Steve Bannon | Philosophy Tube

good evening my name is ollie thorne tonight's show features an heroic firefighter a villainous pyromaniac a 10 000 year old skull and a fantastic musical number in the finale but before the show begins i'd like to say that at no point during tonight's performance am i going to call steve balon a racist a sexist a transphobe an anti-semite or anything of the sort not because i don't think those words have weight to them but because i'm trying to reach the same audience as him i want to try a different tactic so what i am going to do is explain exactly where steve bannon is wrong and exactly where he is correct which is in more places than i expected him to be and there is a small chance that steve himself is somewhere in the theater this evening because he takes a lot of long flights and somebody might send this video to him as a way of passing the time in which case hi steve you've said before that you appreciate it when people who don't agree with you put in the work here i am in case there's a fire during tonight's performance the exits are to the far left and please remember there is no smoking allowed in the theater enjoy the show [Music] [Music] today we're gonna learn all about fire boy there sure is a lot of that around these days isn't there i'm a fireman a fight fires a hate fire you might say i'm an antifa a fire always starts with some combustible material which we call fuel that could be wood paper charcoal the society in which we live anything really everything potentially a fire also needs oxygen an igniter and an accelerant something to make the fire burn faster and one of the world's leading manufacturers and distributors of fire accelerants is stephen k bannon bannon has had a storied career at various times a naval officer investment banker film producer writer director co-founder of far-right misinformation website breitbart.com chief executive of donald trump's presidential campaign and chief strategist to the trump white house until he was either fired or quit in august 2017. basically bannon is still a movie producer he produces and arranges stories he used to do it with actual movies now he does it in real life since leaving the white house he's traveled around the world helping far-right causes including but not limited to the national front in france the bolsonaro presidential campaign in brazil and tommy robinson ukip boris johnson and jacob rees-mogg here in the uk a lot of ink has been spilled over trying to figure out what it is that bannon personally thinks but i don't really care what he believes in his heart i'm here to explain what he is philosophically doing steve the color of your soul is between you and god but your ass belongs to me [Music] in 2010 bannon wrote and directed a strange little film called generation zero about the financial crisis a favorite topic of his that he brings up whenever he speaks at live events the thesis is somewhat garbled but in essence the film claims that the 2008 financial crash was the culmination of a destined cycle of history that repeats roughly every hundred years always ending in a crisis from which the next cycle begins this is called strauss howe generational theory or the fourth turning and it isn't widely believed to be true or a useful way of doing history but it does make for a nice dramatic framing device so points for style i guess that's just the flavor though the real claim is that the crash was caused by baby boomers lack of moral character as opposed to anything else bannon says that his generation grew up in the 60s they became selfish narcissistic entitled hippies and when they inherited the levers of political and economic control they made risky moves they forgot all about personal responsibility and they screwed it up for everyone else this analysis of the financial crash is very similar to the one put forward by prager u if you've ever heard of them a lot of ideas in common between them and bannon if you haven't ever heard of them then lucky old you don't worry about it moreover the film claims that they by which it variously denotes politicians in general financiers in general baby boomers elites the democratic party and president obama made things worse after the crash by bailing out the banks with taxpayer money rather than letting them fail even though it was actually george w bush's government who did that not obama this is a falsehood that bannon repeats in his speech at oxford university and in his debate with david frum in toronto now he is critical of old school republicans like bush and democrats so ideologically it's not a huge deal in fact in the from debate he correctly says at the start that it was bush and then contradicts himself later on but it's maybe worth noting that he is leading his audience to be critical of democrats in particular but the basic thesis of the film seems simple enough you might say the financial crisis was a problem not of capitalism but of character as the film's tagline puts it and whether you believe that or whether you're correct it's a nice hot take and it makes for some good content however within that basic thrust the film also contains some stunning leaps of absolute moon logic at various points it implies without outright stating that the financial crash was the culmination of a decades-long deliberate plot by leftists to crash the american economy in order to instigate revolution that it was the fault of black civil rights activists who made white bankers afraid to deny loans to black subprime borrowers for fear of being called racist and that bill clinton's democratic party was trying to make the united states part of a new global world order which is vague and undefined and then just never mentioned again none of these claims are backed up by any kind of evidence and you're not really supposed to notice that because they're more implied than outright stated and this tactic is used throughout for instance at one point the film says that there was a plot in the 60s by two academics named cloward and piven to deliberately crash the american economy by signing loads of people up to welfare and then it just leaves this hanging it never gets brought up again but the implication is that the crash of 08 might have had something to do with it but what cloud and pivot actually wrote in a public magazine article was that a lot of people who were eligible for welfare weren't getting it and so if everybody who was eligible could be encouraged to actually sign up