Carl Benjamin - Woke, Liberalism, and God
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 04. 2024
- Subscribe to Nick's Substack for the FULL EPISODE: www.nickdixon.net
SUBSCRIBE to this channel: / @nick_dixon
Subscribe to The Current Thing audio podcast: podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast...
Twitter/X: / nickdixoncomic
Carl’s links:
lotuseaters.com
/ sargon_of_akkad
#podcast #politics #sargon #lotuseaters #woke #atheism #liberalism
I would 100% watch a fallout show where a white Ryan gosling attempts to find the last remaining white person in America 2085
It would be interesting to see a future where they had post apocalypse racial segregation and how those different communities were fairing.😂
@@RichardEnglanderI think we know 😂
I'd happily watch him do so as a Trauma Sevant type of Ken. :D
They would be Amish.
to be honest, i'd be even MORE likely to watch it if it was a white ryan gosling in black face.
I'm a Registered Nurse and Midwife and have seen how a few feminists over the past five decades have altered and destroyed the beautiful practice of nursing.
I think we have to consider at this point that the people right at the top aren't stupid and they know exactly what they are doing.
The follow through on your point are they 1.evil/malicious 2.incompetent 3.uncaring and indifferent?
@@MrDanno2 Depends on the individual. The biggest key to understanding 'conspiracy theory' is just understanding human nature and how individuals, even isolated, in specific situations are overwhelmingly likely to respond in certain ways.
Fantastic interview on the Duran with, I think his name is Jim Dyer, he's been writing about this cabal that wants a oneworld li-beral auth-oritar*Ian gove-rnment for 20 years. Highly recommend a viewing.
@@MrDanno2 All three.
Nah. To conclude that everyone in charge is stupid is itself stupid and shows an incomplete understanding of the forces upon them, and the lack of power any individual has in present times.
Carl, you are wrong on the Christianity front. We still have a thriving Christian community in this country. People have seen the woke religious nature of the CofE, deserted it and set up their own churches.
Correct. I know a fair few ex-Church in Wales ministers who've just set up independent churches affiliated with other Anglican groups.
Typical christian response. Just run away from the problems to "greener pastures" elsewhere. Meanwhile heresy and apostasy dominates the UK
@@actuallyKriminell Lol!
Seeing it is not the same as actually stepping up and fighting back against it taking over.
@@actuallyKriminell Exactly. Evil corrupts Adam and Eve so God kicks them out of the garden and lets the evil that corrupted them stay and flourish.
Nick asked a good question at the beginning. Yes, the nazis were used as a justification to make being right wing in the western world basically illegal. It took time, but it happened. Which is weird at first because many of the people who fought the nazis directly were right wing essentially. Your average American or British soldier wasn't exactly an antifa-progressive for example, regular citizens for that matter too. So what we take from this shouldn't be to defend the nazis necessarily. But we don't need to base our whole worldview on just opposing things based on whether the nazis believed it or not. They believed a lot of things, some wacky things, and some true things. The sky doesn't suddenly stop being blue if the nazis also believed it was blue. We need to try our hardest to see reality as it is.
Nazism is the only defense against Communism. That was the whole reason for its existence, why it arose in the first place. If you can't understand that, you won't understand why the Communists outlawed it and anything resembling it after it was defeated.
Oh you simple fool lol. Nazis were socialists, hence left wing, has nothing to do with being right wing. Left wing crazies will use any flawed argument 😉
Carl Benjamin is my favorite english nationalist
I thought he was a Civic nationalist? Which is to say not a nationalist at all (George Bush jr nationalism)
@AndersonWave17 yes, he should join the teaming hordes of white nationalists, all 20000 of you worldwide. If anything says "victory" it's a movement borne out of the shittiest aspects of the progressive manure pile that's been largely rejected by humanity. Hey, how's Iron March doing these days?
Carl is not even English. He has a black grandfather apparently. Lmao.
Is he a nationalist? Nationalism= ethno nationalism because of the definition of "nation".
He's probably a statist. Civ nat.
@@87stevan ok so he's packin meat and still loves his country. sounds like a total chad.
I think Carl might have religiosity backwards. I don't go to church, read my Bible and pray because I'm passionate about God. I'm passionate about God because I go to church, read my Bible, and pray. Like I didn't love my wife before I started spending a lot of time with her. If I had said I don't want to be around you a lot because that'd be faking being in love with you, I'd probably never have fallen in love with her.
I do take your point about going to Church, praying and reading your bible helping a person to become more passionate about God.
However are you not concerned that the core beliefs of Christianity are under threat from people like Jordan Peterson? Could the Church destroy itself from within if new members were only intellectuals with a passion for discussing narrative and no passion for the core beliefs of Christianity.
@@johnwheeler3071great take we need to evolve they'll keep taking out kids with new technology. We need to tec up fast and fight. Thes people don't speak for us. Could we talk more about this.....?
The core propositions of christianity are still false though, however much you are in love with your version of "god".
@@lil-al 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 what a joke you thought you did something there with those words. Poor thing you'll get there one day
Pikkiwokki will reward us with a pig roast and as many coconuts as we can carry.
I’m closer to Nick than Carl on religion. I don’t think Carl reads how fraught with failing and trying again life is for believers.
We aren’t complete. We are works in progress. We just accept that burden.
So you get nothing out of being religious?
@@alastairthegreat2887 He didn’t say that at all. What’s with the weird strawman?
@@alastairthegreat2887 You get conviction, the ability to grow via introspection and adherence to a moral ethics code that helps guide one to do good and be a good person. Thats what Christianity does. Which is why advocates for it are probably way happier then say a staunch atheist.
