"There's nothing wrong with picking the lesser of two evils; you get less evil" -Noam Chomsky

@penelopeferrer5643

Жыл бұрын

I used to think Obama is evil but after becoming liberal ove found he's a pretty chill guy. I find christians really weird at this point in my life

@theweekndxo7438

11 ай бұрын

@@penelopeferrer5643he literally drone striked a wedding bruh

@lexerdaniel4843

Ай бұрын

@@theweekndxo7438actually it’s JSOC who selected targets for drone strikes, not the President. He is briefed on the strikes, especially high casualty strikes, after the fact.

"That was when Jim, being the intelligent man he is, took the fight to the one place he knew it would matter most...the KZread comment section"

the funny thing is when Sam was called dismissive. the one thing he is NOT is dismissive. he engages all callers everytime. ijs...just an observation

Yeah you lost the debate so attack his parenting and kids stay classy

dear caller and other libertarians : to acknowledge something as viable it must be deemed viable in the first place demanding someone to acknowledge the viability of your position as a starting point of a debate is lunacy and here's something you have to take into consideration : you expect that corporations would not poison, kill or experiment on people when the central reason why peter thiel wants to make a libertarian floating country is human expoerimentation

@matthewheywood8532

4 жыл бұрын

C RA because you are ignoring or oblivious to why the government got this way . You seem to forget why they had to put regulations in place as corporations were running amok at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century. When left unregulated corporations will and do run amok

@Kropothead

3 жыл бұрын

@@Chris89892 Ignoring material conditions tends to make an ideology come across as total nonsense.

Sam beat this guy into submission lmfao. By the end he could only make attacks on his parenting lol great argument

@Seattle-2017

Жыл бұрын

Jim hangs up right at the end of his last hyperbolic statement because he could not handle another common sense Seder rebuttal. I think this Jim guy called a few more times since, with similar incoherent arguments mixed with angry personal insults.

It's hilarious seeing this guy try to insult Sam and Sam just slapping back the insults completely. It's like a rhetorical "stop hitting yourself."

Old video but I'mma say it anyway, Jim thinks he has a rivalry with you and he loves you more than he seems

Jim loves Sam I believe, he certainly spends a lot of time watching him.

You handled that really well Sam. There's a reason you're on here and Jim from PA is not.

Sam's comeback to the caller's "smug, narcissistic... have you watched yourself" comment was classic! Then 5 seconds of dead air - completely threw the guy off.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA I love that when he tried to call Sam stupid, he seemed to think he’d dunked on him, only to find he had dunked on himself. Seriously, these never get old.

How telling is that the guy calls Sam narcissistic and self-righteous as he frothes at the mouth admonishing his parenting skills with the expectation that Sam is going to give a shit what this guy thinks? You just know he's at home watching this video over and over again.

'But wouldn't...watching myself endlessly be more narcissistic...?' lol!

Wishing violence on people? That is a rather odd thing for someone to say who purportedly encourages people to vote ethically.

It's amazing how the libertarian callers so reliably resort to personal insults when they call in.

I love this. Jim has nothing and is knocked back by Sam at every turn. The amount of sighs and 'hmms' he gives are wonderful. That, followed by the attempted attack on Sam's parenting and the clear disappointment he has at not being yelled at or kicked off the programme is just peachy.

@Seattle-2017

Жыл бұрын

Sam is great. He lets these libertarians talk themselves into a black hole, then brushes off their personal insults when they run out of incoherent arguments.

Sam spoke the operative word to this caller: "reality". The unsettling majority of libertarians I've engaged have been far removed from the reality that is 21st century America. The concept of pragmaticism is unknown to them. I appreciate the depth of their convictions, but those same convictions are not viable in this country, on this world, at this time.

@Seattle-2017

Жыл бұрын

Nor at any other place or time.

Weird that Jim's worried about Sam's parenting when it's quite clear from this clip that Jim's parents repeatedly threw him onto the ground on his head to see if he would still be alright. Sorry Jimbob, can't criticize other people's parenting if your own was bad.

Dude was so mad Sam didn’t take the bait and get outraged lol

Loses argument, takes a potshot at the kids.

Well once it became a personal attack the caller lost this one.. I admire Sam's composure in the face of personal abuse.

@Seattle-2017

Жыл бұрын

The caller lost this one the second Sam picked up the call.

Jim, don't take that hint! Ignore it like every other fact of life! You are one of the funniest semi-regular features of this program. Even better then Random-Rush.

Not liking drone strikes doesn't mean Libertarianism is a viable alternative party. There were plenty of other far more sane 3rd party candidates than Gary Johnson.

Jim was amusing, tried so much and still failed so hard. When he grows in to adulthood he will learn what words mean and hopefully learns to construct a decent argument, here he just sounded silly.

Are you saying all your taxes are refunded, you've never paid taxes during these events, nor have you ever contributed to an economic market that funds those federal, state, or local violations of civil liberties?

I couldn't vote for someone I view as a criminal, just couldn't do it.