that would be a good way of getting the federal government to pay more attention to poverty and that's it they they just wrote an article about it there's no evidence i can find that anybody ever used it as a blueprint for organized action certainly no evidence that anybody held onto it in a desk drawer for 42 years until they got into a position to crash the economy but you're not really meant to notice that when you watch steve bannon's film it's just like spooky leftists it's all presented as this monichian pre-ordained struggle with the destined cycle of history and this bombastic super serious tone storm clouds scary music threatening graphics it's like reading the book of revelations there's this feeling of cosmic cataclysm and drama but at the same time it's really vague and just it's kind of bullshit it's overwhelming trying to keep up with it points get made and then dropped and restated later but never developed very often huge claims get made out of nowhere really quickly like a truck screaming past you in the dark if you're thinking of watching the film to have a laugh or just to see the weirdness for yourself i would honestly say skip it it's not fun the effect is just exhausting all the more so because from a technical standpoint film just isn't all that good the stock footage and the animations look pretty cheap the endless shots of statues and monuments get old fast the sound editing is really choppy it's repetitive the chapter markers are more confusing than helpful it's repetitive the imagery is often painfully over the top it's repetitive and it's repetitive sometimes steve bannon's film is just flat out wrong or bizarre of the financial crisis it asks how could so many authorities have failed to predict this ignoring the fact that some people actually did and petaphor for one is a left-wing economist who predicted the financial crash in detail several years before it actually happened but nobody listened presumably because her wikipedia picture is so spooky when discussing the 60s and counterculture the film conspicuously omits any of the reasons why people were actually rebelling against things like the vietnam war and white supremacy instead it says cultures change because elites come up with ideas that then filter down into the culture they come through the newspapers they come through the mainstream pulpit they come through the universities and then down into the grammar schools they come through the tv they come through the movies they come through popular music even anyone else smell petrol have you heard about these awesome attacks dreadful simply dreadful here it says family of four burned alive two little girls and a mother and father charred to a crisp and they've no idea who did it mind you i hardly ever read the newspapers load of old nonsense most of the time i've never met a journalist i could trust but just occasionally i do like to indulge i like to read the horoscopes what's your sign oh let's see what the future has in store with mercury in retrograde your energies are depleted beware of old friends or lovers who may be mocking you behind your back you will strive for success but until you make a breakthrough in yourself you will not attain it powerful energies swarm around you by paying the proper attention you can learn to harness them oh you must be somebody very special but even though the film is intellectually and technically pretty shoddy it's still very effective and affective so why there is one bit of generation zero that is absolute genius the bit where it says ordinary americans know what's going on they aren't fooled they're outraged and again it provides no evidence for this no polls no surveys of what americans think not even an explanation of what it is that ordinary americans supposedly know and are outraged about it just says it and this is what philosophers call constructing a public we might think that the public just exists somewhere just out there but really when we talk about the public we create an idea of it and then actual members of the public get affected by what they think the public wants we see this all the time in the uk especially newspapers will say things like concerns have been raised but they won't say who raised those concerns or what they are you just read it you go damn concerns i i also have concerns i don't know what i'm concerned about but i guess i'll find out later in the meantime better keep buying more newspapers and non-trans people constructing publix is very important for understanding populism which is politics that's all about the people versus the elites there's a lot of technical debate in philosophy about whether populism counts as an ideology or not personally i lean more towards saying that it's a style since anybody can do it if you're very clever you'll already have noticed that even though populist is usually used to describe people on the right wing like steve bannon you could have left-wing populism you could even have centrist populism the devil is in how you define these two groups but the other feature of populism is that these are moral groupings not just descriptive ones the people whoever they are are good and the elites well concerns have been raised there's also a lot of debate about where populism came from and who is or isn't a populist some people have argued that tony blair was pretty populist when he was prime minister but tony blair himself has since founded the tony blair institute one of whose stated goals is to combat populism so we might want to take that with a pinch of salt though i mean the tony blair institute also says that one of its main aims is to support stability in the middle east which has kind of in poor taste isn't it isn't that like opening the pewdiepie center for jewish cultural studies or the jesse single graham-linehan clinic for transgender health one thing the blair institute do point out though is that populism's a sliding scale so it's probably not a good use of our time to argue about who is or isn't one another thing to watch out for is to what degree populists present these two groups as being unified the british national party been smoking that populist cush for decades talking about the native british people and who is that okay we know who they mean when they say that but even just within the group of white people who were born here you have a lot of different and sometimes irreconcilable interests in his debate with david frum in toronto bannon says that liberalism is done for