-67
Which are you?
(reddthat.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
-67 points (28.1% liked)
Memes
45602 readers
1324 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Hence the double quotes I suspect.
If you don't know him, that person is a ytuber called Vaush - having only a couple of videos of him he strikes me as one of the most untruthful people on this planet.
He is a radlib who tries to argue on the basis on marx' and lenins work to "vote blue no matter who". I've seen him claim Marx today would've been a Biden staffer for example. He also is unable to see the programmatic imperialism behind neoliberal concepts such as free trade agreements like NAFTA and defends these conceptually. He effectively hordes socialist leaning youths back into supporting the status quo so I wouldn't wonder if one day it is revealed that the FBI secretly funds him
I think he is said to have pleaded for the legalization of consensual sexual relationships with underaged children, hence the reference.
Edit: No idea if he actually defended pedophilia. Personally I wouldn't think that he meant it. I am not an expert on Vaush (luckily) I only mentioned the accusations bc it is what tripped up the commenter.
Unfortunately, that user is not lying.
On top of everything else, Vaush engages in ableist, racist, transphobic, and sexist language, unapologetically.
He's a genuine piece of excrement
asfasfd
It's pretty well known and easy to verify, but I have no interest in googling this reprehensible being. If you've listened to him in the past, then I do wish you a swift recovery. Cheers.
I did the Google. He apparently used child porn and pedophilia as rhetorical devices in arguments about other topics, which have then of course been taken out of context and weaponizsd by people who hate him.
It's a good example of why you shouldn't use certain topics to score debate points and why no one should be live on the internet for multiple hours a day.
https://creatorpedia.fandom.com/wiki/Ian_Kochinski_(Vaush)
It's just one of those topics you want to avoid unless you're making a specific point about it, for example how right-wing nutjobs now believe that literally anyone they don't like is a pedophile.
I ran into one of his debates on crypto/NFTs a while back and he wasn't well-informed enough to adequately defend his own position or attack some of fundamental weaknesses of that ecosystem. Was not impressed.
Indeed not
Oh get off your high horse. You're well aware that everything I said is accurate. I simply don't respect you enough to engage with you further.
Not only do they not have a source, Vaush has actually addressed basically all the controversies about him in a long list of ways.
Here's a link to a GitHub page that has a large collection of Vaush's responses to his various controversies over the years.
And if it wasn't clear Vaush is a staunch trans ally and anti-racist. Any honest viewing of his content on either subject would show that to be the case.
Oof, dude you make me feel bad for giving you a good faithed response after your first comment.
For someone who urges to be careful with accusations you are pretty grossly misrepresenting my comment here
I don't throw it around like Vaush throws around "red-fascist", "tankie", "antisemite" and every other slur , I use it specifically for someone who draws upon radical aesthetic in the abstract but supports the capitalist, imperialist status-quo in the specific.
You can chose to be offended by that, but Vaush is the definition of a radlib
Honestly I have only ever used it for him. Thinking of it I might use "Vaushite" in the future which has the added benefit of visually representing the fact that his disingenious output is nothing but a thin layer around "shit"
I understand getting tripped up when others chime in with varying intentions. Also my initial comment should have been clearer and did leave more room to read a pedophilia accusation into it than I intended.
I can see that you argue in good faith and I apologize for some reddit impulses that I haven't unlearned yet.
Personally I don't see the equation of leftism with defending CP in OPs post though.
The way I read it OP groups "meat-eaters" into categories with each being a drastic exaggeration (the "lvl 5 bloodmouth" is a straight up cannibal) so I think none of this can be taken seriously.
One "group" is the The "Leftist" meat eater. I expand the quotes to something like The pseudo-leftist meat eater who is then represented by Vaush. To me this is basically a 1 person group that might as well just be called "Vaush" but calling him The pseudo Leftist is just one more swing at him.
I am definitely both a leftist and not a vegan and I don't mind the post in fact I found it quite funny (but obviously very few ppl agree). I agree though that slapping the CP stuff under Vaushs pic is unfair to him, as some people will take it seriously, I have to say that humor was also not lost on me though
You and me both man. Someone the other day said "that classic reddit performative snark" and fuck me if it didn't feel like I heard a gunshot. Looking through this thread I came pretty close to going full tilt that direction again. Still learning I suppose.
So I'm a little surprised to see this. The image explicitly says:
So the post to me is saying "leftists want to legalize child porn." With Vaush as a poster for all leftists. I do not see it as purely about Vaush anymore than i see the "Plants Rights Activist" commentary being about solely Joe Rogan (which funny enough is not even a stance I think he holds, but I dislike him and don't care to confirm lol).
Let me give another example: If I was making a meme and put "Conservatives [insert picture of George Bush above it]: Wants their steak bloody. Hates gay people." Would you say "ah this is just about George Bush" or would you see it as I see it, which is a statement about ALL conservatives with simply an image of one?
The images are just meant to accent the content, not be taken directly as the subject. Does that make sense?
I guess I should have made it more clear, that I was only trying to summarize sentiment about Vaush for you to understand the reference, I was not making anything up
To be clear: I do not remember nor care what exactly Vaush argued for in that video people point to as I have no interest in wasting more time with Vaush. Personally I don't believe he would defend pedophilia and just wants to be edgy.
When I said "It is said" I meant it to be understood like "people say that about him" not that it were common knowledge. I apologize if my English was not on point.
I think your accusation towards me making something up isn't fair but I agree with your notion of being careful with the topic in general so I will edit my original comment to reflect that I can't and won't weigh in on the debate on whether he did or did not defend pedophilia.
That’s fair. I did come in a little hot, but I am just very tired of watching people casually throw around “pedophile.“ I understand that is not what you were doing, but this post set up a very specific situation that it looked like you were building on. I over interpreted your intention, and I apologize. Still, this post is total rage bait, and kind of messed up ultimately. It’s an absurd, shoehorned attempt to try and equate liberals with pedophiles. It should be removed frankly.