As the guy below commented. It's a common debate tactic. If you give 3 points, and your opponent *crushes* 2 of them, you are left with one point unrefuted. You can build these up and propose that because said points are unanswered, they must be correct. At the very least it allows ideologues to draw their preferred conclusion, and should be rightly frowned upon. (I get accused of it when I make sure to answer every question, or refute every statement fully and with broad explanation)

I'm certain Jim isn't aware he paid for the wars, indefinite detention, drone strikes, torture, and every other violation of civil liberties with his taxes. Ask him if there is a necessary evil in that choice or if he is being a hypocrite, although I'm certain Jim never considered either because he doesn't even understand the meaning of hypocrisy or the possibility of other viable explinations and he just hates not having his way, so he acts like a child.

Lol funny how libertarians almost always resort to personal attacks once they realize they've lost the argument. Remember the guy who was like "you are a horrible, despicable person" when Sam said "if you don't pay your taxes, I believe you should be in jail." 😂

@Seattle-2017

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, that guy was a libertarian presidential candidate.

Huh? It was Seder who began with the insults: "Do you know what hypocrisy is?" Why is the caller's feed constantly breaking up? The home team is not exactly comedy on steroids. The caller brings up some valid points and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand with the ad hom gambit.

expand your playlists dude ;) I think a playlist of Jim is overdue ;) I put together a playlist on my channel of every debate you've had with a libertarian I could find on the net ;)

Wouldn't it be more narcissistic to watch all my own videos all the time? *Libertarian.exe has stopped responding*

Thankyou for being a person not a partisan strand. Breath of fresh air.

Every time I hear that dude say something, he pisses me off. Like when he says that the difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives feel disgust more keenly. That's why, he says, conservatives care about gay marriage and liberals don't. Excuse me, but not only do I feel disgust quite keenly myself, I also politicize it. It's just that I reserve my disgust for war criminals rather than for what consenting adults do behind closed door.

Jiiiim... why u do dis? Jiiiiim... stahp...

"You're a fucking child...Dude, you're the best argument for abortion." The irony of these comments is palpable. I am not the one throwing a temper tantrum.

Best part: surprised when Sam doesn't give a shit about his ad hominem attacks. Just can't grasp that nobody gives a shit what he says.

Sam you should have intelligent Libertarian on your show.

@Seattle-2017

Жыл бұрын

"Intelligent Libertarian"? What?!?

Bless Jim from PA for his complete lack of a life. lol how many times is he going to make this exact same call?

Jim, you sound likre the smug amd narcissistic person in this conversation. Libertsriamism is not, in any way, a viablr alternative to these two parties. imo, anything is better than the Republican Party, brsides Libertarianism. Jim, I have no idea where your hate comes from, but it comes off as filthy and untoward. I feel really sorry for you, to have to go after poor little Sam, based upon his parenting. Kind of off limits buddy. Sam is against the drug war bte, against torture, and against these senseless wars. Why do you habe so much hate in your heart?

Jim's calls are always a laugh. That guy never has anything substantial to say.

Libertarian understanding of the FED is soo limited. Do honestly believe there was no business cycle before the FED?

that was very... painful to watch.

I haven't read his research, but I've watched a few of his lectures on youtube. I think a lot of what I've heard him say is really simplistic to the point of being silly. Hasn't really inspired me to do any deeper reading.

When Sam talks to Libertarians he gets so smug and dismissive of them as they fail to be able to make a single point and just breathily contradict themselves. What a shame, if he was nicer I could listen to longer clips of them panting in rage.

I never said I was.

He always is, I like to imagine he's constantly running from the evil government when he calls Sam.

Jim, just take a hint. You are making a fool out of yourself.

An important thing to realize is that what libertarians call "regulations" are simply laws they don't happen to like. There's no special category of law called a "regulation", there's just laws, and without laws, the free market cannot exist at all. Imagine a "free market" without contract law or property rights or law enforcement. That's regulation too. Regulations are necessary for the free market to even exist, it's just a question of how beneficial or detrimental the laws are.

So, anybody who voted for any candidate who had any chance of winning is guilty. As for me, I'm guilt free. I didn't vote. Instead, I stayed home, and rubbed this magic lamp with a rabbit's foot wrapped in four-leaf clovers and wished upon seven stars that all bad things in politics would go away. When that happens, make sure to give me credit. Until then, I'm blaming you.

I actually happen to agree with the caller in this case. The more people that start supporting third party and independent candidates the better. It would send a message to the two parties that we aren't happy. This is also the problem here in Australia.

Of course, in your deluded mind, the only 3rd party candidate was Gary Johnson.

The economy was more volatile before the fed than it has been since.

Heh Heh Heh. Well played sir.

Sadly I have an aspergers friend and he's a genious at politics, this .... is just well.... *gesturing to Jim*

Again, that depends on how you define 'lesser evil'. To me, rational is to live in a society where 10 lives arent less important than a 100 lives. I dont understand on what evidence people can make a call like that. Thats why we're a Republic and not a democracy. On the other hand, throwing somebody off a bridge is no different than the 'lesser evil' nonsense we constantly get on this channel. Are you saying Sam is a psychopath?