and the only choices now are between left-wing populism and right-wing populism he isn't the only one to say this some left-wing people agree with him including political scientist chantal moof but regardless one of the reasons bannon can be so persuasive is because he's a great populist he knows how to construct his public he's also very good at evoking emotional responses and i don't mean that in the sense that he uses feelings rather than logic and the hammer of reason no i mean he uses techniques to get people to feel as well as to think there's nothing wrong with that i do it too and bannon's pretty good at it certainly in his from debate he's just way better on stage than from his when from tries to muster an emotion to get the audience all teary-eyed about classical liberal values it's just like watching a blemonge explain why it votes liberal democrat you actually tuition fees aren't real debt it's just attacks on earning after education but bannon is relaxed he's confident he plays off the crowd he tells jokes he gets passionate he creates a mood generation zero is where this really shines through because it's almost all mood as ian danskin from innuendo studios has pointed out certain pieces of media cause the audience to reach a point called effective override where emotion overwhelms critical thinking ian's talking mainly about people getting riled up by inspiring patriotic propaganda but it could just as easily be despair or hopelessness or anxiety like the kind generation 0 invokes in its audience it makes you so anxious with its high stakes and its dramatic presentation that you're too busy being anxious to realize that the content is almost pure nonsense almost and i say almost because it does get some things very right more like very right wing no i do actually mean correct and i think this is the main reason why bannon is so persuasive to so many he often gets the first bit right for instance both in the film and elsewhere bannon points out that the people responsible for the financial crash have not been brought to justice yet he also says that it's unfair for the banks to have been bailed out consequence-free by the taxpayer which is something that i actually agree with and although he doesn't use the word neo-liberalism he is critical of the way that for the past several decades successive governments of all parties both in the u.s and in europe have just unleashed the market and hang the consequences for everybody else particularly millennials who got saddled with huge amounts of debt and people of all generations who got sent off to fight and die in pointless expensive wars to secure profits for oil companies a leftist would point out that these things have happened because in capitalism stuff gets done because it's profitable not because anybody necessarily needs it to be done and so any kind of moral consideration or concerns about sustainability are always going to come second to the profit motive capitalism don't have any breaks on the train the mantra is more and that gives companies a very strong incentive to mess with democracy through lobbying but bannon won't go there so although he can sometimes diagnose the problems with society quite effectively he then veers off into the wild blue yonder of weird shit this almost being correct but then sashaying off into moon logic is common to a lot of people on the far right and much as we might like to malign them as cranks or loonies that's not always true they do sometimes have part of the picture and that can be very appealing awful it's produced such a climate of fear don't you think that's the worst part the fear the suspicion a chap can't walk down the street smoking a cigarette these days without being accused of being an arsonist i say if i want to smoke a cigarette that is jolly well my right as a free man but light up in some places these days and people will yell arsonist arsonist take this chap steve bannon all right dreadful chap don't misunderstand me simply awful the things he says most of the things he says although you can't deny his popularity particularly amongst the white working class i'm a travelling salesman so i get about a fair bit listen to a lot of people real salt of the earth people i grew up very poor no advantages in life whatsoever so i've spent a lot of time around hard workers know how they think do you believe in god no need to say anything i see the look on your face i think that's a very brave stance if i may say so i think that's the best stance one can take on questions theological not many people would and this chat bannon dreadful chap but here's an article here's an article about steve bannon lighting a cigarette at the oxford student union and somebody called the fire department they had people in the streets yelling arsonist artist just for lighting a cigarette let's take another non-bannon example just for a breath of fresh air and because it's hilarious this video which you can watch right here on youtube.gov is a discussion between two far-right guys thomas rouselle who goes by the handle survive the jive and another youtuber who i swear i've seen before somewhere yes it's neo-nazi marcus folen aka the golden one the living meme and the second most famous swedish man ever to use youtube to distribute anti-semitic messages marcus and tom have what starts out as an interesting discussion about cheddar man a 10 000 year old human skeleton found in cheddar gorge belonging to one of the first modern inhabitants of the uk in 2018 for the first time a team at the natural history museum got a look at cheddar man's dna and channel 4 turned this story into a fun little edutainment program called first brit the investigation found that cheddar man had blue eyes dark hair and dark skin at least darker than mine for instance a lot of media articles emphasized the dark skin as did the documentary which also featured a facial reconstruction of cheddar man by two artists who specialize in this kind of work this is what they came up with and this is the image of cheddar man that a lot of media coverage ran with you can see the obvious differences between it and previous reconstructions done without the benefit of dna sequencing both of which have pale skin marcus and tom point out in their video that dark doesn't necessarily mean black we don't know a hundred percent that cheddar man was very dark-skinned just almost certainly a good deal darker than what we would call a white person now and that's actually kind of interesting