Compared to the minitrue (Fox) they are completely devoid of doublethink, duckspeak, or blackwhite and don't rely on bellyfeel to get away with rectifying misprint and oldthink.
Fox, OAN, and Jones are the plusgood outlets producing goodthink, allowing the rest to be labeled as guilty of crimethink and fodder for a joycamp.

I had to look it up to remember, in 1984 they called it "doublethink" where two contradictory ideas were presented as true, like the ideas they've put forward that they had the largest inauguration crowd ever and the reason they didn't was people had difficulty in getting through security and it was cold.

this is pretty high on the retarded scale.
and tagging this in the *education *philosophy and *learn channels is insulting to those who use their brains.

look man,i get that you disagree with socialism as an economic system,and you are perfectly within your rights to hold that opinion,but it is apparent that you have no clue what socialism is and continue to regurgitate the tired old tropes from the mcarthy era.

you,my friend,suffer from an incredibly bad case of doublethink.

you cannot on the one hand view taxes as theft and then turn around and support the military.which is a socialist institution and uses taxes to fund itself.

what you fail to realize is that this discussion goes back to the beginning of this country:what is the governments role.since the constitution was a brilliant document,and what made it brilliant was NOT simply the words written but the fact that our forefathers KNEW that they didnt know everything and they allowed for the constitution to be changed,as our society changed.

which is why we got rid of slavery,and allowed women to vote.we expanded the bill of rights to include blacks.

we did these things as a society.

we got rid of child labor and we decided that basic education was a fundamental right.

socialism is not a utopian philosphy.it is an economic philosophy and it can be just as abused as capitalism.the bank bailouts in 2007 was a socialist reaction,and one the majority of the american people disagreed with,but so was the interstate highways...which we DID agree upon.

so to title this "socialism explained" is pretty fucking stupid.

i already linked you an actual breakdown of american socialism,which appears you failed to read.so allow me to try again and i implore you.give it a read:
https://mises.org/blog/bernie-sanders-right-us-already-socialist-country

@SDGundamX

it is all good mate.
you vote however you wish,for whatever reasons you deem pertinent.

i do not identify so strongly with a video that it somehow represents me,or everything i stand for,and i have no issue if someone disagrees.though i always do respect when someone states WHY they downvoted.

which you did,and mad respect my man.

as i stated earlier i was fairly ignorant to a lot of this new flavor of social justice warrior.gamergate included.in fact,i still do find gamergate really that important in the larger context,though i am sure there are gamers who would disagree with me.

i found this video interesting in that it was addressing how the more radical and extreme elements were attempting to hijack public spaces by controlling language,and therefore dominate the conversation.

since i was not familiar with this particular youtubers stance on gamergate,nor followed his videos,i harbored zero bias on his conclusions.

in my opinion,this mans stance or political leanings in regards to gamergate is not enough of a valid reason to dismiss what he is laying down in this video.

what you are suggesting (and if i am reading your position wrong,please let me know),is that because this youtuber held a certain position on a related subject,devalues and dismisses his position on radical social justice warriors.

a good analogy is me pointing to the sky and stating "the sky is blue" and having my statement dismissed because you may disagree with my politics,religion or philosophy.

but that would not make my statement any less true.

i agree with you that it does not matter of someone is a narcissist or a special snowflake.it is the argument that matters.the IDEAS that should be examined for their veracity and clarity.

and yes,this youtuber makes certain assumptions that are not only irrelevant but extremely biased.

which brings me back to my main point.
freedom of speech and how these radicals attempt to impose their own selective bias by controlling the language we use to express ourselves and those very ideas that you and i find to important.

so while the radical right attempts to legislate morality and impose THEIR own narrow and subjective understandings on all of us.

the radical left is attempting to silence dissent and dialogue by controlling language by using this weird orwellian doublethink.

"zero tolerance for the intolerant" almost every college campus has something similar to this all over campus.

now THAT phrase is a brilliant example of orwellian doublethink.
definition of doublethink:The power to hold two completely contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accept both of them.

so my main point is in regards to freedom of speech and how the radical end of these social justice warriors are threatening that most basic and vital right.

did i get my point across?
well,the jury is still out,but i hope that at least i got a few people thinking and giving this situation a bit more scrutiny.

i am also attempting to address this phenom of binary thinking.
that because i post a video that criticizes the more radical elements of social justice warriors.this automatically translates to me being "anti-social justice warriors".

my recent posts on this matter have confused and troubled some sifters.because they had a certain mental image of who i was and because they may identify as a social justice warrior,my posts were offensive to them,and confusing.

now thankfully @Jinx spoke up and inquired about my reasons,because it appeared to him that i was behaving out of character.

