness and why that brings us

back around and why

because it's the definition of fairness

which is not egalitarianism

taught a logical circle you just created

a circle unjust hierarchies

therefore china and russia are fascist

because they

created and protected unjust hierarchies

of course based on a tautology based on

a circle

we can say anything we want and apply it

to anything but i'm asking you the

meaning

well it's easy to say and harder to

prove yeah it's i just proved it though

i proved it to talk to you no okay well

people can come back

fascism is a tautology it is

unjustifiable and therefore

meaningless well people can go back and

look at the tape themselves of course

and everyone

not that anyone will even even wash fans

in the chat

even wash fans in the chat are admitting

you lost

and lauren lord red bricks

we can look at the logs he's never been

a fan he's been talking shit from day

one he's pretending to be a fan

because our fan base which she won't

succeed

is ban him given to those authoritarian

tendencies i don't

know i i prefer him to know that i am

i'm more authoritarian by not banning

them because

just like how you're in my discord in my

general i am your daddy

i'm your daddy he's in my chat you're in

my general you're giving me

fuel and attention and content so if you

can't define

fascism can you define socialism

actually

i didn't say i can't define fascism i

just said

whatever you want okay so you won't

define fascism

qualifications for a definition require

way more than a string of words if you

want to know what we think about

socialism go watch our video the meaning

can you define socialism yeah watch our

video the meaning of socialism in 2021

and we give definition and meaning to

the word of socialism

can you define it in one sentence no you

can't define it in one sentence no one

can

i can i can literally do it right now we

could do this too let's do this too go

ahead and define it in one sentence

let's go

yeah so socialism is characterized by

two main principles the abolition of the

commodity form and the democratic means

you talk about the commodity form what a

royal road we're on now

what a royal road we're on now well i

watched your debate with zan yesterday

and you were a capitalism stand so it's

pretty cringe

okay so not really very leftist of you

okay i'm a capitalism

you seem to think that uh you seem to

think that socialism and communism

don't involve the abolition of the

commodity they don't sorry i would like

you to substantiate

the claim and justify the claim that's

social

capitalist wait wait so you you have

made just two claims

so not even a nas ball just straight up

you you have just not even like

okay not even like yeah

wait is mark's a capitalist have you

read the communist manifesto it doesn't

talk about the abolition of commodity

form anywhere in there

actually i don't care about what your

german your dead german wife okay so

this is your special definition of

socialism which is unique to you

we can literally google the definition

of socialism right now pretty much and

who wrote that almost word for what who

wrote that i supposed to have to look at

we'd have to look at the source

and i want to know who the source is and

let me let them come in my discord and

i'll debate

just like i am with me take a look

yeah go to the source bring them here

and i'll debate them just like i'm doing

with you because it's behind whatever

they're doing

is an author behind every stream all

right let's see it's an author and i

want to debate them too and see why they

justify it

so this definition comes from oxford

languages

okay and why should i give a fuck about

what they think

well something tells me that they know

they know a lot more about the

definition of words than you do

that's your suspicion why should i care

you haven't convinced me why i should

care what you think

well you should care because these are

qualified professionals and you're just

somebody but i think

i think they're losers actually i don't

think they're they're not qualified to

me

i don't think that's not qualified to me

it seems like it's cool so now we have

to use

okay so now we have anti-intellectualism

another yeah

so i think the intellectuals are cocks i

actually do think they're called cox

yes do you think that they belong to any

uh

particular demographic um

cox like you damn

aunties not sex positive either yeah

yeah

damn yeah it's yeah it's a great we can

we can run we can run down the list are

you a cook

are you a cock personally you're a cock

no it's not a king could have

but hey i'm not going to judge anyone on

whatever

it may not be a kink it may not be a

kink but you're actually a cock

you're actually a cop well whatever is

done between consenting adults is

fine by me they can do whatever they

want none of my business you're a cock

because i just

well you're not a cock actually you're

something a little bit worse because i

just

fucked you intellectually how about that

so um actually yeah that's a good idea

how about we run down

i could run down the 14 points of

fascism and see which ones you agree

with

you want to talk about umberto echo now

i wanted to talk to you louis vuitton i

don't want to talk about roberto ecko

just like you don't want to talk about

the dead german guy

karl marx how about that

well you're the one that didn't agree

with the definition of the socialism

based on the oxford dictionary but

alberto echo isn't here to defend

