Interesting YT Conversations...

[Bigga]

not a debate. 2 different people can have 2 different views, and other people can have 2 different opinions on them which is not arbitrarily defined by their success.

It could just be that someone could consider Sachs a more affable and amiable fellow, and think that Cleese was a genius but is now an insufferable chap.

Ultimately, both more talented and successful than Russell and the respect everyone else managed to show Sachs says to me he was a better person too.

At last, an answer.

The problem is humour/ comedy dictates that we should be able to understand all Human Beings should be able to be the subject of laughter (I don't feel that's an entirely acceptable position, but I respect it as much I can in order not to be a hypocrite).

There have been a myriad of worse kinds of 'humour' by people more talented than Brand about people more or less powerful/ respected than themselves.

The point should be whether that 'comedian' continues a prolonged attack of the subject rather than a one off.

Your self contained 'trap' is whether you judge ALL people by the measure you judged Brand on the one action.

I would say, if that's the barometer, you will have the smallest respect for the even smaller amount of people around you because of it.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

At last, an answer.

The problem is humour/ comedy dictates that we should be able to understand all Human Beings should be able to be the subject of laughter (I don't feel that's an entirely acceptable position, but I respect it as much I can in order not to be a hypocrite).

There have been a myriad of worse kinds of 'humour' by people more talented than Brand about people more or less powerful/ respected than themselves.

The point should be whether that 'comedian' continues a prolonged attack of the subject rather than a one off.

Your self contained 'trap' is whether you judge ALL people by the measure you judged Brand on the one action.

I would say, if that's the barometer, you will have the smallest respect for the even smaller amount of people around you because of it.

No, because unlike the left and right you do not have to forcibly defined by an arbitrary narrow frame of reference and rules. Much in the same way as you would treat someone commenting on your friend differently to them commenting on your mother, you can have varying levels of respect and tolerance for a range of different actions, behaviours and circumstances and adapt them and adapt to them accordingly. That's how the law works, hence why people committing technically the same crime can get varying degrees of sentencing based on numerous other factors.

I can happily disregard Brand to my heart's content and it's not incompatible in the slightest to tolerating a repeat offender of a different nature, context or nuances. That's the beauty of a reasoned, complex, human viewpoint rather than the political pigeons that are squawking endlessly at the moment.

 

[Bigga]

No, because unlike the left and right you do not have to forcibly defined by an arbitrary narrow frame of reference and rules. Much in the same way as you would treat someone commenting on your friend differently to them commenting on your mother, you can have varying levels of respect and tolerance for a range of different actions, behaviours and circumstances and adapt them and adapt to them accordingly. That's how the law works, hence why people committing technically the same crime can get varying degrees of sentencing based on numerous other factors.

I can happily disregard Brand to my heart's content and it's not incompatible in the slightest to tolerating a repeat offender of a different nature, context or nuances. That's the beauty of a reasoned, complex, human viewpoint rather than the political pigeons that are squawking endlessly at the moment.

But...

By your own admission, you switched off from Brand based upon his abstract humour on Sachs.

Once.

Compared to your own view of 'levels of respect', you're quite heavy handed thus quite the opposite of the 'reasoned' decision you've made!

But, again, it's your choice on 'humour'. BTW, I see you neatly avoided who else you judge by the same mantle.

But, that's by-the-by; a man made an ill attempt at humour and failed. The same man has grown as an individual since the period he was trying to anchor his life. He's had a baby and, I think, gotten married. He, now, has more life experience and is now asking questions about happiness and how to reach it.

I've had some falling outs with a few on here, BUT I have seen them grow as people and therefore, can move past former discrepancies in order hear new views.

You have your position and I have my position.

I don't mean to judge yours I just found it, to me, somewhat illogical.

But, it is what it is and I'm happy to leave it there.

 

[PannickAtTheDisco]

But...

By your own admission, you switched off from Brand based upon his abstract humour on Sachs.

Once.

Compared to your own view of 'levels of respect', you're quite heavy handed thus quite the opposite of the 'reasoned' decision you've made!

But, again, it's your choice on 'humour'. BTW, I see you neatly avoided who else you judge by the same mantle.

But, that's by-the-by; a man made an ill attempt at humour and failed. The same man has grown as an individual since the period he was trying to anchor his life. He's had a baby and, I think, gotten married. He, now, has more life experience and is now asking questions about happiness and how to reach it.

I've had some falling outs with a few on here, BUT I have seen them grow as people and therefore, can move past former discrepancies in order hear new views.

You have your position and I have my position.

I don't mean to judge yours I just found it, to me, somewhat illogical.

But, it is what it is and I'm happy to leave it there.

I gave one reason as to why I dislike Brand, that being the core of who he is which I think he displayed when he went to those depths, it resonated particularly strongly with me at the time and there's little I've noted since to make me find him any more likeable. In addition, I'm not fond of the way he conducts and handles himself, I don't find him a likeable personality (personal preference) and I struggle to see the merit of his standing considering I don't particularly see the fuss about his contributions in his chosen professions, in fact they often make him more unlikable at least to me.