but i am not.
i am,and always have been,about freedom,equality,fairness and justice.i apply that metric as evenly as i humanly can ( i make mistakes,of course).

bad ideas MUST be challenged and how this new batch of social justice warriors are behaving in order to further their agenda is a bad fucking idea.

does this mean trash ALL people who are socially conscious and wish to create a better world by fighting injustice,racism and bigotry?

of COURSE not!
but i do blame those well-intentioned people for not standing up this new form of bully groupthink.just because someone identifies as a social justice warrior does not mean that they get a free pass just for being part of a group.

so just like i blame the "good" cops who stand by and allow the "bad" cops to break the law,abuse their authority and behave like fascists with impunity.they are just as responsible as those cops who cross the line.

so while the intentions may be good,the execution is a horrible lovecraftian nightmare,with far reaching implications that affect us all and can be easily abused.

freedom of speech is good.
disagreement is healthy.
we cannot be so allergic to conflict that we shut down the conversation,and all reside in our own little echo chambers where everybody is agreeing and nobody is questioning.

as a society there is grave danger in that practice.

and that is really what i am talking about.
thanks for commenting my man.
as you may have figured out.this is a fairly important subject to me.
stay awesome!

Because a whale is murdering its oppressors, which is ALWAYS fun and funny. I mean, I like British people but there's something about Mel Gibson murdering them in movies that just... that's also why we hate Mel Gibson, because he became the oppressor which we need to kill (socially). And now we are the oppressor.

If I saw a giant whale flying over my city, I would welcome it with dying arms. It's funny to know deep down inside that your own death, not out of self hatred or injustice, but out of a post-human sense of justice, could be absolutely hilarious.

Would the death of your civilization yield positive results?

Or at least laughs?

It did in this animation!!

Money is the root of all evil? Evil is the root of all things -- and it's funny to exist within the frames of constant existential doublethink!

Also, it's a cute whale, sort of like a Stay Puff of our current meme cycle -- which is over, because meme cycles are like 5 minutes or something.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. My opinions, while oft contrarian, are really just open ended processes without judgement or declaration. They are hardly even opinions, as I almost always simultaneously believe and hold dear multiple conflicting ideas about particular subjects. An enlightened doublethink as it were. Everything is a theory worth pondering. Thanks Socrates. Thanks for making me not know anything.

Now while tenure certainly holds clout, it can also blind us to the moments in time which were shorter but sweeter than any of the fine tuned complexities of empire. The Internet as we know it, with youtube and Facebook, for example, may be the fixture but I'll always think kindly upon those early 90s, when it was the awkward but mysterious world wide web.

So, cool, yay for fixtures, but I'm a founders man, not a member of the club after its maturity. The Thomas Paine -- Cool, the revolution is over, now fuck yo couch. Where's the next one?

Other examples where the fixture isn't necessarily the only method to decide value by: Van Halen's prolific career versus that first, highly exceptional, fast and heavy album. Or the short but sweet years Ronnie James Dio or Glenn Huges sang for Black Sabbath -- Ozzy is the fixture, but those short moments of time where something strange and magical was created with other diverse geniuses, prior to or after the bread winners, those are the moments of fascination.

I love Jon Stewart but this ain't no thang. My interest was already piqued and held years ago, before him. He's great though and far better than a single television show.

I'm mostly on the same page as you, however I am also obsessed with the politics and pseudo-science of the fictional universe.

Everything is doublethink. I could shit on a piece of toast one second and then eat it the next -- and believe it was nutella.

But that's just me.

I never purchase animals from breeders or shops, because I view their ilk as unethical in the face of the thousands of animals that ALREADY EXIST and DIE every year.

Stupid humans and their penchant for declaring one set of genetic qualities as better than another. A dog is a dog. A cat is a cat. Save the ones that need saving and halt your superfluous breeding to make money off of selective assholes.

I've owned a beautiful russian blue, orange tabby, dalmatian mix, german shepard, and austrailian cattle dog that I purchased from the pound. Pretty cheap, I did a good deed, and they ended up being some of the greatest companions of my life.

Seriously, stop breeding animals for so-called "pure" breeds. It's sickening. Actual lovers of animals and all things cuddly, think about this fact and stop doublethinking yourself into believing you're an animal lover. You're NOT. You love the idea of something cute that you believe is superior to another something that is less cute. And that line of thinking most certainly does not qualify you for anything other than a cretin.

>> ^hpqp:

@Contagion21 and @SDGundamX
Indeed, I stand corrected.
The Vatican's stance on evolution is an excellent example of its hypocrisy and doublethink/doublespeak. Without the myth of creation/fall, the notion of original sin is impossible, rendering Jesus' sacrifice (i.e. redemption) unnecessary. That's pretty much the whole creed crumbling right there. So while it officially embraces evolution, it still teaches the mutually exclusive doctrine of Adam/Eve/the Fall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution#Polygenism



I found these to be interesting reads.

