i've seen Po on lotus eaters and those were good episodes, she seems happy ? fulfilled ? don't know the right word for it but she has that kind of energy especially when talking about motherhood, good for her
Oh, this is gonna be gud... Always loved Po, she's been a great voice to listen too, because it's just... her. It's not indoctrination, it's a person who's finding herself and sometimes clearly struggling so. I've always appreciated her candor and if her life allows it, can't wait to hear more as she continues her path in life.
Benjamin - "I'm tired of the commentary thing." Truer words Benjamin. The "Intellectuals" are so tiresome, we all know what the problems are, we can only highlight and describe and identify the issues so many times. Intellectuals talking isn't going to fix where we're at.
Classism is nothing like racism because the classes are not in competition with one another. People did jobs appropriate to their class, socialized within their class and married within their class (in general, there was some movement between classes). And, generally speaking, people didn't view people from a higher class as better than them (and often worse).
The last 5 seconds made me a little sad, the mood of the room changed. Po seems to be aging in reverse too. How is she pulling that off? Is that what being off CZcams does? Makes you look younger and more attractive?
You seem unaware of Peterson's recent direction. He has done a lot of work on the Bible and the nature of belief (and has written a book on the subject). He has also interviewed/debated a lot of significant thinkers (some more successfully than others). He has become much more forceful in his positions on culture war issues and politics. Plus, he has launched the Peterson Academy, which could well be his most significant achievement (assuming it works out). You might prefer his earlier work, but he is definitely trying to expand his knowledge and his reach. He barely ever mentions lobsters now!
To high brow for most men who think like the perenitalists, i.e., women don't have a mind or a soul; only beasts to be conquered. This is the male take, and men wonder why feminism exists.
In the middle portion, I think the question that Boyce is trying to formulate might be "How can the interests of the élites be aligned with the interests of the general public?" Po is completely right that élites have always acted for their own benefit: they didn't used to be purely altruistic. A totally altruistic rich person would give all their money away and swiftly cease being rich. At minimum, élites are trying to maintain a social order which keeps them on top. But the key question is alignment of interest: what type of society is going to get the best results for the regular people of the country assuming that élites are acting self-interestedly?
Monarchy in my view. Republics routinely maintain an elite or descend into turpitude. Monarchy does as well to be fair but it is more likely to mould the nation in a better direction.
Not at all familiar with Po, but she was great. Will have to go back and watch previous calm from 6 years ago 👉 czcams.com/video/1Hbm1H0rJTc/video.html
44:05 On the Woman question, whilst I agree with Mrs Person that the question of women's political power is WoW! Her description of commentary may be prescient. Richard Milhous Nixon when discussing women and whether they should be in politics in 1983 sayed that women have had a role in politics historically, they were in the salons discussing the recent political theory and events and no doubt influencing policy in the end. Whether for good or ill.
Po got so very close to explaining why the "spat" between the sexs is reasonable and understandable. She's like a polished politician who avoids any controversy and only touches disputes in a vague inoffensive manner. Would really like to see what she was going to say about Mary and Alex saying come on guys we are serious but... hear me out on....
Hah I swear, old-school Liberals, Austrian economics to a certain extent, the intentional ethos of the IDW pseudo-counter-elite, the least militant of the New Atheists, cultural Christianity, specifically Petersonian "small c" conservatism to a considerable extent as well... Ppl think these are changing trends, burnout on one, move on to another. However in reality, they all have SO MUCH in common. We're getting a bunch of different angles on the same, repeatedly attempted push, by normal people back towards a workable system, with familiar features.
28:05 I have a bit of a pet peeve about Brits emphasizing the way that Americans think "race" unlike Brits who think "nation". The self conception of America since arguably when New Netherland was conquered, but certainly since the 1850s, was that it is a place where people from anywhere in Europe can be integrated into a fundamentally anglo society. Given that assumption, when Americans say "white", they are thinking of a specific nation. Of course, technically an unassimilated Russian or Frenchman or Albanian is white, but they aren't usually a relevant topic when Americans are talking about race. When John Jay noted in Federalist 2 "that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country, to one united people; a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language" he did not find it necessary to qualify this remark for the presence of Dutch, French, or Germans. Now, this does have the downstream effect that Americans are probably less likely to be concerned about, say, Polish immigration than Brits would be. I think that's a reasonable attitude in both cases; the American's relative lack of concern is partly because there's so much else that's a higher priority to be worried about.