I became a Christian partly because of all the religions I looked into it was the only one that accounted for sinful behaviour. We are not and can never be prefect and that pursuit is the source of most of the worlds woes.
@@robosoldier11 you mean you can gaslight yourself? because you cant self motivate?
I don't know what books Carl has read on the subject, but my understanding from my readings is that Classical Liberals didn't mean "equality" to mean that we all have the same talents, skills, and abilities to achieve the same outcomes, it meant that no arbitrary barriers will be placed in your way of achieving your own pursuits, so long as you don't infringe on anyone else's natural rights.
Rousseau sounds like a proto communist, not a Classical Liberal. See this is why the US worked so well for the first 124 years. People understood what equality meant, and were willing to fight to preserve that meaning. They also understood that the moocher masses should not be allowed to vote, but at some point they allowed the socialists to vote and it all started going down hill form there.
@20:00 No Carl, equality of opportunity does not mean that a wealthy person has to start at the same place as a poor person. That wealth was built by his ancestors and hes fully entitled to it. Again, equality of opportunity means NO ARBITRARY BARRIERS to one's pursuits. I swear the more people engage in "talk" the more they brainwash themselves. The professional socialist "talkers" (all they do is talk, and not produce anything of value) eventually wear you down in their domain of expertise until they convince someone as bright and knowledgeable and well read as Carl Benjamin to reject the founding principles of "The West". Its hard to believe, but here we are...
Unfortunately you see it everywhere these days, left and right.
@@emjay9688
Well and contained within that sentence you wrote is another reason why we keep losing. Imprecise definitions.
I'm not picking on you, I've been guilty of the same thing many times, but what does "right" and "left" mean? As far as I know, its some made up terms the French used back during their first republic based on where the two factions that were pro self government sat in the French parlament (the right or left side), right after they had guillotined their royalty. It has no precise meaning. I've been called a right winger when I say government it too bloated and spends too much money for unconstitutional socialist programs, and then a left winger when I say that drugs should be decriminalized because government does not have the right to tell you what you can put in your body.
The same goes for "conservatism". Back in Thomas Jefferson's days the "conservatives" were monarchists. Today, they are, for the most part traditionalist, mostly Christian, Classical Liberals, that would likely go totalitarian with certain Christian beliefs if you let them, like when they tried to ban birth control.
The epitaph of religion has been written multiple times in history. Cynicism and irreligion are common symptoms of declining cultures, and often herald the collapse of social institutions and ultimately a resurgence of religion. Christian scripture records how the time of Christ saw the state of Judea described as “a faithless generation” with religious and civil leadership seen as increasingly morally bankrupt. This would then give rise to Christianity, a religious tradition which dominated the west through the Middle Ages. Renaissance era Humanism, itself motivated in part by corruption of church authorities, gave way to the reformation. The sheltered sophisticates of wealthy and secure societies seem to frequently come to the conclusion they have grown beyond religion, only to then face social decay and foreign domination by groups still motivated by the primal passions that faith channels into pro-social behavior.
Yeah, nothing new under the sun. It is strange how people who read Spengler doesn't understand such things.
Religion will never go away because it plays an irreplaceable social role. The current age is just as religious as it's ever been, although many will never admit it. In practice, however, this is undeniable. The post-Enlightenment so-called secular liberalism of the current age has mainly re-skinned Christianity as its own. It preaches original sin (whiteness, racism, colonialism), redemption (anti-racism and reparations), fruits of the Holy Spirit (diversity, equity, and inclusion), has a clergy (university professors and institutional media), and preaches doomsday prophecy (climate "science"). Its adherents earnestly believe the faith to the point of dismissing any evidence contrary to it as unholy and sacrilege (right wing propaganda), no matter how sound said evidence is. It gives many people meaning and fulfillment in life- they really believe they are saving the world through political activism.
@@scalesofleviathan9697 It is meaning or distraction?
What they don't understand is that evolution seems to want religion. For some reason, the more atheistic and materialistic thinking one has, the less likely they are to reproduce, or reproduce in large quantities. So yeah, sure, right now you have a lot of non-religious people. But guess what? Those people are enjoying themselves right now and not reproducing. You know who is reproducing at higher rates? The super religious. So, what you end up with more and more religious children. Look what happened to Israel. The super orthodox are having a lot of children, while the rest of the population is living their liberal fantasies. Guess what? Before you know it, in a couple of generations, the orthodox would have doubled their populations while the secularists declined. This would be more obvious if it wasn't for state schooling that tries it's best to repress religion. Imagine a world where the majority of children went to their own private/religious schools and not state schools.
Bullshit. Religion has been on the decline for decades, and things were fine and getting better. The trouble we see now has NOTHING to do with decline in religion- it’s due to woke bad actors purposefully trying to tear down society for a communist/Marxist revolution.
This idea that things are bad because not enough Jebus is nothing but propaganda and lies.
PS- all the major players at the forefront of fighting woke are atheists. James Lindsay, Douglas Murray, Andrew Murray, Joe Rogan, and many others.
Stop the BS propaganda for your faith. It’s obnoxious
Hey everyone good to see people like Nick having a great guy like Carl on.
Failed?
Not how I see it.
I see all this as how Liberalism was always going to end up, we just didn't know it until to late.
Nonsense. What we need is to return to liberalism. The mistake was going away from it and embracing progressivism (or downright Marxism) instead.