Adam, Eve, and Evolution (Official Catholic Church stance)

What is a Mitochondrial Adam and Eve

@Contagion21 and @SDGundamX

Indeed, I stand corrected.

The Vatican's stance on evolution is an excellent example of its hypocrisy and doublethink/doublespeak. Without the myth of creation/fall, the notion of original sin is impossible, rendering Jesus' sacrifice (i.e. redemption) unnecessary. That's pretty much the whole creed crumbling right there. So while it officially embraces evolution, it still teaches the mutually exclusive doctrine of Adam/Eve/the Fall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution#Polygenism

>> ^Ti_Moth:

I would say worse, he is using the excuse of a large budget defecit (caused by the financial crisis and the inability of the previous Labour government to save during the boom[Not that the tories would have done it differently had they been in power]) to make larger than nesecary cuts for public services like our beloved NHS and our vital benefits service instead of raising taxes (and collecting a fair ammount to begin with) from his mates the big businesses and bankers.


Not to mention raising VAT, brazenly asserting that it's a "fair tax" because it affects everyone equally, when it in fact affects the poor more than the rich since it amounts to a price increase on almost everything you buy. A cowardly move that does nothing except make it harder for those on lower incomes to get by, so that they can continue to subsidise the wealthy banks.

And let's not forget the wonder of the Big Society, a drive to get charities and community groups to take over the running of the public services that the ConDem government are cutting. For free. Dressing up the withdrawal of public funds as a drive to get communities running is a piece of doublethink so gobsmackingly insulting that I don't think people can even comprehend it. It's a classic Big Lie, straight from Nineteen Eighty-Four.

I know that there are time constraints and you can't just let guests rail on their talking points without challenge, but at least for me personally it isn't particularly kosher or persuasive to let the guy say 3-5 words and then interrupt him, shout at him, and say that he is dodging the issue, etc.

Yes, he did dodge the question. Yes, when he was actually given a chance to string a sentence together it was meaningless talking point drivel. That is what is persuasive. Let him talk. Give him ample opportunities to drop doublethink, non-sequitors, and cognitive dissonance. And then, call him on it.

Reminds me of... not is ... it shares a general concept but not the motivation to create obediance.

Here, the language takes away the context of human idioms, emotion, and cultural norms embedded in the words replacing it with dry descriptions and simplified adverbs. e.g. Lips, eyes, smile, waiter, food, drink, menus, mirrors, tears, man, woman. Smiling or crying means something. Lip uplifting or dripping salt liquid is an empty description.

Living with such a language would limit the ability to think and behave emotively as a human... there just wouldn't be a word for it any more.>> ^poolcleaner:

>> ^raverman:
Awesome Post! Steampunk style poetry... reminds me of Orwellian "Newspeak".

It's more like the opposite of Newspeak. Newspeak was a parred down vocabulary, simplifying sentence structure, omitting alternative words, and emphasizing simplistic concatenations such as "doublethink", as well as shortened concatenations such as "minitrue" (Ministry of Truth). It's also important to note that in order to truly speak and understand Newspeak you must have a specific understanding of each word, for no single word is intended to be used in any other way than it's original meaning, eliminating poetics.
This video, on the other hand, is a string of modern expressions filled with stiff latinate words for comedic (and poetic) effect. There are too many thoughts associated with each word to be even remotely considered for ingsoc's Oceania.

>> ^raverman:

Awesome Post! Steampunk style poetry... reminds me of Orwellian "Newspeak".


It's more like the opposite of Newspeak. Newspeak was a parred down vocabulary, simplifying sentence structure, omitting alternative words, and emphasizing simplistic concatenations such as "doublethink", as well as shortened concatenations such as "minitrue" (Ministry of Truth). It's also important to note that in order to truly speak and understand Newspeak you must have a specific understanding of each word, for no single word is intended to be used in any other way than it's original meaning, eliminating poetics.

This video, on the other hand, is a string of modern expressions filled with stiff latinate words for comedic (and poetic) effect. There are too many thoughts associated with each word to be even remotely considered for ingsoc's Oceania.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doublethink
Doublethink is a form of trained, willful intellectual blindness to contradictions in a belief system. Doublethink differs from ordinary hypocrisy in that the "doublethinking" person deliberately had to forget the contradiction between his two opposing beliefs — and then deliberately forget that he had forgotten the contradiction. He then had to forget the forgetting of the forgetting, and so on; this intentional forgetting, once begun, continues indefinitely. In the novel's notes, Orwell describes it as "controlled insanity".