Ultimately, when you piss someone off, it's hard to win them back particularly when you don't make a tangible shift in your personality and behaviour to demonstrate true remorse. Whether or not that's considered heavy-handed by others is up to them, ultimately I have a fluid and naturally evolving view of the world because your life experiences shape it and I will react accordingly, that's the crux of it. Trust me, I know I've pissed off many more multiples of people than I have had like me, but I only live my own life and I'm at the stage of my life where I have to go with the way I see things, because it's particularly difficult to depend on such a chaotic society in this age with so many elements that feel in desperate need of correcting, from the minutiae to the big picture.

 

[Dax777]

@Bigga @Rascal @ZenHalfTimeCrock

So I did go and watch the Triggernometry interview with SoA. Can I ask as I was curious in how you guys referenced him, what exactly do you disagree with SoA on in that interview? And what's are the terrible views you thit he holds?

Andd if we can use the Triggernometry interview as the basis for our discussion, that way we have a reference point rather than a 'belief' that he is wrong just because.

I look forward to your views.

 

[Rascal]

@Bigga @Rascal @ZenHalfTimeCrock

So I did go and watch the Triggernometry interview with SoA. Can I ask as I was curious in how you guys referenced him, what exactly do you disagree with SoA on in that interview? And what's are the terrible views you thit he holds?

Andd if we can use the Triggernometry interview as the basis for our discussion, that way we have a reference point rather than a 'belief' that he is wrong just because.

I look forward to your views.

He came across as quite balanced and reasoned in that interview which surprised me. He is associated with the UK Alt-Right and has a history of defending far right figures like Le Pen in France and Bolsanaro in Brazil. He is fond of diatribes about cultural Marxism, he is anti feminist and also a promulgator of 9/11 conspiracies, one of which claiming UFOs caused the destruction of the twin towers. Also his tweet to Jess Phillips a Labour MP saying "I would not rape you" was pretty distasteful. The #metoo campaign was full of "gold digging whores" Plus more. He is very outspoken and describes himself as a classical liberal. I really don't trust anybody who uses that term to describe themselves, but that's my own personal political viewpoint.

Like I said, I listened to him nonetheless and he surprised me as their is a bright fella in there, I just don't agree with his politics.

 

[Bigga]

He came across as quite balanced and reasoned in that interview which surprised me. He is associated with the UK Alt-Right and has a history of defending far right figures like Le Pen in France and Bolsanaro in Brazil. He is fond of diatribes about cultural Marxism, he is anti feminist and also a promulgator of 9/11 conspiracies, one of which claiming UFOs caused the destruction of the twin towers. Also his tweet to Jess Phillips a Labour MP saying "I would not rape you" was pretty distasteful. The #metoo campaign was full of "gold digging whores" Plus more. He is very outspoken and describes himself as a classical liberal. I really don't trust anybody who uses that term to describe themselves, but that's my own personal political viewpoint.

Like I said, I listened to him nonetheless and he surprised me as their is a bright fella in there, I just don't agree with his politics.

I must say, there's a reason why I've not responded and that's because you can't genuinely have a say on a clip that's 'false positive' about the man.

Rasc nails the his true colours, but if anything @Dax777 it's you that needs the greater understanding of context about SoA than just the example you've selected.

 

[Dax777]

I must say, there's a reason why I've not responded and that's because you can't genuinely have a say on a clip that's 'false positive' about the man.

Rasc nails the his true colours, but if anything @Dax777 it's you that needs the greater understanding of context about SoA than just the example you've selected.

I didn't select an example. Rascal suggested a podcast/ YouTube show 'Triggernometry' and I watched it. And frankly didn't find much wrong other than a waiver on his part towards the end.

So I asked if there was anything in the video @Rascal suggested that you disagreed with. The point of that question was to get a baseline for where we agree and disagree based on what we've both seen. I.e. that video.

Then post that, I asked what else about him do you object to? This was a question about your view of him and where that stems from.

Just like Rascal said, he found nothing in the Trigonometry interview objectionable. This however doesn't mean there aren't other places where he has been.

Hence why I asked the 2,nd question

 

[Bigga]

I didn't select an example. Rascal suggested a podcast/ YouTube show 'Triggernometry' and I watched it. And frankly didn't find much wrong other than a waiver on his part towards the end.

So I asked if there was anything in the video @Rascal suggested that you disagreed with. The point of that question was to get a baseline for where we agree and disagree based on what we've both seen. I.e. that video.

Then post that, I asked what else about him do you object to? This was a question about your view of him and where that stems from.

Just like Rascal said, he found nothing in the Trigonometry interview objectionable. This however doesn't mean there aren't other places where he has been.

Hence why I asked the 2,nd question

You want subject matter?

He's got plenty of material.

I just don't to post them, but he has a YT channel to peruse, should you wish to.

 

[ZenHalfTimeCrock]

@ZenHalfTimeCrock thanks s lot for the detailed and easy to read and understand response. It was highly informative.

I'll probably read it again this weekend to pick out some of the articles and books you referenced. Again this was a pleasure to read. And I am grateful that you took the time.

Hi Daxx, I've been (and still am) too busy to contribute to the forum recently. But, on reflection, I think we have to be wary of utopian political systems. Every man and his dog knows about fascism and communism but I think neoliberalism has to be added to the list.

Instead, I think we have be less in thrall to ideology and go more for what actually works in terms of producing a half-decent society. Some form of regulated capitalism does the trick for me.

Sorry to be so brief. I haven't even got the time to read recent posts but my concerns about SoA are based on what I have come across elsewhere with respect to him. Hopefully, someone has pointed out what kind of character he is.