26:24 the difference between racism and classism is that classism is mostly an internal distinction and racism is mostly an external distinction, from a cultural and ethnic perspective. It's an outsider-identifier.
@johnnotrealname8168 in my view, class is inherently internal because it relies on structure and hierarchy in a culture, and the people's roles therein. Racism tends to the external because it mostly ignores an outsider's class or rank. A classist could conceivably show respect to an outsider of equal rank or class as it can conform to their own culture (classic examples are of generals in opposing armies showing respect for each other); whereas a racist does not care for such details. I spoke too categorically at first, my bad. This is my opinion and thought on it, not a hard and fast rule.
(COMMON GROUND.). A return to high trust societies will require communities who hold common values in terms of Education, Religion, Law, Values, and Commerce. If you want to welcome all comers, it will be a recipe for misery. Douglas isn't a racist. To me he's a realist. I don't think it matters to him what somebody's background is. I see him as being more interested in common shared values. Diversity is not our strength, and countries DO need to vet the migrants coming in. If they don't want to abide by the laws of the country, they may leave. That's not racist. It's practical. It's why the Chinese Emperors built that Great Wall. Ghengis Khan was a malevolent force who sought to conquer. People like that need to be sent packing.
Good points. However.... We are in a globalised world of growing collective groupsize (eg all Europe is getting blender-homigenised to a singular-ish EU identity) creating a 450m population block, as a pole in the multipolar world, competing against bigger poles (China 1400m, India 1500m, ASEAN 800m, North America 600m...). None of the bigger players can see a future for small separate isolationist line-ranger small country (eg UK 70m) unless it gets subsumed into a greater block. Ultimately our monarch is the landlord, the farm managers have been appointed and we are the livestock
@@OrwellsHousecat Is globalization inevitable? Monarch? Do you believe that a one world order will come about without genocide? Will you silently take up the yoke? I'm not so sure I'm willing to go quietly. I also think that a lot of really NICE people have no idea what we are up against. Have you seen Beneath Sheep's clothing? Worth the watch. It's time for us to put some boundaries between our diverse cultures. I have locks on my door because not just anybody is welcome.
@@OrwellsHousecat it gets worse when we consider it is the Promethean aims of the Global American Empire that is marginalising European interests, and even its own national interests. Any hope seems to remain in pockets of resistance within a balkanised North America. But at what cost to any form of global-civilisational power?
@@eliaseal331 aye. The GAE seems kinda hellbent on destroying Europe at the moment - economic sanctions, cutting it off from energy security, cutting it off from food security, cutting it off from technology, cutting it off from rare earth metals, swamping it in domestic sectarian conflict and religious wars, de-industrialising it, de-militarising it so it can't defend itself, and pushing it into war against a formidable neighbour. Anything to prevent it from joining Eurasia, even if it means ar@bising it.
The British aristocracy were destroyed by inheritance tax in the early 20th century, strangely enough we didn't many of these problems before the current elite, who are managerial, and mostly of middle class origins, but privately educated. If the aristocracy were in charge then domestic service would still be a major employer and the manor houses wouldn't all be gone or owned by the national trust. Different elites have different elite cultures, the nobility believed they had an obligation to live up to their privilege by serving their people in the sight of God, that they were bond to land, history, family and oath. The managerial class believe in f you got mine. Also as we are as Christians constantly called to better ourselves I don't see the ride as ever being over, we must stand by our principals till the end, and always go forth with truth and honour. If that means you aren't welcome in certain circles then all the better, we need our own communities, tolerance is a crime against the tolerated, as they are facilitated in their evil.
