[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / film / htg / hypno / mexicali / new / sw / vore / zoo ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)
Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.


WARNING! Free Speech Zone - all local trashcans will be targeted for destruction by Antifa.

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

 No.71161

>02:45

>I spent lots of time studying the left before I became a public intellectual

>public intellectual

Molybert has always been pretty full of himself but lately it's becoming hard to watch.

 No.71165

>>71161

I don't get why people like Stefan Molyneux, he doesn't seem to be very well informed on history, cinema, philosophy, or really anything. But I don't think that's exclusive to Molyneux, anyone who claims to be an 'intellectual' or 'skeptic' on Youtube have the critical thinking skills of a High School graduate. It's really frustrating because liberty minded people get lumped in with these people and you have to work a lot to distance yourself your beliefs from Youtube 'skeptics'.


 No.71166

>>71161

For a moment I thought I was on /tv/ for some reason.


 No.71169

>>71161

>implying he is not a public intelectual


 No.71172

>>71165

He seems to be reasonably informed, but he's not playing in the same league as Rothbard, Hoppe, or Mises. I wouldn't mind so much if it wasn't for his steadfast conviction that footnotes are the devil. I've read a few books of him, and most of what was truly great was taken 1:1 from Rothbard, while his innovations have often been utterly horrendous. I talked about UPB a few times before, so let me just say now that his chapter on rape was the most insanely hilarious thing I've read this year.

Yes, if you're a Youtube scholar, you're probably no scholar at all. No idea why people keep watching them so much. Reading books is far better.


 No.71178

File: f65cd967076198b⋯.jpg (53.96 KB, 405x720, 9:16, neckbeard.jpg)

>>71169

>public intellectual

>not private intellectual

what a cuck


 No.71179

>>71161

Hey, it's not like I'm peddling and pushing him onto people. I know he's annoying and not worth anyone's time, but all I can do is avoid him.

>public intellectual


 No.71181

>>71172

I'm not comparing him to Rothbard, Hoppes, or Mises, very few could match them. Perhaps even compared with the average person Molyneux is more informed, but as someone really interested in history his analysis of Rome was just hilariously bad. I don't think he has the intellectual capital to be called anything close to an intellectual, if I was being gracious I'd say he's a political pundit. At least he's fun to watch and tries to incorporate a poetic style to his videos and he's far less grating than your average Youtube personality, but I don't think he has anything substantial to say outside of what he has repeated by people of a much higher intellectual caliber.

I'm more just frustrated with these online figures and how they all develop a horde of unquestioning sycophants. I wouldn't care about this stuff if I wasn't so indignant about the whole situation.


 No.71183

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

Wonderful to have a thread about him. I've been watching this fuck for God knows how long and wanted an excuse to vent my disdain for him.

He's a double-mouth. On Rubin he presents himself as some apolitical figure purely concerned with philosophy and the truth while in his videos he rants like an autistic child having a stroke. To this guy, like to every ancap I'll give credit to the ancaps on this board, you're pretty damn smart, anyone who merely suggests that maybe, just maybe, some centralized authority or maybe some regulations can be helpful in its general outcome, is a communist. Apparently social democracy will lead to million-trillion-gorillion deaths by gommunism and that almost all leftist (I love how desperately he tries to intellectualize this, no no, not EVERYONE, that's silly, just about almost everyone that ideologically opposes me) are r-selected-powerhungry-cultural-marxist-something-something. And, if I may use a phrase this retard likes to spout, he's "virtue signaling" about how you're a trash human being if you overlook the gorillions - and how wouldn't you! You're automatically tied to them!

No I'm not a leftist. And even if you ancaps agree with his vitriol, he's just awful in his own right regardless of the position he takes. He can't take criticism, he has childish antics like pulling dumb faces and making tasteless impressions of some imaginary opponent, he constantly needs to remind his viewers (and himself) that he's a philosopher, whenever he responds to his critics he belittles them through sugar coating, his prose and vocabulary is absolutely nauseous to read, he is dishonest, he has ego issues etc etc. The literally single redeeming quality about him is his approach to children.