himself is the problem

he's not here to defend himself you're

here you said intellectuals are cocks

listen listen so he's inverted

echo isn't here to defend why he wrote

those no no that's not what i asked is

well judging by how often people use

those 14 points kind of sounds like it

honestly kind of sounds like it

damn okay what about these 14 words

instead how much do you agree with these

we must secure the existence of our

people and the future for white children

what about 14 words instead of 14 points

do you agree with those ones

it's it's really rich a white australian

is accusing

an arab muslim of being a neo-nazi and a

4chan pole guy

it's really rich isn't it louis vuitton

how does it feel by the way

uh today that i'm white how does it feel

to be sounds like some

it sounds like you need to work on your

whiteness to assume that the people

you're not white my bad you're not white

my race doesn't matter

i don't judge people i'm looking at your

profile picture you look pretty white to

me it's okay there's nothing wrong with

being white

but it must feel what are you gonna well

you're just gonna assume that i'm white

but

you're the one who brought white

supremacy into this not you brought

white supremacy into this by mentioning

the 14 words

the 14 words are a white supremacist uh

created

and and you're white dude i'm not i'm

the arab guy the muslim guy so why are

you bringing that on me

i'm a muslim dude i'm arab wait do you

think that it's possible to be arab and

a white supremacist

i i i've seen very few examples of

that in a uh significant do you think

that's

in the realm of positive possibility

plausibility not really

okay well perhaps you should look up avi

and many sometimes he's a pretty

significant right-wing figure in the

australian media

okay he's a white supremacist and he's a

white nationalist and he's arab it

sounds like he's a little bit of a nut

case then right because

it does just great so he would so he's

saying that arabs are

uh included in that so if so that's like

saying

a black person can be a white

nationalist because we're just including

black people in the definition of white

but that's not how reality works no you

wouldn't include black people in the

deaf or absent the definition of white

but you can be an arab all black person

and be a white nationalist

okay and so okay so

so you're so common senses i already

understand common sense means nothing to

you

so that's why you're saying such a

stupid thing that you don't understand

why in a common sense way it's pretty

stupid

to accuse an arab muslim of caring about

the 14 words what do i have to do with

that but according to you

since common sense doesn't matter and

it's anti-intellectual

i guess uh i i'll concede you that point

on i'll concede to the point that it is

entirely possible that

has an arab muslim uh is actually in

in fact a 4chan white nationalist and

why you've come to that conclusion and

arrived at that is very strange and

peculiar if that's how

the world is made intelligible to you

good luck in being able to

i mean we can look at some examples like

um jesse lee peterson is absolutely a

white supremacist okay

very easily avi and many like i said why

am i a white knight why am i a white

supremacist

is my question i'm not calling you white

supremacists i just wanted to know what

you thought about those 14 words

strange to bring up don't you think why

did you want to know what i thought

about

14 points 14 words i guess you could say

i made an olympic leap between those 14

things but what does that have to do

with me why do i care about the 14 words

go ahead like i said i made an

olympic leap as you would say and why

did you make that leap

because i'm just here for the mains now

can you are you here for the memes when

you lost

is that is that it well you still can't

define fascism

you're still too scared to define

pressure no i can say a lot about

fascism actually

it's just that i'm not going to give

some scholastic

definition that is supposedly passed off

as the essence of

the manner of expression we give to what

a word is

is very different from the actual

essential meaning

uh of that word that's the function so

if i was to ask you the definition of

any word

not politically related would you be

able to define it

it'd be the same thing what what

objectively given

uh no i cannot define what a shoe is a

shoe

well well to me if you find shoes to me

if someone doesn't know what a shoe is i

would question

what about a shoe oh literally so

terrified

scared just running away my god why am i

running away from the you said i'm

running away from the definition of

fascism because i'm defending russia and

china now why am i running

away from the definition of shoes if

that logic calls up

it seems like i'm just running away from

you because you have to be consistent

it seems like i'm running away from the

definition of any word and i'm actually

i'm consistent for a

and that's telling me for an actual

actual reason that reflects

that's cowardly that reflects my view of

life you're running away

you either have to lie or admit that

russia and china are fascists but but

what does shoes have to do with

russia and china i apply the same thing

to the definition of

the definition of shoes i apply the same

people i don't know do they have shoes

in the communist childhood communist

rights i'm asking you that

i'm asking you why you're making that

connection i'm consistent about how i