the fact that the artists and the documentary chose to portray cheddar man as being very dark-skinned might prompt some interesting questions about how we today imagine racial otherness about how scientific findings get presented to the public and whether we can really use modern categories like race to reconstruct the past when it might not have been so simple so much of what we pay attention to in a human face like expression and hair length and style and facial hair can't be known from dna there is a lot of artistic license here the artists chose to give cheddar man a cheeky little grin a little bit of personality and you can't tell that from their genes he might have been a miserable kid so there is a lot here that goes beyond the science marcus and tom are almost right and to prove this point i'm going to bury my own head in the woods [Music] for the first time in decades breakthroughs in cutting-edge scientific technology have allowed scientists to resurrect the past researchers at the university of new london have sequenced the dna of geordie mann a 10 000 year old skeleton found in the radioactive wasteland that was once the north of england when geordie man was first discovered in the year 12016 it was initially thought to have been the skull of a giant gorilla but then we figured out that it was actually the skull of a humanoid male with a freakishly large head based on the genetic markers we can say with reasonable certainty that geordie mann was probably around six foot tall had pale blue green eyes dark hair and required some form of primitive corrective glass worn on the face in order to see and from the shape of the skull we can deduce that he was probably an alpha buck that slayed mad puss on the reg definitely a chad i mean with a skull circumference like that he was probably so chad that he shared a border with cameroon [Music] to its credit the channel 4 documentary alludes to the fact that discovering one of the first britons was probably what we today would have called a person of color is a significant thing one of the scientists who did the genetic analysis explicitly says this is a challenge to the idea that british means white he enlists the help of an unnamed expert in the u.s who emails him part way through the program saying there's a very high probability that cheddar man had dark to black skin but he quote can't say for sure you can actually see a snippet of that email in the documentary so when marcus and tom say that this is a politically relevant discovery and that the way we present the past reflects not just what it was like but also how we think about it through the lens of now they're not wrong in that bit per se they've hit upon an interesting philosophical point which is that the study of history is like a kind of storytelling historians try to construct stories out of bits and pieces that actually happened but somebody has to take those bits and pieces and put them into a digestible order and the way they do that will reflect them and the context in which they live but then moon logic thomas claims that this is all part of a deliberate conspiracy to trick white people out of their history and their claims on european land he calls this psychological terrorism that should not be forgiven by anybody and of course he provides absolutely no evidence of this conspiracy existing but he isn't the only one saying that it's out there see also this anonymous article on cheddar man from freedom post uk black cheddar man appears to be a mainstream media fabrication to rewrite history and claim that the original inhabitants of europe were black in an attempt to justify multiculturalism and immigration what can i say but yikes curiously their sensational story also broke during black history month oh no it must be a conspiracy what are the odds of that happening one in 12. so they got the first bit right it's just that's the spoon full of sugar that helps the poison go down similarly bannon says some things which are true and they give his overall story more credibility and whether he personally believes the falsehoods he says or not it's the overall story that he's selling apparently most of the protesters outside bannon's speech at oxford were typical students idealistic socialist oh yes a surprising number as if they don't know that socialism communism killed i don't know how many hundreds of millions of people i used to be a lecturer so i know students quite well i was a lecturer at london saints university years ago awful tragedy with the library at london saints all those books up in smoke let's stay in history for a moment and talk about julius evela who is also absolutely fucking hilarious julius evela was an early 20th century italian writer he was literally a baron and he literally wore a monocle stephen bannon has mentioned eviler a few times in passing the now disgraced former golden boy of breitbart milo yiannopoulos credited eviler as one of the foundational thinkers of the alt-right movement and it's not hard to see why his influence is clear it's possible to take a very surface-level reading of eviler according to which he is just a traditionalist traditionalism being the philosophical idea that all the different ancient traditions of the world's different societies have a grain of truth in them that the modern world has lost sight of and that we need to go back and recover it is only by going back to the meanings and the visions that existed before the establishment of the causes of the present civilization that it is possible to achieve an absolute reference point the key for the real understanding of all modern deviations on the surface evela's traditionalism might seem pretty innocuous something's wrong with the modern world and we need to go back in time in order to discover what it is but remember history reflects the storyteller it matters what those traditions are and it matters who gets to pick them i'll get to you another day our old pals marcus and tom discuss evela in the same video they discuss cheddar man and they read him simply as a traditionalist they distinguish between traditionalism and conservativism conservativism being according to them the tendency to preserve the familiar whereas traditionalism being the idea that we need to go back even further to find deeper truths in their video marcus and tom ask if the goal is to go back to traditions how can we discover authentic traditions that haven't been distorted over time in other words how can we do accurate