@@KRGruner The narrow end of the wedge regarding "liberalism" happened 60 years ago, which is about the time that academics started lumping Rousseau in with Locke and Hobbes, and calling their (contradictory) ideas "liberalism". Carl has argued many times that "liberalism has nothing to resist communism" but doesn't recognize that Rousseau's "social contract" isn't liberal, and is the basis for how socialists/communists/Marxists co-opted "liberalism". Locke and Rousseau were within a generation of each other, and people at that time recognized their views as opposed to one another. Voltaire was the most famous critic of Rousseau, and was a strong believer in Natural Rights. People have been creating qualifiers for this distinction since the 60's, using terms like "classical liberal" and "English liberal" to make this distinction, while subliminally buying into it via adding a modifer.
Rousseau was not liberal, social contracts have never existed, and once people realize this will they finally accept that what conservatives are trying to conserve is actually "real" liberalism. With these caveats added I completely agree with your point.
@@KRGruner go away James Lindsay.
@@____________________519 I agree with much of what you said but disagree that conservatives want to conserve real liberalism. I think Michael Malice is more correct in saying "conservatives are just progressives driving the speed limit". Guaranteed, in one generation conservatives will be defending most of the nonsense liberals are currently espousing. They'll rightfully call modern liberals socialists and criticize their plans to continuously expand the welfare state but they have no interest in dismantling what's already been created should they gain power. Quite the contrary, they will defend the existing system but will try and convince the public that they can manage it better and more efficiently.
The only people wanting to conserve real liberalism are libertarians.
@@KRGruner Nah. The issue is Liberalism. Due to a number of pretty basic false presumptions within liberalism is why Liberalism collapsing into itself isn't a bug, but a feature.
Let's take the presumed rationality of people within liberalism. The liberal simply presumes the rational person won't want to be a drug zombie subsisting off of benefits/welfare. Yet in many places not only is this more common than ever, the liberals fund it thinking extra support will get the drug-addled on the 'right track'. This can easily lead us to John Rawls who would go even a step further and argue against punishment or imprisonment these sorts(along with essentially all criminals) as the 'sensible' person would pursue such activity, therefore the drug zombie is closer to a madman than a criminal willfully harming others.
Progressives are simply another step past Rawls who agree the homeless drug addicts are not criminals but are actually the victims of society. So them pulling a knife to rob you because they're jonesing for another hit - isn't their fault. It's actually your fault for living a decent life, which (somehow) resulted in this deluded person reliant on drugs and crime.
This is because liberalism contains no moral guidance and very sparse limiting factors within it. So the only response liberalism has to itself is to consume itself like an oroborous where the society becomes burdened by so many laws that the people are no longer free as a means of addressing only some of liberalisms own incoherence.
So the liberal will actively argue that it's a persons right to become a drug zombie, but will turn around and impose taxes and fees on the non drug-zombies for causing the drug zombies. So now we need to set designated times and locations where it's allowable to abuse hard drugs, funded and provided by the liberal government.
The problem is liberalism.
Carl is an inspiration. He dodges so many pitfalls, balances so many concerns, approaches the world empirically while avoiding the dogmas of empiricism. Nick is much better dressed though. Now you just need to invest in a tie.
Carl has his blindspots, and unlike many of us, he refuses for long periods of time to adress them. But maybe his process just takes longer.
@@frankberger7035 Like his penchant for wearing short-sleeved shirts when he's not even at the beach?
@@billgaits3717like letting go of a lot of liberal presumptions and the solutions. He’s getting there, though.
Dodges so many pitfalls like destroying ukip and getting trolled off the internet?
@@MrOnay-px1jx He was? ohh you mean his youtube channel? i mean he seems more active there now.
Ephesians 6:12
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.”
No, we do not. Paul's angels and demons do not exist. We are battiling very much flesh and blood.
@@lil-al Whatever sin, whatever guilty 'pleasure' keeps you from God it is not worth it. Hell is real and your on your way... Only Jesus can save you. Praying for you!
@@lil-almilitant atheist snowflakes are so cringe.
@@lil-al stupid is as stupid does
Watching this unironically from a Haven Holidays camp
based,rory the tiger was also based and so was manic the parrot,90s kids know.
It's funny how you can tell how long someone has been aware of Carl by how they refer to him. I've been watching him since 2015 and I always call him Sargon. My brother didn't wake up from the Left's narrative until covid hit in 2020, and whenever he brings him up, he refers to him as Carl Benjamin.
I really admire him for how much he's grown as a content creator, like forming the Lotus Eaters, but I still do miss 'This Week In Stupid'.
TWIS was great
He was my introduction to politics when I was 15-16, then I stopped really caring about politics, and now I see him again still going at it. He didn't use to be this right wing, which is interesting.
TWIS was effectively passed off to Vee, as mentioned by Sargon himself.
I'm somewhere in the middle but just use Carl now cos he's clearly matured into a far different person from the OG Sargon Gamergate persona.
But , he is Sargon.
„Egalitarianism, in every form and shape, is incompatible with the idea of private property. Private property implies exclusivity, inequality, and difference.“
No. Its called a shotgun. Thats the perfect form of egalitarian private property.
@@117johnpar Buhh das WACIST!!!
I think you are misdefining Egalitarianism in this statement.
@@dragons_red How? It's not a dictionary definition but the dictionary definition applied to reality.
The year 2016 marked a pivotal moment in global politics with the rise of significant events such as the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States and the Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom. While these events sparked polarizing debates and uncertainties, for many, they also symbolized a glimmer of hope for change and a reevaluation of established norms and systems.
Great to see this!
I saw the tweet about it yesterday and got up early hoping to catch it.
The more I found out about the universe, the more it cemented my Christian beliefs in God.
For me not especially in God, but I find that religious people keep to more baseline things like kindness, friendship, mom and dad households... In this insanity I now long for that clarity.
