YouTuber Shaun debunks Jimmy Dore's anti-vaccination videos

[Video Game Fan 2000]

"god I hate these 90 minute self-indulgent YouTube essays about nothing"

someone makes 20 minute minimalist video about British classism as expressed through pouring scorn on food eaten by poor people

"he only made that to game the algorithm"

I'm thinking some very positive things about Mussolini's dress sense right now, I thought you'd like to know.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

I'm enjoying the irony of someone who writes paragraphs and paragraphs that nobody else bothers to read complaining about 90 minute long videos about "Twitter bullshit"

[Video Game Fan 2000]

Maybe if I say everything I post on camera, give myself a gurning avatar and do skits you'll think I'm cool.

It pays to hold your own "side" of an argument to a higher standard. I don't give a shit about how fallacious Stephen Crowder and Shapiro are, they exist to spew misinformation. The more people writing walls of text in response to Contrapoints videos the better, talk is good, engagement with ideas is priceless.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

Maybe if I say everything I post on camera, give myself a gurning avatar and do skits you'll think I'm cool.

Mate if you could actually be witty or engaging my eyes wouldn't glaze over after your first interminable paragraph while my ears filled with the sound of white noise.

[Video Game Fan 2000]

Is that why you imagine your own stories like Ricky Gervais does?

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

If talk is good and engagement with ideas is priceless then why is Shaun's video a "Twitter feud". He illustrates how people leave out information in order to misrepresent sources to further their own agenda. And he's debunking anti-vaxx nonsense which is timely.

[Video Game Fan 2000]

Someone from the UK having strong opinions about Jimmy Dore is the most Twitterbubble thing imaginable. I take it back if Jimmy Dore's opinions on Ivermectin and vaccines are actually having a measurable effect on the UK public take up and engagement with anti-covid measures.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

yeah I'm more and more convinced that you looked at the title and length of the video and didn't even watch it

[Video Game Fan 2000]

I got about 20 mins in and went back to videogames. I didn't get the point of it. Just more "bad man wrong" stuff for Twitter.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

"It's Twitter bullshit"

didn't even finish the video

[Video Game Fan 2000]

To be honest, I'm a bit unsettled by how deferential you are to internet personalities and how personal you get when someone criticises them. Don't engage me on this topic again, just roll your eyes and move on. I don't mind if you think I'm stupid or secretly right wing.

I like Shaun's channel, I'm disappointed by a lot of his recent videos especially the stuff that's all Twitter villain-of-the-week stuff related to US culture war shite. That's really it.

[Retinend]

I feel like half the people care about these personalities and half don't on here. It might seem cringey but I find Twitter politics -and online political discourse online writ large- endlessly entertaining. If I see an unfamiliar name like "Jimmy Dore" I try to work out what people are worked up about.

[bgmnts]

Had no idea who Jimmy Dore was until this thread was created so I suppose it probably is internet bubble stuff.

But then if that's what gets views and stuff then fair enough.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

To be honest, I'm a bit unsettled by how deferential you are to internet personalities and how personal you get when someone criticises them.

well this isn't very good faith is it

and don't worry, I barely read your posts because they're usually boring, pompous shit that goes on for paragraphs and paragraphs

[bgmnts]

well this isn't very good faith is it

and don't worry, I barely read your posts because they're usually boring, pompous shit that goes on for paragraphs and paragraphs

Don't you get hostile when people make this complaint about length in terms of the video bloggers?

[Video Game Fan 2000]

well this isn't very good faith is it

Frankly, I'm still upset by the last time you put words in my mouth and I'm asking you not to engage with me on this topic if you're likely to do it again. Just keep it between your ears.

[bgmnts]

Also VGF there are plenty of leftist youtubers that talk about stuff that matters I think. ThoughtSlime and HasanAbi off the top of my head.

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

Don't you get hostile when people make this complaint about length in terms of the video bloggers?

I wouldn't say hostile. Most of the time I don't even comment on it. People don't want to watch long videos, I get it. I think it's funny when people complain that a video covering a complex topic is "too long" because if you're looking for an in-depth discussion of a complex issue that's also less than thirty minutes long, that's not possible. I also think it's funny when the same people who complain about overly long videos with intricate sets and costumes (again, valid) also complain about shorter minimalist videos. Like at that point, fire up your webcam and show all of us how it's done please.

