It allows people to draw the conclusions they want from it.
No, its debate club nonsense to let someone feel like they are the smartest person in the room by acting like they are playing ultra Machiavellian schemes with always having an out of "I wasn't wrong because technicality I left open here!!"
He isn't a retard, he knows what conclusions he is building towards and implying. Everything else is him trying to always be right and feel smarter than you, which is only makes him more pathetic.
I disagree on the premise that there's more than one way to skin a cat.
I agree in your assessment of him, he obfuscates and personally is a weird dude with a weird way of looking at the world.
I disagree with you; in the fact that he is, at the end of the day, on "our side" of the fence. And has been for decades, whilst living in California and remaining effective at messaging despite being cancelled multiple times.
In a war, not everyone has to be shooting. Someone has to drive the trucks bringing supplies.
I think if you tally up what he's actually done, judge him by the fruits he bears, he will squarely end up having done good.
Case in point, you watch any video of him and you probably end up angry. 90% you are angry about a specific based topic, and you are angry because you didn't think he went far enough.
But your thinking about that topic and you can't stop thinking about it. That's the point.
in the fact that he is, at the end of the day, on "our side" of the fence
Disagree. He is on his side. Whatever side makes him feel like he is superior to you, and also being a bit contrarian enough to feel like he isn't a conformist. Even in his video reversing course on the vaxx, he refuses to fully admit to wrongdoing and is mockingly going "you right, you right, happy now?"
He has shown his intelligence to be worthless in the face of fear, his "analytics" to be easily led astray by blind authority worship, and his pride unwilling to allow him to even admit to being wrong in the face of being hit with it. And considering that's his entire purpose, to be that smart guy willing to call shit out, he invalidated any fruit he could bear with doubt.
Sure we can talk about him in incredibly vague philosophical musings to obfuscate the issue, its almost fitting given who he is, but that is still just engaging in debate club nonsense.
you are angry because you didn't think he went far enough. But your thinking about that topic and you can't stop thinking about it.
Sorry, but this doesn't make any sense. If I'm mad at him for not going far enough, then me "merely thinking about it" has no use or value, because I'm already committed and extreme on the position. And if the point is to "shock" someone into thinking about something all day, then they would be thinking he went too far for that to work. But I get what you probably meant.
I'm sure his point is to be inflammatory to get that shock value thinking going in people. But that requires him to have a level of trust towards his intelligence or rationality that he cannot be just waved off as "oh that retard is spouting off again." Which, as I've said, he has lost. He is now relying fully on Gell-Mann Amnesia, there's a debate club term for him, to keep people from remembering his unreliability to have any further credibility.
Let me back up, I think he had a persuasion filter that was very useful for 80% of reality, and would try to fight a rear guard to stretch it over the remainder rather than just acknowledging it.
He did that by communicating in a feminine way. He used words not to communicate direct information but to influence and lead you to a certain point abstractly or indirectly. That is feminine communication, not masculine.
I'm not trying to say he didn't have his faults or defend them, I'm saying that I think he will be judged positively as time goes on, as ultimately he did more good than harm.
I'm saying that I think he will be judged positively as time goes on, as ultimately he did more good than harm.
And I'm disagreeing with this. As time goes on all his videos/writings will be forgotten (as happens to us all), sans the one that got him cancelled, while his legacy will be "wrote a newspaper comic that was funny to office drones decades ago" and "Clott Adams." And that controversial video and the Clott Adams thing will completely derail a Leftie or a Rightie who might stumble upon him later, by them instantly dismissing him on the topic for being a "wrongthinker/retard."
If he was a major politician or someone on that level, whose every movement can have linger effects for decades you'd be right. But he was just a formerly famous guy talking on the internet.
No, its debate club nonsense to let someone feel like they are the smartest person in the room by acting like they are playing ultra Machiavellian schemes with always having an out of "I wasn't wrong because technicality I left open here!!"
He isn't a retard, he knows what conclusions he is building towards and implying. Everything else is him trying to always be right and feel smarter than you, which is only makes him more pathetic.
I disagree on the premise that there's more than one way to skin a cat.
I agree in your assessment of him, he obfuscates and personally is a weird dude with a weird way of looking at the world.
I disagree with you; in the fact that he is, at the end of the day, on "our side" of the fence. And has been for decades, whilst living in California and remaining effective at messaging despite being cancelled multiple times.
In a war, not everyone has to be shooting. Someone has to drive the trucks bringing supplies. I think if you tally up what he's actually done, judge him by the fruits he bears, he will squarely end up having done good.
Case in point, you watch any video of him and you probably end up angry. 90% you are angry about a specific based topic, and you are angry because you didn't think he went far enough.
But your thinking about that topic and you can't stop thinking about it. That's the point.
Disagree. He is on his side. Whatever side makes him feel like he is superior to you, and also being a bit contrarian enough to feel like he isn't a conformist. Even in his video reversing course on the vaxx, he refuses to fully admit to wrongdoing and is mockingly going "you right, you right, happy now?"
He has shown his intelligence to be worthless in the face of fear, his "analytics" to be easily led astray by blind authority worship, and his pride unwilling to allow him to even admit to being wrong in the face of being hit with it. And considering that's his entire purpose, to be that smart guy willing to call shit out, he invalidated any fruit he could bear with doubt.
Sure we can talk about him in incredibly vague philosophical musings to obfuscate the issue, its almost fitting given who he is, but that is still just engaging in debate club nonsense.
Sorry, but this doesn't make any sense. If I'm mad at him for not going far enough, then me "merely thinking about it" has no use or value, because I'm already committed and extreme on the position. And if the point is to "shock" someone into thinking about something all day, then they would be thinking he went too far for that to work. But I get what you probably meant.
I'm sure his point is to be inflammatory to get that shock value thinking going in people. But that requires him to have a level of trust towards his intelligence or rationality that he cannot be just waved off as "oh that retard is spouting off again." Which, as I've said, he has lost. He is now relying fully on Gell-Mann Amnesia, there's a debate club term for him, to keep people from remembering his unreliability to have any further credibility.
Let me back up, I think he had a persuasion filter that was very useful for 80% of reality, and would try to fight a rear guard to stretch it over the remainder rather than just acknowledging it.
He did that by communicating in a feminine way. He used words not to communicate direct information but to influence and lead you to a certain point abstractly or indirectly. That is feminine communication, not masculine.
I'm not trying to say he didn't have his faults or defend them, I'm saying that I think he will be judged positively as time goes on, as ultimately he did more good than harm.
And I'm disagreeing with this. As time goes on all his videos/writings will be forgotten (as happens to us all), sans the one that got him cancelled, while his legacy will be "wrote a newspaper comic that was funny to office drones decades ago" and "Clott Adams." And that controversial video and the Clott Adams thing will completely derail a Leftie or a Rightie who might stumble upon him later, by them instantly dismissing him on the topic for being a "wrongthinker/retard."
If he was a major politician or someone on that level, whose every movement can have linger effects for decades you'd be right. But he was just a formerly famous guy talking on the internet.