Better to understand the horseshoe as a spiral, in behavioral terms an addiction, needing to disrobe, dissect, and deconstruct more and more of one's assumptions so as to continue to be satiated. ...Remystification is a good word.
Po was the original, engineer version of Mary Harrington.
Po deserves that accolade.
If Mary Harrington had a little sister.
Love Po, to paraphrase Sosa: there is no lying in her.
Po played down her drawings but she made the “larp” comic-! And it was her first one apparently. Shes popular right out the gate on multiple fronts
You are sweet
Oh yeah I remember that. Impressive work. Live-Action Role-Playing is fun though.
For my whole life, I’ve been very successful at not being invited to dinner parties.
People want to be invited to dinner parties?
Po seems nice. I like her.
🏅
Subscribe to her channel then.
Lovely Po! This made nice listening for cooking this morning. 😊
i've seen Po on lotus eaters and those were good episodes, she seems happy ? fulfilled ? don't know the right word for it but she has that kind of energy especially when talking about motherhood, good for her
Po!!!! So glad you have her on. Watched her for years.
🥉
She’s been part of the community for ages. Always nice to see her getting a bit more visibility
Oh, this is gonna be gud... Always loved Po, she's been a great voice to listen too, because it's just... her. It's not indoctrination, it's a person who's finding herself and sometimes clearly struggling so. I've always appreciated her candor and if her life allows it, can't wait to hear more as she continues her path in life.
A favorite Brit. You can deny reality, but not deny the consequences of denying reality - Ayn Rand
I don't take advice from Jews.
I identify as having made the first comment! 🎉
🥇
😊😂😊
Dumb.
I am a firstphobe, stop oppressing the seconders and thirders we deserve a space at the table as well.
@@thedave7760 😆
Benjamin - "I'm tired of the commentary thing." Truer words Benjamin. The "Intellectuals" are so tiresome, we all know what the problems are, we can only highlight and describe and identify the issues so many times. Intellectuals talking isn't going to fix where we're at.
Ben is probably the most interesting person to watch speak, in terms of his facial expression, that I've ever seen. Good words too
Classism is nothing like racism because the classes are not in competition with one another. People did jobs appropriate to their class, socialized within their class and married within their class (in general, there was some movement between classes). And, generally speaking, people didn't view people from a higher class as better than them (and often worse).
Never heard of her, but she's great 👍🏻
Want to check out the novel
Po is simply delightful.
I've met Po, and can confirm she is friendly to eccentric youtube fans.
Po is just a delight! So refreshing as a person.
Wow, Benjamin and Po have become so based in the last years ❤
Oh Benjamin. You had Po on and I was showing my mom the Beneath Sheep's Clothing doccco. Oh well, Happy to listen in now!!
Benjamin in considerately dropped this while I was walking someone else's beautiful dog.
The last 5 seconds made me a little sad, the mood of the room changed.
Po seems to be aging in reverse too. How is she pulling that off? Is that what being off CZcams does? Makes you look younger and more attractive?
The webcam filters keep getting better
@@PothePersonhaha, touché
Po is great, glad to hear she is enjoying motherhood.
Ben is really doing the rounds
Not by chance, on purpose.
I confess, I’m calmversating intetionally.
@@BenjaminABoyce Less Brownian motion, more Benjamin motion.
You seem unaware of Peterson's recent direction. He has done a lot of work on the Bible and the nature of belief (and has written a book on the subject). He has also interviewed/debated a lot of significant thinkers (some more successfully than others). He has become much more forceful in his positions on culture war issues and politics. Plus, he has launched the Peterson Academy, which could well be his most significant achievement (assuming it works out). You might prefer his earlier work, but he is definitely trying to expand his knowledge and his reach. He barely ever mentions lobsters now!
I could listen to her talk all day, lol probably. I remember watching a video where she just talked about a coal scoop for about half an hour.
Unfortunately Po's content is way to intellectual & highbrow for 85% of wahmen; so sadly she doesn't get the wahmen audience she deserves 🥴
To high brow for most men who think like the perenitalists, i.e., women don't have a mind or a soul; only beasts to be conquered. This is the male take, and men wonder why feminism exists.