@@martinvho that is a good start, but we are only flesh and blood.
Really? Made me the opposite, realised how incredible the universe was compared to our tiny minds worshipping someone who if he is real, watches us suffer everyday, watched kids become victims to Pakistani gangs… Yeah, proper enlightening stuff this god gobbling…
@@angelsackson you fail to understand free will. If everything is easy, there is no effort and no beauty. If you feel so incensed upon the wrong doings of others, do something about it. Me? I just try to do what I can where I am. God forcing us to behave every minute of every day negates choice. If the right thing is enforced upon us where we have no choice than doing the right thing is done with no passion or choice involved, making the action meaningless.
If altruism is forced, it loses it's value.
I hope you’re right… I listen to Carl debate all the time with friends and fellow CZcamsrs Dev and Arch about morality and life. With each podcast and discussion it becomes more and more clear that the reason why these supremely intelligent individuals can’t agree on a suitable reason or origin for morality without a divine source is because there isn’t one.
I was where you are on religion in the fairly recent past. I didn’t start being Christian because I thought it would be useful, I did because the preponderance of evidence convinced me it was the truth.
Go read about simulation theory and then the Shroud of Turin. Saying a clockwork universe disproves God is like saying the existence of a physics engine proves a video game wrote itself.
" I did because the preponderance of evidence convinced me it was the truth. " That is a load of bollocks. You wanted christianity to be true so decided that there was evidence. There is not. The shroud is a medieval hoax - it doesn't even depict a realistic human. If that is all the evidence you needed, you are just confirming your biases, even if you thought you had none.
James Lindsay should have dialogued with Carl instead of soaking his trousers and blocking him. Carl’s simply read more, interfaced with people who disagree with him, and has a more salient understanding of reality. James found philosophy 5 minutes ago and built a meta-othering-myth to caricature the “badguys” whilst being too horrified to actually talk to anyone.
The religious always seem to have locked their brains away.
The wishy washy not-quite-Christian clergy in England is a bit demoralizing. It's difficult to know where to turn when you can't find a church on solid foundations.
Orthodoxy perhaps?
Catholicism if you can find a Latin Mass community. The priests who offer the old mass are super solid
@@slickmechanical wdym old Mass? What happened? Why did the Catholics change Mass? I am not knowledgable about this.
@@superboygamer4034 the Mass is said in the vernacular now instead of Latin. The prayers were changed somewhat but the general outline and form of Mass is still the same
@superboygamer4034 they changed the mass to basically appeal to protestants in the vein of Christian unity, which never happened because if the way you worship isn't important, then it isn't worth believing. It was a massive boomer cope. The ones who believed enough to keep the old faith and old ways are solid.
Orthodoxy is for legit Greeks and Eastern Europeans, and everyone else who does it is a Byzantine larper
Benjamin finally seems ready to give up on Liberalism.
Duh, He’s a nazi lol
Place as many "I just want to be left alone"s together it'll never best the "My way is righteous and anything else is evil" and you'll see the flaws in Liberalism over and over.
Point to any dead letter you wish without the people whom truely believe it'll never mean or enforce anything.
Why hold onto a failing concept? He has done his research and found the flaws of it.
Well, at this point I think you'd have to be somewhat willfully ignorant to not at least consider the prospect that this intellectual project has moved toward our ruin.
we aer 8% of the planet, dropping quickly, and we have lost rough half our wealth globally in a single generation.... at what point would you be ready to consider something else?
That's beauty of being a christian. You have to believe in resurrection.
Amen.
Why is gods magic not witchcraft?
Witches aren't real@@_nebulousthoughts
@@_nebulousthoughtsbecause God isn’t a witch he’s the creator
@@CLairsoftFTW Logos
24:00 god, I'm so glad Carl saw this about the Fallout show. This completely snuck under the radar of the majority viewers.
I don't actually believe Sargon is correct is this instance. I'll have to re watch the show.
@@RagehavenHe isn't
@brianschultz962 I didn't think so either.
He isn’t correct because *SPOILERS BELOW*
-
-
the Vault of the main character is first of all majority white and second we are literally told that the vault she comes from is a eugenics experiment to breed a new managerial class for the new world based on Vault tech managers which was majority white. Marriage isn’t freely decided, you‘re paired off with selected partners. It’s a main plot point in the first episode that the main character is having an arranged marriage and the big twist is the revelation of managers being unfrozen over time to mix into the Vaults gene pool. So in actuality it’s exactly the opposite of what Carl said. It couldn‘t be more clear how people aren’t just all biracial.
You can see "one of everything" casting everywhere.
The Catholic Archdiocese of Southwark is home to 175 parishes covering south London and Kent /Medway. At Easter we welcomed 500 converts into the Faith. France also seen a record number of converts this year. It is also worth noting that there are twice as many Catholics on earth now as there were in 1970. In hoc signo vinces ✝️.
Numbers mean nothing without context. Are those people BEHAVING Christian, that is the only relevant metric.
@@roobs4245 if by numbers you refer to 8,000 Catholics defeating 36,000 Ottomans at Lepanto, in 1571.......
In relation to behaviour, morality, only the Almighty can see into hearts. In hoc signo vinces ✝️.
And they’re all in Africa or South America, not Europe.
@@liammccann8763 I can objectively see people's actions. And I will judge those actions. Easy, non-confrontational tolerance is what ruined the church.
@@roobs4245whom may I ask is the measure of your moral standards? Ne Timeas ✝️.
The best interview I've seen with CB -- a most erudite speaker.
I've been listening to Nick's podcast on Google Podcasts, but the CZcams algorithm suggested I watch it, instead. Clearly Mr Dixon is going up in the world. 👍
Top notch work Mr Dixon.