history for this traditionalist project and that would be an interesting question but marcus gives the game away and he says that the traditions we live by need to be in line with our values as europeans and that means that rather than choosing the values based on the traditions marcus is doing it the other way around he's choosing which traditions to follow based on the values he currently has and choosing the traditions based on the values is exactly the same mistake that eveler makes as well he was heavily involved with the italian fascists and then the nazis which makes sense once you read it the fact that he was a fascist is not an incidental detail that we can separate from his philosophy because there is no neutral history there can be no untainted traditionalism that doesn't contain some of the values of the present being projected back and if you carry on reading revolts against the modern world beyond the introduction you'll find that all the traditions evel are things we need to go back to are terrible for instance he says that miscegenation and racial equality is messing with the naturally ordered hierarchy of the races which we need to bring back but in an interesting twist unlike a lot of modern racists evella didn't believe that biology or iq or genetics made white people superior he was a spiritual racist he says it might seem unfair to say that some people are born racially inferior but a person is endowed with a certain spirit by virtue of being born in a given caste but at the same time one is born in a specific caste because one possesses transcendentally a given spirit in other words if you weren't such a screw-up your immortal soul would have had the good sense to have been born a white person the same is also apparently true of gender to be born male you first have to be transcendentally male to be born female you first have to be transcendentally just a piece of shit just just just the worst what it is to be transcendentally trans he doesn't say we can guess men must realize their soul's potential by becoming either warriors or ascetics and women must realize their soul's potential by becoming either mothers or lovers and evil doesn't mean lover in the fun way of consensual sexual explorations between loving and equal partners he means women giving themselves entirely to men and quote being for another being again not in the fun way according to eveler so-called feminism direct quote is really taking women away from what'll make them happy it's turning all the women into men and all the all the dudes are becoming feminines it's the degeneracy of the male and female types and it's happening because men aren't virile enough and it's a threat to the west hence the types of the woman garcon and the shallow and vain woman incapable of any elan beyond herself utterly inadequate as far as sensuality and sinfulness are concerned because to the modern woman the possibilities of physical love are often not as interesting as the narcissistic cult of her body or is being seen with as many or as few clothes as possible also harem anime is the ideal model of western femininity tenshi muyo was red pellets fuck evilla predicts that if this goes on relationships and gender norms as he knows them in 1934 are doomed and in fantasy was right about that it just turned out that was rad the west really did decline after 1934 but it wasn't degeneracy or a lack of racial purity that killed so many people and destroyed europe it was people like evela worrying about that stuff so much they invented fascism and committed genocide over it although when he was tried in 1951 he said i'm not a fascist i'm a super fascist you're not dealing with an ordinary fascist anymore kakarot i have realized the legend but the world actually got a tiny bit better again in 1974 when julius evela fucking died like a cuck if he was really all that great his soul wouldn't have been born into a body susceptible to liver disease he was then reincarnated as davis irini but if you strip evila of all of that context and pretend neutral history is possible you can present this watered-down version where he's just a traditionalist and he's the real kicker if anybody then comes to you and tries to bring up that relevant context you can accuse them of just poisoning the well of being a biased virtue signaling sjw who's afraid of new ideas and they won't debate you on evil's terms kind of like if a cigarette company put out an ad saying that smoking makes you cool and you pointed out the smoking gives people cancer and they said why won't you debate us on the cool question and here we come back to stephen bannon because he is really good at this when bannon gave his speech at oxford university there were anti-fascist protesters outside and he said he wished that they understood fascism because fascism is about trying to worship the state and he's trying to shrink the state so he can't be a fascist and again not entirely wrong but incomplete because fascism is also often characterized by racial ideology it's really more about the worship of the in-group versus the out-group where that in-group is often though not always defined racially and yes if and when that in-group gets into power there is a certain amount of state worship but that's because the state then becomes the proxy for the master race from which all others are excluded on the topic of immigration bannon says that immigrants drive down wages but that's not actually true it's not true when steve bannon says it and it isn't true when jeremy corbyn says it either immigrants don't lower wages bosses do and they do it because we live in a system where things are done because they're profitable not because people need them to be done he also says that welfare states can't take the burden of mass migration which would only be true as long as the people who got rich under this current system are allowed to keep that money which we don't have to let them do another very slick surface level claim that bannon makes is that president donald trump's policies don't care about whether you're black or white or asian or hispanic they care about whether you're a citizen he calls this economic nationalism and says it's about maximizing the value of citizenship and yeah okay but in countries like the usa and the uk where for a long time only white people were allowed to be full citizens who gets seen as a citizen now is still very much affected by that history this is not about blame or guilt or victimhood those are