treat all words

and my views of language in general not

just fascism

louis bataan although i could point out

why it is particularly pernicious

and from a practical and political

perspective it's uh

leading to all sorts of opportunistic

positions

to treat political phenomena in terms of

predefined

uh preemptively formally established

definitions i've made my point about

that

on washington so can i ask a question

about that go ahead

do you think that uh the definitions

come from how those words are acted

out or definitions are decided

on before something manifests

since you're so curious about my views

louis vuitton this sudden burst of

curiosity

my view is that words relate to

intelligible objects of some kind

right and some kind of fundamental

encounter with the object so to speak

with something in actual

being in actual reality that is

objectively somehow intelligible

some kind of fundamental encounter

unconscious encounter

takes primacy over the ways we give

conscious

representation in other words for

example take the case of an apple

we enter into contact with what an apple

actually is objectively first

and then we give expression to this

consciously to the best of our ability

through words that's my view of the

matter um

i think it's a very reasonable view in a

very intuitive commonsensical way but

then again common sense according to you

is anti-intellectual

which i am also anti-intellectual so

it is what it is um so instead of being

purposefully vague

i just want to know does the definition

from words

come before after that object manifests

or not not that object but whatever the

word itself before the thing the word is

referring to

does the definition come before after it

manifests in good faith what you mean by

manifest is before we enter into contact

with it and it

and it um enters our world of meaning in

some kind of way

unconsciously that's what you mean by

manifest right

no isn't just like yeah for example did

fascism

need to appear in the world first before

we found this definition or did we

already define what fascism well well

well um before i actually i am not a

vulgar empiricist

and a naive realist who thinks that

objects

are formally intelligible uh formally

definite

before they are intelligible in a more

material and essential way

well yes you are because you said you

already believe in objective truth

i don't believe in it or i do you

already said that you believe in

objections i do believe

yes but guess what louis bataan if you

actually understand

that is exactly what you just said for

example just said that you have to wait

your assumption which cannot be

supported is that an object can only

mean

an already formally definite uh

substance or

thing but that's actually not the

meaning that's not i swear if you want

to know my definition of a word then ask

me don't put words in my mind

then why are you saying i'm saying that

uh

that things are formally definite they

manifest themselves as formally definite

first

because i i was saying that's not my

view and then you said no it is your

view

so why are you saying that's my view i'm

saying it is your view because you

believe in objective truth which you've

already admitted what

what what objective truth is to be

believed

that words already have meanings before

manifest what does that have to do

that's what objective truth means no it

doesn't actually objective truth doesn't

mean oh my god

it doesn't mean naive realism objective

truth means that the truth is this is

good faith y'all

objective truth means that the truth is

objective that's the german meaning of

objectivity

oh that sounds like a tautology my

friend

gohan what's what's so tautological we

can go through this place our objective

truth is that it's objective

object yes objective truth means

curious okay got him wait i'm free to

elaborate we can elaborate and

um okay

i just don't want to hear the word

totology come out of your mouth for the

rest of this conversation

you're saying that objective truth

somehow means that it's all

already out there uh without any

subjective mediation and i'm saying

that's not

why we have the phrase objective truth

we have the phrase

objective so i would i would look at the

definition of objective truth

and you would argue about the definition

of truth so qualify

what the truth is we don't have the word

objective

truth to say that it's already out there

in formally definite and manifest i

would look at the definition of

objective truth

but then you would weasel out of it and

just deflect the deflection

deflect the definition well guess what

uh louis vuitton

my understanding of what objective truth

is doesn't come from reading the oxford

book of definitions it comes from a

rigorous understanding of the history

of western philosophy actually uh your

ballpark

so to speak that's what i'm engaging it

from i don't

care about what you're talking about

what did emmanuel kant say about the

absolute object what did hagel speak

about the object i don't care mate you

don't care no matter how much reading

you've done

the oxford scholars are still more

each one of the oxford scholars can line

up in a congo line and each one of them

can take turns sucking my dick how about

that

damn yeah all right true exactly

implying that oxford doesn't pay

attention to western philosophers very

good chaotic

i actually think andrew saxon

institutions are

pretty much mental midgets who don't