Traditionalism: security
Conservatism: freedom and security
Anarchism: freedom
Libertarianism: FREEDOM and equality
Liberalism: freedom and equality
Socialism: freedom and EQUALITY
Communism: EQUALITY and security
Fascism: equality and SECURITY.
Carl doesn't realize he is still a liberal.
No he isn't. He no longer justifies his beliefs with liberal principles. He now has abandoned Liberalism for English Traditionalism. The foundations of your beliefs can be just as important as the beliefs themselves
Classical liberalism only failed because of the implementation of socialist apparatus like the welfare state, universal suffrage and the equality act.
Take those away and liberalism works and mass immigration disappears.
Frederick F Nolan wrote a book in the 70’s. Logan’s Run. Terrible movie and TV series made from it. They both missed his thesis that the young grew up angry with their elders, until they got to the point of lynching them and calling for an age cap. Now seems prescient?
In the state of nature, the individual DOES have property. It owns everything it can conquer, defend and hold...for as long as it can do so.
I'm attached to Sargon XD
What a great interview both of you. And how refreshing.
"Carl Benjamin? Oh, you mean the mo' f kin Sargon!"
Peter Hitchens said he became a Christian when he realised he could be judged after death. That's not really a rational reason but a foundation to build rationalisations around.
It's no sort of foundation at all. It"s basically fear of the unevidenced irrational. Why not just "realise" that one is reincarnated to have another go?? Just as silly. Poor Peter.
24:13 "You've got the Ghoul and the Vault dweller. Every other character (practically) is some person of color"
This take on Amazon's Fallout is simply not accurate. If you Google "Fallout cast," you'll notice 15 out of 24 of the top-billed actors appear white. The show is set in the city of Los Angeles, and LA is ~40% white, so the show is perfectly representative of LA county, or at least, what remains of LA in 2296.
Besides Lucy and Cooper, you've got Lucy's father Hank, her mother Rose, her brother Norm, her cousin Chet, Enclave scientist Wilzig, Elder Quintus, Squire Thaddeus, Mr. House, and PLENTY of other white characters. Not sure where Carl is getting this "every other character" nonsense unless he hasn't actually watched the show. Unless by "every other character" he means "about half of the characters,," which would be fair.
We should criticize shows that make implausible casting choices, but Fallout is not one of those shows (with one exception: Maximus' friend "Dane," the only gender nonbinary soldier in the apocalyptic wasteland).
I agree! ‘Fallout’ is actually one of the few decent shows around at the moment. I hate all the gender nonsense, Dane is a character that can be ignored from a “non-binary” perspective; it hasn’t so far, at least, taken anything away from the plot, or made it a big issue in the show.
"actors appear white"
That "appear" could easily take the world power-lifting record.
@@ThriftingSquirrel
Watch Mauler's take on Fallout. Endless entertainment value.
Found the channel from LE-Podcast. Can't wait to see what you make of it Nick.
Thanks! Big things planned.
Around 15:00 give or take, Carl makes the claim that "Liberalism" wants everyone to be equal, but then conflates that with equal ownership of property, which I don't think is at all what "Liberalism" means by equality. Liberalism wants equality under the law. Even in a state of absolute legal equality and fairness, you would still have unequal distribution of property and resources, but it would be vastly less than what exists in the world today. It would be based on differentials in the talents and drives of individuals, and that would be ok. Inequality in the world today is mostly based on subtle forms of theft, and some amount of sheer luck. Similarly, because Liberalism doesn't demand absolute equality, it also doesn't seek a "state of nature" which would be the opposite of civilization, which is required to exist for Liberalism to exist. Carl seems to be assuming his conclusion by looking at liberalism through a communist lens.
Quiet you fool, you're dismantling his misunderstood boogeyman!
Yes, I found his rationale quite garbled. I think classical liberalism HAS failed because it was displaced by socialist apparatus. It wasn’t strong enough to stand up for itself.
Freedom isn't equal, some people are simply better than others. We can build a world of equal opportunities but we can't have equal people... and we never will unless we reduce our population to a single human being; I don't think it's the sort of freedom we should be aiming for.
Exactly. And even in an equal society there's going to be those who are "more equal then others" which might result in tribalistic competion to see who's the more equal (which ironically could lead to racist imperialism)
I like exercise. I like the feeling after I work out. I know that it's good for me. I STILL HATE GOING TO THE GYM. The fact that I don't like going to church isn't about a lack of belief. It's about my broken nature. Hating going to the gym doesn't mean I don't believe in health and hating going to church doesn't mean I don't believe in God.
Learn to love the pain.
Working out gives me the "good pain" it's a pain I only get to experience from doing something beneficial, and thus I associate it with a job well done.
So too for worship. The sensitivity to sin comes from having a cleaner spirit, especially when I find myself to be the sinner.
Thus I am not ashamed to be ashamed of my behaviour, for through learning to become like Christ and moving to be so, I become more painfully aware of my faults.
It is a *good pain*
I would need to know tgat the guy delivering the sermon hadn't spent all night at a bondage party with 3 R-ent boys.
@travtotheworld
This may be the perfect analogy.
@@astrovarius543yeah I love the fact I’ve gone through the pain, but if you love the pain from the gym you’re not working out hard enough mate
Good session lads.
47:30 on Geert Wilders/ the Netherlands: The Dutch don't elect a prime minister, nor does the biggest party automatically gain it, let alone have full control. It's a coalition, in this case almost certainly of 4 parties, that have to negotiate. Wilders may have the most votes, but that doesn't entitle him to anything. Theoretically he can even be sidelined for an elitist coalition (though that's very unlikely to work, and would probably destroy the VVD, NSC, and quite possibly PvdA (Labour). Even now, Wilders has gone in the polls from his 25% win to a 33% vote share, so the other parties can only do so much.