[TrenterPercenter]

Just to point out (as it seems a little mean) I do read your posts VGF2K and enjoy your efforts even if I don't always agree with what you are saying.  I like reading people's opinions on things though.

[Video Game Fan 2000]

ThoughtSlime and HasanAbi off the top of my head.

These two are bad. Isn't HasanAbi one of those twitch debate guys, maybe I'm not thinking of the right guy? ThoughtSlime is literally summarising twitter threads, and I can't listen to them because of all the "...and I can stress this enough..." Twitter-ism that's left in.

My question is why go to these kind of places for opinions, this is how bubbles form in the first place. Especially if its rude to correct people. Back when it was about humiliating Thunderfoot, I got the point. Bad man falls down: I can dig it. Bad man is bad: thanks I can see that for myself.

[TrenterPercenter]

Awww don't knock ThoughtSlime (not sure on HasanAbi never really watched him) he is great and fun and come on it's meant to edutainment funnyisms.

My question is why go to these kind of places for opinions

Because it is accessible and comforting; you might not need or appreciate that but lots of others do and there are good things in that, sure potential problems but lots of good things too.

[bgmnts]

ThoughtSlime is literally summarising twitter threads, and I can't listen to them because of all the "...and I can stress this enough..." Twitter-ism that's left in.

Is this true? I haven't watched ThoughtSlime in a couple of months or so but I dont remember it being whatever this twitter-ism is.

If I click on, say, his LANDLORDS ARE IN CRISIS video, am I going to see him summarising twitter?

I'm confused what these people who want to share their opinions are meant to do, post their stuff exclusively on Stormfront?

[The Ombudsman]

Just to point out (as it seems a little mean) I do read your posts VGF2K and enjoy your efforts even if I don't always agree with what you are saying.  I like reading people's opinions on things though.

For what it's worth, I enjoy reading the longer posts on the boards, both Trenter and VGF2K included. Even though I don't agree with all the points, it makes this place much more interesting.

[Video Game Fan 2000]

I think ThoughtSlime has copped to not being able to do theory and informative videos and is labelled as a comedy channel now, which, fairdos. More success to them, its just not for me.

Think of how bad All Gas No Brakes would be if he added voice over "debunking" the people he interviewed. I know satire gets a bad rep on the American left, but sometimes comedy is the most effective thing to do.

[madhair60]

I just like hbomb, Shaun is too dry for me. I'd rather watch vTubers anyway

[TrenterPercenter]

I just like hbomb, Shaun is too dry for me. I'd rather watch vTubers anyway

I'm OK with vtubers

[Video Game Fan 2000]

lets all be vtubers

[Lungpuddle]

Because it is accessible and comforting; you might not need or appreciate that but lots of others do and there are good things in that, sure potential problems but lots of good things too.

I don't really mind long videos, sometimes (quite often, these days) I have time to watch them and while I'm watching them I feel intelligent, vindicated and less alone in how I think. It doesn't last long after I get off youtube, though, and I sometimes get into discussions with people on the other side of the fence, in the human flesh, and I remember I'm actually no good at debating things. So I appreciate the videos, but I do worry that they're turning me into an even more useless person who is seen by everyone as some leftie whose views aren't to be taken seriously. Then again, that doesn't diminish the comforting effect the videos have at the time.

[TrenterPercenter]

I don't really mind long videos, sometimes (quite often, these days) I have time to watch them and while I'm watching them I feel intelligent, vindicated and less alone in how I think. It doesn't last long after I get off youtube, though, and I sometimes get into discussions with people on the other side of the fence, in the human flesh, and I remember I'm actually no good at debating things. So I appreciate the videos, but I do worry that they're turning me into an even more useless person who is seen by everyone as some leftie whose views aren't to be taken seriously. Then again, that doesn't diminish the comforting effect the videos have at the time.

WARNING PSYCHOLOGY INCOMING

I think this is a really important.  The psychological impact of these videos is problematic, people wonder why all these people worship the great Dr Peterson but it's simple; he makes them feel good.  He empathises and promotes their problems (that is not all he does but we'll come back to that), something that is important in giving a voice to "things", the first step of all therapeutic interactions is someone bringing "a problem" into reality; we repress problems so they can't be real; we do this in lots of ways from not telling the person we love that we love them to not admitting that thing someone said made us upset.  All humans exist in an internal and external world; with our abilities to manage these two worlds successful being an important key to happiness.  "Being oneself" is really all about integrating these two worlds and it is a major goal of most people for quite complicated neurological reasons (but lets avoid me rambling by just saying there is less stress in a system that is not having to expend psychological resources in managing any deficit between two ways of being).