It's masculine is what it is
Well, YT audience is mostly male, to begin with. And she has a really logical, rational type of mind.
In the middle portion, I think the question that Boyce is trying to formulate might be "How can the interests of the élites be aligned with the interests of the general public?" Po is completely right that élites have always acted for their own benefit: they didn't used to be purely altruistic. A totally altruistic rich person would give all their money away and swiftly cease being rich. At minimum, élites are trying to maintain a social order which keeps them on top.
But the key question is alignment of interest: what type of society is going to get the best results for the regular people of the country assuming that élites are acting self-interestedly?
Monarchy in my view. Republics routinely maintain an elite or descend into turpitude. Monarchy does as well to be fair but it is more likely to mould the nation in a better direction.
Not at all familiar with Po, but she was great. Will have to go back and watch previous calm from 6 years ago 👉 czcams.com/video/1Hbm1H0rJTc/video.html
🥈
Man, I remember her channel from way back. Nice to see her here again.
44:05 On the Woman question, whilst I agree with Mrs Person that the question of women's political power is WoW! Her description of commentary may be prescient. Richard Milhous Nixon when discussing women and whether they should be in politics in 1983 sayed that women have had a role in politics historically, they were in the salons discussing the recent political theory and events and no doubt influencing policy in the end. Whether for good or ill.
Po The Person is certainly one of my favourite persons! ☺️
Does anyone have a link to Po's book?
On amazon? The book is called "Bastion of Stone: A Delicate Workplace Romance" (26.07.20).
Hey! It's Po!!!!
How time has flown by
Po got so very close to explaining why the "spat" between the sexs is reasonable and understandable. She's like a polished politician who avoids any controversy and only touches disputes in a vague inoffensive manner.
Would really like to see what she was going to say about Mary and Alex saying come on guys we are serious but... hear me out on....
Luv Po, simple as.
Love PO, wish she would bring back waman hour
Not worth it, men in our spheres are the worst allies.
@@zeddez1005 not all of us
@@zeddez1005 Given that wamen hour, in its latest times, gathered 1 or 2 women participants, women are women's worst allies. :D
Did I understand it correcectly that she said to be a fan of Jared Taylor and thinks that Douglas Murray and Thomas Sowell are "a bit racist"?
From the point of view of a normie, yes
Choir is amazing, church or not. There's nothing quite like it. What ever happened to caroling?
Hah I swear, old-school Liberals, Austrian economics to a certain extent, the intentional ethos of the IDW pseudo-counter-elite, the least militant of the New Atheists, cultural Christianity, specifically Petersonian "small c" conservatism to a considerable extent as well...
Ppl think these are changing trends, burnout on one, move on to another. However in reality, they all have SO MUCH in common. We're getting a bunch of different angles on the same, repeatedly attempted push, by normal people back towards a workable system, with familiar features.
Omg you two again. ❤ I love you two. Poooooo hiiii. Welcome back. Congrats on the baby. Love you too Ben
Working class is about culture not income in UK
28:05 I have a bit of a pet peeve about Brits emphasizing the way that Americans think "race" unlike Brits who think "nation". The self conception of America since arguably when New Netherland was conquered, but certainly since the 1850s, was that it is a place where people from anywhere in Europe can be integrated into a fundamentally anglo society. Given that assumption, when Americans say "white", they are thinking of a specific nation. Of course, technically an unassimilated Russian or Frenchman or Albanian is white, but they aren't usually a relevant topic when Americans are talking about race.
When John Jay noted in Federalist 2 "that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country, to one united people; a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language" he did not find it necessary to qualify this remark for the presence of Dutch, French, or Germans.
Now, this does have the downstream effect that Americans are probably less likely to be concerned about, say, Polish immigration than Brits would be. I think that's a reasonable attitude in both cases; the American's relative lack of concern is partly because there's so much else that's a higher priority to be worried about.
Screw Polacks, Wops, Dagos and Taigs I guess.
26:24 the difference between racism and classism is that classism is mostly an internal distinction and racism is mostly an external distinction, from a cultural and ethnic perspective. It's an outsider-identifier.