Even so, Wilders has to make concessions. He's widely considered "often right on the issues, but hard to vote for someone that abrasive, extreme and caustic". Most concessions he already made before the election (he only got the win because of that - he polled in 4th place prior). But his partners still insisted he should not be PM, and he conceded that. This is uncommon, but not overly odd.
Should be noted that 3 out of 4 coalition partners will not have [signiifcant] prior governing experience, so that contributed to the thought of getting outsiders to take the government posts.
There is only 1 way in which Geert Wilders is on the right: he is against mass immigration and against Islamisation of the West specifically.
However, in all other aspects Wilders is a socialist, and on the left on most issues.
Good explanation. I'm tired of these people not even doing basic research on the stuff they talk about. Makes me doubt they know anything about anything.
@@louiscachet7681 They know less than they think they do, but they do know very well what their audience wants to hear. It's really grating, because for every good point or observation you get a snide, half-informed remark, or self-pat on the back. Almost as annoying to listen to as Novara.
So he isn't a "classical liberal" anymore?
1:10:08 Carl, respectfully, your assertion is only possibly true if your underlying atheist beliefs are true. If the Christians are correct then belief in and worship of Christ might fade in a region or country or culture but it won’t disappear from the world.
Great watch
Love Lotus Eaters Podcast so very much looking forward to listening to this one on the way to work. Also Nick, any chance you can get either Eva Vlaardingeebroek or Amy Gallagher on a future show?
Thanks. Was thinking of asking Amy.
That comment about Norah Vincent's book @35:50 was great.
Huge fan of The Lotus Eaters and Carl. Nice!
The Cass Review has already made a significant difference to the NHS, and is tangible evidence we can use now to push back even harder. We can’t get complacent though. The shouty activists will gradually be drowned out.
I would argue that the kid with the better off parents who gets sent to a better school, is still equality of opportunity.
The parents gained their wealth through legitimate means so just b/c they transferred their wealth to their child doesn't suddenly turn it illegitimate.
Nobody is entitled to anybody else's wealth, no matter how far down the chain it goes.
Great discussion as always Nick, thank you. Your style combines the depths of human experience, the lightness and fun of comedy, all the while challenging your guests in a way that allows them to express their views in a good faith forum. I follow Carl quite closely and he does great work too and he’s added tremendous value to the world. However, on certain topics I perceive him to be stuck in an intellectual rut. Namely in this case elite theory. He defends liberal democracy as it presents itself to us, in fairness admitting some peripheral flaws in it too, but then proceeds to say that none of the available parties or political movements represent the interests of the people. And furthermore, that certain ideas or worldviews are effectively gate-kept from being viable options anyway. I find this element his thinking fundamentally lacking as he hasn’t seemed to have connected the dots as to why this might be. Why is it that there are no viable alternatives that represent men like him? I wonder if elite theory can provide insight into this.
Was liberalism actually tried?
Seems like we in the U.K have adopted the American usage of liberal - ie it's not even liberalism we're talking about but rather progressivism.
sounds like you're getting into the 'that's not true Communism' type of argumentation there :x
What would be 'true liberalism' in your view and how would you go about trying it?
My favorite example of forced diversity is in Wheel of Time show from Amazon. The main characters come from isolated village in the hills, yet each is different shade of color. The place used to be a prosperous capital of mountain kingdom a thousand years ago.
How come that after 1000 years of isolation they're not all pale brownish? How come there are white gingers, brown even black people? Isn't it suspicious? It's almost like mixed color relationships were forbidden, isn't it? 🤡
But the reality is that the creators simply don't give a shit about logical inconsistencies like this. It's why most western movies, shows and video games today suck.
I watched the first season then decided to try the books, and they were so much better I stuck with them, and stopped watching the show.
I doubt that the reasons movies suck is because of the color of the actors.
With regards to christianity in england, specifically, there has always been a tension between faith and people not beliving. When i was 17, i went to york minster as part of my A level medival history
Anyway, we had a guided tour from a PhD student who was writing her thesis on this exact point, she claimed that the older pagan and celtic cultrural traditions were far stronger in social.interactions and general societal attitudes, she showed us a pipe roll (for those whomdont know its kind of a copy of scrolls and letters pasted together) anyway there is a letter from the archbishop of york to the pope beamonaing the attitude of specifically northern english christians, it overtly ststed they were more pagen in attitude and temprement, and while nice, friendly and affible when the church bells rang you would find more.people in the ale house than the church pues. We also see this in the adoption of pagan traditions into uk occasions such as easter, halloween, sowen, and may day. The chaos of oliver cromwells rule and the near 2nd civil war also hints at a less than fervant christian faith in the general population......that being said i think society needs an over arching philisophical and moral framework to anchor itself. What that is, i dont know, i dont think "prenentding" or "perfomative belife" for want of a better word, is the correct rout, as that was just be a shallow veneer of faith without any supporting framework really. I think the challege is to search out and devise one for a larglely secular society, i belive Jainism has no actual deities in it, so perhaps something analogus to that may be better.
19:42 I think it's because you are looking at it from a collective sense and not an individualistic sense. It's not the responsibility of others to build you up. just to make sure the opportunity is there for you to take if you get to the position through merit in the first place.
Worse is worse, is a concept I haven't heard articulated before, sometimes the obvious needs stating
53:00 assisted dying. It is akin to Logan's Run with them getting to 30 and 'renewal' where they were laser zapped and turned into food.