Now, why is this important? and what the fuck has it got to do with the Youtubes or Peterson? 

In real life we are surrounded by a rich world of social cues that impact and shape our individual psychology minute to minute day to day with varying degrees of permanency.  The impact can be quite overwhelming and uncomfortable trying to reflect on all of these cues so we often dampen this by modifying our behaviours and response in a kind of bracket of probable safety.  We do this intuitively and via feedback from our interactions.  YT is a one way street; it also a market place for attention seeking YTubers in competition to hook viewers into watching them; this means highly emotive, stimulating appeals to individuals.  We do not play a external-behavioural role in this interaction therefore our senses that would usually be engaged in this and modified by responses of others are replaced with that of the Ytuber; we are therefore imbued with their emotion, we ride on it and it designed to make you the viewer, feel good.  Once you have assimilated a shared mindset with a YTuber and "identify" with them or their cause you are going feel good engaging with them and absorbing their emotions because you are effectively tricking your brain into thinking it is in some battle that it is winning (hence why you feel intelligent and vindicated - brilliant words btw!), more dopamine please!  The more you align with this individual the more you will experience that glowy nice fuzzy feeling when they jangle your emotions and smite your enemies.

It is exactly the same in effect as Peterson; different context and sure Peterson largely preaches hate (as far as I'm concerned) or at the very least highly idealised prescriptive ideas of the world that he makes appealing to his audience.  A fascinating thing about Peterson's fanbase is the emboldened view of him as a great intellect, a clinical psychologist no less, and therefore they live vicariously via this.   This despite the fact that psychologists are not meant to behave like him, they are not meant to lead, coercive and convince people, a big part of training is about controlling and limiting your own emotions because you are facilitating and supporting others, not yours.  This of course doesn't work on YT therapeutic interactions are relational[nb]and non-judgemental another basic element of psychology that Peterson seems to have missed[/nb] not one way streets.  Telling people what they want to hear or, shock horror, the people you dislike are really as bad as you thought, or creating these people for you if you hadn't already found out externalising problems onto imaginary people is great maladaptive way to managing your own feelings of anxiety and self worth, anyway don't worry about them they are stupid, not like you, is a recipe for dependancy - hence why it is professionally a big no no in psychology.

Peterson is the extreme entity here; he is really just a cult leader/religious evangelist and utterly boring tbh even as a manipulator; but he is successful because of the medium and how a individual is forced to interact with the material.  Lots of lefties are in this game as well; the psychological pull of seeing your enemy "DESTROYED" is too important in the creation of TubeDollars to miss out on; it creates a psychological dependency on these concentrated emotional interactions which has consequences for how we then manage this changed internal self with our actual external self.  This then feeds into the real world, a real world which is usually much more greyer much more flexible and much less emotionally stimulating.

[Video Game Fan 2000]

That's a great post.

I think there is a big disconnection in academic versus real world understanding of where emotional hooks get in it.

For example, look at narrative analysis. I think in the popular view we'd say that the real emotional investment and identification happens in the narrative itself, the storytelling or involvement with something in the context that it happens. Then the analysis or discussing of "meaning" is something dry, intellectual and detached. Feeling first, and then ideas after.

The success of Peterson and others show this not to be false, but that the reality to be more complex than the intuition suggests. The "meta" level of engagement isn't purely intellectual at all, its where a lot of the emotional engagement happens. It's where social side happens too, because you get to look at other people and have them tell you what they think something meant. It's an incredibly engaging thing, especially when there are competing interpretations happening over a single text or idea. The popularity of "explainer" video really speaks to how engaging people find this, and how much the "meta" level is bound up with what people identify with and differentiate themselves from.

I think the idea that Peterson's youtube content got big because he was "telling men what they wanted to hear" is false. He wasn't, he was gaming his position as interpretator, exploiting the factor that the supposedly dry and cold  "meta" level of engagement is often where all the social commitments and emotional engagements happen. Academically, there's obviously a huge emphasis on interpretation and explanation, rival perspectives and all that - but in popular culture there's more the idea that the experience of a thing is pure, and the discussion afterwards is less authentic. I don't think Peterson is smart enough to have done it deliberately, but he essentially passed around the crack in the university basement, giving an audience a kick they don't usually get and condescending to them when they responded.