Look at the shit that happens in the video. The guy wasn't antagonizing, he wasn't being rude, he only made a reasonable suggestion. Stefan immediately took it as a personal attack on his skill and had a meltdown for 40 minutes straight. Is screeching about your view count and the amount of time you've been doing something sounds like an argument to you? To Stefan it sure does. And to add, his analogies fucking suck. You can be a newbie at something and still give a decent suggestion, depending on the sphere of thought of course - debating, unlike swimming, something we all do all the time through our lives, is just such thing.

Here are two more examples why Stefan is a total hack and just weasels around with rhetoric. One time that he had a Swede and his girlfriend on his show, and the topic of woman suffrage came up. Stefan says that when women got the vote the countries took a socialist turn in the span of up to 30 years. So the Swede asks if women should be allowed to vote. Stefan pauses for a second with a dumbfounded look on his face, realizes that's he's been cornered, and just says with a big smile and his arms outstretched: "No one should have the vote!" Come on Stefan… We know what the caller meant, not "whether there should be some form of voting", he meant "when we have voting, should women be allowed to vote?" Sadly the caller didn't catch Stefan's trick. Stefan knew he was in a trap, if he answered yes then he'd be inconsistent with the information he said a moment ago, if he answered no then he'd confirm his distrust and disdain for women (and hilariously still be inconsistent in the respect that he'd condone unequal legal status and asymmetrical use of force by one group on another through voting). So what do you do in such a situation? Move the goalposts!

Another example is when he had some guy on his show asking about discrimination. So his analogy in favor of discrimination was denying a homeless man to perform a surgery being the same thing like denying someone service on their group background - except denying a homeless man to do a surgery is on the basis of skill and the welfare of the patient, it's not even close to denying someone service because of their group background that has no weight whatsoever on the actual action except the opinion of the service provider. I have no problem with freedom of dis/association, but Molyneux is downright retarded here.

Do I even need to mention the time he said that the sun is polluting? He's desperate to be right about everything and he'll pull the most pathetic "arguments" to at least try to look right. That so-called charisma some people think he has is just his cocksureness

1/2


 No.71184

File: 08722280a8eae85⋯.jpg (32.56 KB, 340x444, 85:111, 1148490216.jpg)

>>71172

>He seems to be reasonably informed

He's actually very poorly informed. On ancap affairs and ancap accessories he might be spot on, idk, but for everything else he radiates the know-it-all typical of burgers. Speaking of ancap affairs, if he knows economics so well why does he shy away from international trade? Libertarians make it a point that tariffs hurt the economy and that trying to "balance it out" by some other policy only doubles the damage. He actually defended Trump's protectionism in one of his videos, saying that even if we'll lose international deals we'd still have a boost in domestic industry and increased prosperity therefore. THAT IS A FUCKING ELEMENTARY FALLACY.

>most of what was truly great was taken 1:1 from Rothbard

So he plagiarized and didn't even leave any citations. Imagine my shock.

2/2


 No.71189

>>71183

>>71184

Nice anger attack here. I'll address it tomorrow, but let me just say that this was a delight ro read. Molyneux-bashing is unnaturally satisfying.


 No.71229

>>71184

>On ancap affairs and ancap accessories he might be spot on, idk, but for everything else he radiates the know-it-all typical of burgers.

Oh, he's not that good on them. Most of his talking points come from Rothbard or David Friedman, or else they are incredibly bad. The one time he tried to add a personal touch to the philosophy was in UPB. Everyday Anarchy and Practical Anarchy are completely unoriginal.

>Speaking of ancap affairs, if he knows economics so well why does he shy away from international trade?

He's not that good on economics. He mostly just remembered that the market works best, but not really why. Never seen him go indepth on anything, either. No surprise, then, that he doesn't understand international trade.

>So he plagiarized and didn't even leave any citations. Imagine my shock.

Not sure if you've read any of his books. He never leaves citations. In UPB, he even acted like he was the first guy to come up with a secular, objective morality.


 No.71624

>>71183

what youre describing is a common jewish attribute: low self awareness and very active egodefense mechanisms inducing among other things cognitive dissonance and primal anger at any dissident


 No.71637

>>71624

And how do you know it's a jewish trait?




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / film / htg / hypno / mexicali / new / sw / vore / zoo ]