Soylent Green shows it well. It will certainly save the elites money on healthcare and welfare.
Belief is not binary but on a spectrum.
Proud to have supported Sargon/Lotus Eaters and that he made the top 50 list is gratifying.
Is it not Liberalism that says "equal under the law"? How does that principle allow for communism where the law is most severe for the most succesful and most loose for the most criminal?
The idea that Christianity has declined in the West due to the development of scientific knowledge is just a bit too neat of an explanation. There are plenty of scientists in the Islamic world who are religious believers and plenty of Muslim scientists in Western countries who remain devout. I think there's something more particular about Western culture, Christianity, and our relationship to religion that is the cause of the decline rather than just empiricism.
Christianity has declined as prosperity increases. This is partly due to scientific knowledge. Scientists in the islaminc world do not base their science on their beliefs/holy book - or if they do they are not doing science. Many people have the ability to partition their faith from their knowledge - I call it intellectual dishonesty.
Carl is an international treasure
God is working, in many countries faith in Jesus is rising. Example Iran, China, Pakistan, in Paris lost month the church was astonished by how many unbelievers came to get baptized as Catholic. Yes the old world is dying but the new one is coming! Indeed we will face many trials but we will face them without fear because we have Jesus on our side
Faith only rises in desperate places. In the west it is sharply declining as people realise they don't need any gods. When these countries raise their standards of living, faith will also decline there. Prosperity needs to be built on rationality, not superstitious nonsense.
@@lil-alFaith rises when men are slapped with the reality that they are flawed, susceptible to corruption, and prone to seek the easy way out, which cannot confer greatness. Christianity has existed for 2000 years, and has out lasted every attempt by those who despise its teachings , and belittle its adherents. The mighty Roman Empire, failed to destroy it by its persecutions. The French Revolution, failed to stamp it out. The Bolsheviks never snuffed out the light of Truth in Russia. And so it was, and so it will be until the return of the true King.
John Waters or Keith Woods would be great guests to talk about the Irish pushback against Plantation migration.
Christ or Chaos.
Lol.
I also struggle with the respect for the virtues of faith with the conflict of not wanting to “phone in” belief.
Humanity missed a beat when we failed to evolve organized communities centered around moral tenets that acknowledge our scientific understanding.
A big step in believing is surrender.
It's a crucial ingredient in 'faith'.
Instead of "phoning it in" have you considered "trial period"
Or as I used for my own justification, "just to see what I can see"?
I haven't found community in faith just yet, but I have found God and the spirit of Him which dwells with me.
If 50,000 people were willing to give $10 a week, we could build our own communities, our own churches and schools, parks and housing for our young people.
We haven't missed that beat - it is what we are still striving for. Religion is still holding us back, but we can get there. (How anyone thinks biblegod is moral is beyond me - we can do better and we will,)
I honestly believe that at some point over the next couple of decades, some countries will established a maximum age. Some will do it by rationing healthcare, or limiting it to palliative care, and pain management, perhaps eliminating programs installing a social security cut off age, and encourage assisted suicide for older citizens, and at least one country will at least attempt to make it legally required.
Mate, plenty of countries limit the type of health care you can access past certain age - good luck getting e.g. transplants after 70 in most countries in the world. Part of it is because certain types of medical interventions - transplants, cancer treatment - are simply too invasive or dangerous at that age, but it also does come down to whether with available means do you save someone with maybe 3-5 years to live, or someone in their twenties who with some luck can hope for 20-30 more years in good health?
I remember about 10 years ago Richard Spencer destroyed Sargoy on liberalism and told him shit was going to get worse and Sargoy just giggled.
Equality of opportunity sounds even better than equality of outcome but it's as ridiculous cause as Carl rightly said, it's just pushing equalism down a generation. If everyone's kids get to have the same opportunities, why the hell would parents do anything? I work hard so my sons get to have a headstart. That's the whole point of being a good parent.
Don't give up on him. :) Pray for him and keep having honest conversations. Carl can take a very C.S. Lewis journey yet.
My bowels have failed
Carl of Akkad is da man!
I disagree on the church thing. It’s basically separating the wheat from the chaff right now, but it’s very much alive, and has some good prospects as many turn away from the hyper secular hellhole of the Woke West.
Maybe check your census data. Here in Australia religion is on a sharp decline. Thank "god".
Carl is right on the convictions front.
I remember when I was 5-8 I WANTED to go to church.
It was something that, even if it was boring I wanted to do b/c I had real conviction over it.
Yet when I was a pre-teens my belief waned. I no longer wanted to go, and I remember one Sunday,
me and my cousins hid from my Grampa b/c we didn't want to go to church.
That was enough to make this stoic old man CRY and it's b/c he had real conviction behind his belief.
It's not just something you can pragmatically force.
Edit: on the clock work universe I very much disagree with your assessments. And I think it's a Very naive way of looking at it. The more I learn about how the universe works, the more I realize the amount of things that just needs to go perfectly right, is astounding. How the elements react, gravity, energy being at its current state. Fun fact: the smallest thing the human eye can see is a human egg. Did you know that the human egg fits perfect between the smalkest thing "the plank length" and the estimated size of the universe. The idea that the universe is just a coincidence is impossible to believe.
Currently I wouldn't call my self an atheist.
I like the Christian teaching but I disagree on the anthropomorphising of God as a figuer. God to me is "goodness"(I will not elaborate b/c that would take a five page essay) and while the teachings in the Bible adequately explains the universe with the worldy knowledge we had at the time. Staunchly believing that the teachings are 100% factual and not more of a way to explain God's creations with worldly understanding is down right foolish.