all ways that people like bannon will try and get you to say ah look they won't debate us on the question of whether smoking is cool or not when he talks about not being guilty for being white or as he said to the french national front let them call you a racist wear it as a badge of honor that's a way of trying to encourage white people in the audience to take conversations about philosophy and history and instead make them about our white feelings which can cause that effective override so please note that i still have not once called steve bannon a racist i'm just putting the warning labels on the cigarette packets facts don't care about your feelings steve it is important to realize though that these slights of hand will work best on white people because we are used to thinking that race doesn't have anything to do with anything because it is never made a problem for us constitutional law professor barbara flagg calls this the transparency phenomenon the tendency for white people to think that categories like citizen and criminal or citizen and immigrant are race neutral because nobody has ever used them against us in a racialized way nobody has ever said to me in britain where are you from no i i mean where are you from and that means that if and when fascism does make a comeback and these categories start overlapping more and more with race and other marginalized identities we might not be the first to smell the smoke so we should probably listen to those who can apparently they arrested one of the ringleaders of the oxford protest some transgender boy or girl i don't really understand that whole thing myself i mean i'm not a bigot i'm quite willing to call people by whatever name you know uh but i i don't really understand why they make such a fuss these activists they demand that you not merely tolerate but uh believe as well it's orwellian orwellian i was young and brave too once but never made that sort of a fuss in my day as i say i grew up very poor still almost penniless to this day i was a waiter before i was a lecturer before i was a traveling salesman a waiter at a luxury restaurant in piccadilly did you ever visit the hotel mill and smith magnificent gorgeous establishment this was all years ago of course terrible what happened to that place apparently it started in the kitchen somebody left a stove on all those people not to mention the furniture although that was an experience let me tell you waiting tables at the hotel mill and smith you see how the other half lives all dressed up in their finest nattering away you're closer to the center of power in a restaurant in piccadilly than you are if you were in the front row of the commons let me tell you the extravagance with which the elites of the world operate the circles in which they move the sheer amount of shackles changing hands it is extraordinary in the from debate bannon says that the choice is between trump populism or bernie sanders jeremy corbyn populism but even then he's not quite giving you the full picture because if you want to you can keep going bernie sanders and jeremy corbyn and even alexandria ocasio-cortez they could just be the beginning i'm not trying to tell you what to do here but you don't have to settle for rent controls and more affordable housing you could demand that we confiscate landlords property and abolish rent and give it to people for free you don't have to settle for ending unjust wars you could dismantle the military and spend that money on other stuff you don't have to settle for taxing fuel slightly more you could break up the biggest polluting companies you don't have to settle for making healthcare more efficient you could make it free for everyone not just citizens everybody you don't have to settle for a 44 marginal tax rate on earnings above 5 million a year which is something steve bannon allegedly pushed for or even a 70 one you could take 100 of that money and establish a maximum wage and a lot of rich people would lose a lot of money but that's the other kind of populism that steve bannon won't tell you about bannon says in my opinion correctly that when people lose faith in liberal capitalism you've got two choices it's going to be socialism or it's going to be fascism the sugar the kernel of truth in what he says is that the old way of doing political philosophy where politicians and capital were in bed with each other has knackered us it is provably a disaster i would go one step further and say that climate change is a problem of liberal capitalism's making that it is unable to solve in time and so we really do need some new ideas or we really are going to face an apocalyptic scenario marxists would go even further and say that it's not just in its consequences but in its very form that capitalism is morally unjustifiable but regardless of that arguably we really have reached a kind of turning point in human history and the choices really are socialism or barbarism but bannon won't entertain the possibility of socialism and he won't overtly tell you that fascism is the answer ah thank you ever so much would you mind putting that over there with the others uh you can leave this if you like can i offer you a drink no very healthy of you i don't know what the world's coming to these days nobody trusts anybody anymore what with these arsenal attacks to be perfectly frank i think there's something fishy going on i mean who appoints these so-called fire fighters who are they accountable to running around breaking down doors covering their faces bullying people for something as small as not changing the batteries in a smoke alarm i don't know i wouldn't be surprised if there were one or two fire fighters working with the arsonists i like you i feel like we've known each other a long time we're a dying breed you and i the world is changing seems like everywhere you look flames are beginning to rise and we have to be so careful not to lose everything that we've built i say you wouldn't by any chance happen to have a match why do we build my children my children why do we build the wall [Music] why my children my children how does the world keep us free how does the wall keep us [Music] my children my children who do we call the enemy [Music] [Music] my children my children because they want what we have god [Music] is [Music] what do we have that they should want my children my children what do we have that they should and our work is never done my children my children the enemy is poverty to keep us free you