understand the wealth of western

philosophy whatsoever

they've never been able to import the

true wealth and treasure

of what was coming from the european

continent instead they rejected

it and distorted it because it seems

like anglo-saxon uh barbarians

uh of oxford and so on they're vulgar

empiricists they don't understand

real human philosophy that's why they've

dismissed the wealth of human

civilization is a bunch of meaningless

uh mumbo jumbo and the rest of the world

uh

is moving on fine after the decline of

the anglo-saxon empire and the rise of

china

and we're witnessing the rise of china

we're witnessing the rise of china and

the anglo-saxon uh

polarity is in decline and you're

calling it fascist because your butt

hurt about it a butthurt australian

you're you would not even worth being

china's colony right

mate yeah you're not china china's

colony australia

you're unworthy of even being hang on

okay so you're gonna say that china's

not fascist when they're engaging

not fascist when they're engaging in

genocide as in australia china is

engaging in genocide

right now and you're saying guys look at

the australian mad at china oh

the angles of course i'm mad at china

china's a fascist state

because china i hate china because the

chinese i hate the ccp the ccp

the chinese people are pretty cool but

the ccp are fucked because china

is more powerful than australia and

britain and all kansas combined

you can't do a damn thing about it now

can you you're used to feeling like

you're in

the world you're used to feeling like

you rule the world and now china's on

the rise

what are you talking about about it

australia's never ruled the world it's

part of the british commonwealth and

it's

descended primarily from the polish and

the the british people and you're what

now want to form kanzuk

with the united kingdom and new zealand

and canada so yeah

you're pretty much an anglo dude you're

a butthurt anglo you're really mad

that's a really

far right belief for the whole kansu

thing fuck that

well it is seemed to be the orientation

and what is happening

but at least it's not fascist right yeah

as an

anarchist i don't want any kind of

status that involves

canada or australia new zealand

possibility for your objective

uh position you can just say i'm an

anarchist and i have my hands are clean

even though you're a seething anglo who

hates the chinese people

you hate china you hate the

civilizational rise of china you hate

the way the chinese

people have beaten anglo-saxon modernity

and do you believe do you believe in the

weaker genocide

do you think it's happening just you've

already said that it's

you've already said there's a weaker

genocide and now you're saying whether

do you believe yes or no that there is a

weaker genocide

yes yes or no no i don't i'm not

convinced of that whatsoever

i think on that note we can end it oh

okay so

just a sum up yeah you surrender go

ahead okay whatever so in conclusion

so are you going to let me finish like i

promise this is just like this is the

end i just want to like say a couple of

points and then yeah

respond to them whether you're here or

not and you won't be here to defend

yourself

that's okay i don't mind so information

infrared has demonstrated that they are

anti-democratic anti-glitterian

okay fat phobia okay sex negative okay

ableist

okay against the concept of equitable

treatment okay

a genocide denier okay um a

[Music]

do you want more i can give you more

absolutely i can give you a

guest well maybe not abusive we also

deny science we're like

what are some more cancelable things

we're also anti-zionist you want to add

that on the list

no that's a good thing like zionism is

fascism

okay it's a little bit anti-semitic

don't you think

no it's not just quite it's it's

anti-semitic

we also also we also uh we also obtained

no no but if i ask you to find zionism

you're going to be able to do okay okay

we agree about zionism it's fine

okay you got me what do you want to say

now you want to talk about what a little

coward okay let's talk about zionism

what did you want to say about zionism

yeah define zionism um what is zionism

or what are you asking a string of words

to define zionism in your own words i'm

gonna give you the same answer i gave

you to when you asked me to define

shoes and when you ask me to define

fascism

coward okay well he surrendered and he

lost and he tried to make a list to

cancel us for

he said we're anti-egalitarian and

anti-equity

even though i was just asking him why he

was mentioning those

strings of words i wasn't proclaiming

judgment on any of those things

in any positive sense whatsoever it

seems our guest

has left he's submitted to his defeat

he was objectively defeated and voss was

defeated in the same way i've just

defeated this guest

the only difference is that vosh has

clout

and this guest doesn't you see the issue

guys

you see the point everyone remember this

one thing

wash the rennet after fucking 20 minutes

and this guy keeps repeating the same

fucking point for like

two or three hours straight explain to

me varsity how are we

meaningless tell me

why are we meaningless he keeps

repeating the same for the point for

like

three hours wasting our fucking time

he's defeated

he was defeated uh just like vosh was

but everyone no one's gonna admit vos

was defeated because i was yelling

but i'll debate anyone and defeat them

there's no question of who was just

defeated