God is still stewarding the ship, mate. Just because we know how to operate the main sails and why we polish the deck and varnish the wood doesn't mean the ship now steers itself.
Really enjoyed this conversation. Like James Lindsay I can happily listen to Carl for hours he speaks as I think yet am unable to elucidate to others. While Nick’s insight often catches me off guard simply because I find him so amusing. His humour is so dry I adore it.
This is an incredibly good pairing for a great conversation. Thanks guys.
The 'ideal' of equality of opportunity is at least shortsighted, because in order to be granted opportunity, one would have to achieve a level of ability to be seriously considered a valid candidate.
GB News not inviting Sargon on but inviting AA on is... telling, to say the least
Why is that telling? They probably didn’t know much about AA and his clip immediately led to a hope not hate hit piece. They’re now probably more worried about him if anything.
Its not that liberalism has failed it has that illiberalism has failed.
You make really interesting points, Nick. I think you are more insightful than your channel subscribers suggest, and I hope you are given more opportunities to express your thoughts or attract more attention to your channel
In other words, I like your opinions as they are thoughtful, and I think you are paying attention to what's going on. (I always watch when you're a guest on lotus eaters)
Our achievements are not never celebrated by society’s. We ended slavery. We allowed freedom. Justice. The ability to seek harmony. This is merit based. And inhibit upon our culture (s)
He’s so close to belief, give em a year, we all go back to the source
At 22:30 it’s a marketing principle called MAYA: most advanced yet acceptable
Let me quote Bowden to explain what right-wing actually means :
„Now, what does Nietzsche believe? He believes that strength is moral glory. That courage is the highest form of morality. That life is hierarchical.
That everything's elitist. There's a hierarchy in each individual. And a hierarchy in every group of individuals. There's a hierarchy between groups of individuals. Inequality is what Right-wing ideas really mean.
Right-wing ideas aren't just a bit of flag-waving and baiting a few Muslims. Right-wing ideas are spiritually about inequality.“
Glad to see Carl accepting that he's Sargon, and always will be. We should build a statue of him missing the eye, like Sargon.
The important things are the formation of children in the belief & a position of high morale in your worldview & people.
Classical liberalism has failed too in case you haven't noticed.
Carl, if you haven't been to Lincoln, go and see that Cathedral.
Indeed, one of the more interesting expressions of theological ideas of its time in built form.
@@emjay9688 I both love and hate cathedrals. They are certainly awe-inspiring - you can almost feel gods in them - but they represent to me a fantastic waste of resources, money and man-power which should have been used to make the ordinary person's life more bearable.
You will always get to bad outcomes when all ends do not terminate on the good. Equal serves no purpose. It’s does not terminate on the good, necessarily. People can be equally bad off, for example.
Liberalism has succeeded.
Nick is great value, isn't he?
that 1 million is long overdue !
On the 'Christianity in the UK' question - ask yourself this - Could any nation be as developed as the Anglosphere, having not thrown-off Christianity, though Christianity in part got us to that developed state?
Sit closer to the mic, Nick. Carl knows...
31:18 are they "morally compelled" ? Or is it that they have no morals at all, but instead do whatever is necessary to provide themselves with more power? I can't help but think if the situation were reversed, they would not stick to their convictions, whatever they happen to be, if it meant sacrificing institutional power. Claiming the moral high ground, is just a position they take because they know it is effective against their opponents. I think the moment they see no political gain from adopting a certain stance, they will drop it like a hot potato and push forwards a load of useful idiots to take the blame in their stead. I expect, if this particular issue blows up in their face, which is might well, they will distance themselves from it so fast it will be jarring.
Self-serving flip-flopping on basic morality is central to the whole ideology. They have the idea that different cultures can be (differently) successful with different values and that they can't determine which morality is "correct". So, there's a lazy assumption that if a leftist ideologue can't tell which moral stance is better, then they are all functionally identical. Therefore, you can hold all of them without being considered a hypocrite (by the people who matter, not you and me). Therefore, the best way to be is to hold whatever position gives you the most benefit in that moment and change course at the wind's discretion.
The answer to that pit of stupidity is realizing that, regardless of whether there is a "best" moral system or not, behaving in an erratic, self-serving, and short-sighted manner has the worst long-term outcomes for one's place in society. To continue the wind metaphor, if you keep changing course to keep the wind at your back, you may go fast but you probably won't end up anywhere worthwhile. So, the best you can do is pick a moral system that has worked for people in your region before and stick to it while acknowledging the inherent flaws and shortcomings.
I also feel like maybe people confuse faith and community. One doesn't need church to believe but you do need it to build society
You do not need church to build a society. What a silly idea.
My problem with both sides is that neither is keeping the billionaires in check who are collectively running media and ensuring the middle class are taxed to death and have little opportunity to thrive. I don't see an answer from anyone in politics currently who will lower our taxes by a good amount, stop govt spending, and keep the govt out of my business.
I'd like to see Carl interviewed on GB News, if only to put a maker down for what the sensible right think. Same with Academic Agent. I think GB News fans, a good proportion, would agree with a lot of his views. The idea that adults need to be protected from time tested truths is absurd. But then we're living in absurd times, ruled by string puppets.
AA was on GB News briefly a few weeks ago.
@@rocketpig1914
Yes. I saw him and thought he tied Rees Mogg up in knots. That's why we need Based Right Wingers appearing on those shows. The GB News viewing public probably have never heard these ideas aired on the media. Their notion of Right Wing is something like the National Front, I think we need to dispell that idea. To be patriotic, traditionalist, and opposed to mass immigration does not mean you are a heel clicking 1930s German.
Love Carl, well read