That makes assumptions about the categories.
@@johnnotrealname8168 interesting, could you elaborate?
@@gonzalogonzalez2585 It assumes class is internal. It begs the question of being an outsider or not.
@johnnotrealname8168 in my view, class is inherently internal because it relies on structure and hierarchy in a culture, and the people's roles therein. Racism tends to the external because it mostly ignores an outsider's class or rank.
A classist could conceivably show respect to an outsider of equal rank or class as it can conform to their own culture (classic examples are of generals in opposing armies showing respect for each other); whereas a racist does not care for such details.
I spoke too categorically at first, my bad. This is my opinion and thought on it, not a hard and fast rule.
(COMMON GROUND.). A return to high trust societies will require communities who hold common values in terms of Education, Religion, Law, Values, and Commerce. If you want to welcome all comers, it will be a recipe for misery. Douglas isn't a racist. To me he's a realist. I don't think it matters to him what somebody's background is. I see him as being more interested in common shared values. Diversity is not our strength, and countries DO need to vet the migrants coming in. If they don't want to abide by the laws of the country, they may leave. That's not racist. It's practical. It's why the Chinese Emperors built that Great Wall. Ghengis Khan was a malevolent force who sought to conquer. People like that need to be sent packing.
Good points.
However.... We are in a globalised world of growing collective groupsize (eg all Europe is getting blender-homigenised to a singular-ish EU identity) creating a 450m population block, as a pole in the multipolar world, competing against bigger poles (China 1400m, India 1500m, ASEAN 800m, North America 600m...).
None of the bigger players can see a future for small separate isolationist line-ranger small country (eg UK 70m) unless it gets subsumed into a greater block.
Ultimately our monarch is the landlord, the farm managers have been appointed and we are the livestock
@@OrwellsHousecat Is globalization inevitable? Monarch? Do you believe that a one world order will come about without genocide? Will you silently take up the yoke? I'm not so sure I'm willing to go quietly. I also think that a lot of really NICE people have no idea what we are up against. Have you seen Beneath Sheep's clothing? Worth the watch. It's time for us to put some boundaries between our diverse cultures. I have locks on my door because not just anybody is welcome.
@@OrwellsHousecat it gets worse when we consider it is the Promethean aims of the Global American Empire that is marginalising European interests, and even its own national interests.
Any hope seems to remain in pockets of resistance within a balkanised North America. But at what cost to any form of global-civilisational power?
@@eliaseal331 aye.
The GAE seems kinda hellbent on destroying Europe at the moment - economic sanctions, cutting it off from energy security, cutting it off from food security, cutting it off from technology, cutting it off from rare earth metals, swamping it in domestic sectarian conflict and religious wars, de-industrialising it, de-militarising it so it can't defend itself, and pushing it into war against a formidable neighbour.
Anything to prevent it from joining Eurasia, even if it means ar@bising it.
So is Dismantle
I used to always listen to po but she changed from Po
to person to something else
The British aristocracy were destroyed by inheritance tax in the early 20th century, strangely enough we didn't many of these problems before the current elite, who are managerial, and mostly of middle class origins, but privately educated.
If the aristocracy were in charge then domestic service would still be a major employer and the manor houses wouldn't all be gone or owned by the national trust.
Different elites have different elite cultures, the nobility believed they had an obligation to live up to their privilege by serving their people in the sight of God, that they were bond to land, history, family and oath. The managerial class believe in f you got mine.
Also as we are as Christians constantly called to better ourselves I don't see the ride as ever being over, we must stand by our principals till the end, and always go forth with truth and honour. If that means you aren't welcome in certain circles then all the better, we need our own communities, tolerance is a crime against the tolerated, as they are facilitated in their evil.
I think it was the '60s in my view. That and debauchery.
Better to understand the horseshoe as a spiral, in behavioral terms an addiction, needing to disrobe, dissect, and deconstruct more and more of one's assumptions so as to continue to be satiated. ...Remystification is a good word.
twelfth
🥇🥈