Channel: Philosophy Tube

Views: 1,361,479

Rating: 4.8726759 out of 5

Keywords: philosophy, steve bannon, politics, max frisch, philosophy tube, oliver thorn, media, breitbart, julius evola, traditionalism

Id: wO6uD3c2qMo

Length: 44min 57sec (2697 seconds)

Published: Mon Feb 04 2019

Reddit Comments

[u/barbwireboy2]

I keep getting blown away by the level of quality in breadtube videos, not only are they packed full of interesting ideas to think about, but just the production level is ridiculous.

[u/Tuesdaythe5th]

"Your ass belongs to me"

O L L Y S T O P

[u/KyloTennant]

He's not a fascist he's a S U P E R F A S C I S T

[u/[deleted]]

HOW DOES HE KEEP GETTING BETTER?!

[u/odious_odes]

Holy shit this video was so good. And not just how fucking sexy it was. The analysis, the use of metaphor, the offhand jokes, the way it all comes together.

[u/Anarchissed]

I really need to join something to organise in meatspace. I've been thinking that for a while but this just really reminded me. It really does feel like the political spectrum is widening and the gap inbetween is growing.

(Speaking of spectrums I think this video just caused a shift on where I am on the kinsey scale. Damn leftists ruining my fragile heterosexuality)

[u/Terminus_Est_Eterne]

DBZ in my BreadTube? Why yes, I would like that.

[u/PM_ME_MICHAEL_STIPE]

This is such a good fucking video. I don't have anything to contribute to the discussion but I need to gush about it.

[u/bookman_]

About a third of commenters are dudes being thirsty on olly