You are not smug, arrogant, narcissistic, or condescending, Sam. The caller is simply frustrated b/c you don't share his point of view; it frustrates him a great deal. I'm guessing this caller has hypertension b/c he seems to have perpetual frustration and is a powder keg. And, he hangs up abruptly as if he has made a point. :/

I have a type of autism similar to aspergers and I'm really smart at politics.

That's kind of a simplistic view of it. It's not the people's fault that there is a two-party system, both the republicans and democrats work hard to make sure third parties have no real chance on a national level.

Sam should let the callers get their actual point across without interrupting them too much first and then crush them. To be fair.

First off, I wrote it poorly, but I agree with Sam vs. his caller. When it comes to a two party system; the two parties are in collusion with each other to now ensure there are only two persons/parties to vote for in a Federal and state elections. Each party are financially supported by overall the same lobbying interests. Corporations. People like Ralph Nader or Ron Paul on the right by inherent default are excluded despite populace support to even share a stage. It must fit the narrative.

Says you Jim.

4:01 he's god a point.

Good to see. Nobody thinks that the libertarian ideal isn't an ideal (most philosophies are, whether you agree with them or not. It's people trying to arrive at the best possible world they can imagine) I have great respect for libertarians that acknowledge the limitations of it, and accept that collectivism has its place (infrastructure, law, international affairs, all require ceding control and pooling resources) Folks like this caller genuinely remain in the dark about reality.

Is he trying to claim that Romney would have been better than Obama?

Oh my god!! Sam you are the least arrogant journalist out there to me. I don't agree with everything you say, but I respect your logic and conclusions. In fact, you have swayed me with your libertarian discussions regarding lack of regulations and the like. I have given up my libertarian naive musings and realized that there is a need for govt. I like stoplights and (somewhat) safe food. The alternative does not work. thx guys, enjoy your show!

There is no such thing. An intelligent libertarian would be a social democrat - a system that has produced the greatest culture in human history and improves lives in every single way over the libertarian system...

Spare the rod, spoil the child. I've got one for your daughter...but then she'd really be spoiled.

Millions of people stay home instead of voting every 4 years. All we need to do for a third party to win is convince those people that they should vote for instead of not voting at all.Voting third party is a good way to provide "damage" as Sam put it because the dems and GOP will look into the platforms of the third parties to start getting votes back. Even when a few more people voting third party than the last time around grows the party which can eventually lead to a third party becoming...

I see. You're an enamoured student of Mr Wood's somewhat convoluted economic "theories".

I agree with the caller on third parties.

Our unfortunate first past the post voting system is what causes the lesser of two evils/spoiler effect that we're stuck with.

I dont know about psychopaths, but i would wager sociopaths would choose to save the majority, since not only does it give them power over somebody's life, it also gives them the opportunity of power in the future, having gained the favor of the majority, like most populist politicians. my 2 cents.

*claps for Sam*

Love how his arguments go from almost coherent to 'You're an idiot and a bad father, why won't you acknowledge me! (Jew) [...I love you really! Love me, please!].

He tries to put morality into these neat little models, but when he talks about the difference in morality between liberals and conservatives, he uses a caricature of conservatives and liberals painted in primary colours. Like when he says that conservatives include loyalty in the concept of morality whereas liberals don't. Ex-fucking-scuse me?

You can only control your own actions. If you choose to vote then what you are doing is giving your stamp of approval for that politician to be in power. I have no culpability for ANY military crimes bc I did not vote for the individuals who were responsible for giving the orders, you did. The president is absolutely in charge of the CIA. Tell me what is wrong with my logic?

I like the idea of a 3rd way. But wouldn't the US be required to have a 2nd way first? And how much of a 3rd way is Ron Paul and co if they run with and alongside Republicans? In the end the system of government in place builds an Us vs Them (in power vs out of power) structure that aids and abets the 2 party domination. The only alternative (and 3rd way) is to suggest a radical change to the make-up of the Houses and executive committees that would lend weight to marginal votes.

If you want to agree about both parties producing bad choices, that's something we (and probably a large portion of America) agrees with. When it comes to voting, it all comes down to making picks that you feel can best help the country and are viable. For all the ill's you, Sam, and I have problems with when it comes to this president, there have been some meaningful advancements. No one president isn't going to have some political policy that is moral on all accounts. (Ex. FDR - Internment)

Hyperbole.

He starts talking about the evolutionary background for disgust, but then he goes on to say that it easily extrapolates to moral disgust. So Michelle Bachmann is disgusted by gay marriage, and I'm disgusted by Michelle Bachmann. Why is one of us feeling more disgust? On what grounds is he saying that my sense of disgust is more limited? Do only certain kinds of disgust count as disgust? Every lecture I've heard of his is full of crap like this.

That's the problem I have with Haidt. He might have done some good scholarship in psychology, but when it comes applying it to politics he does stuff like: "Hmm, conservatives care about gay marriage and liberals don't. Obviously that's because liberals just don't care about disgusting stuff." He doesn't seem to take it any further than that. This isn't the only example either, but I don't really want to discuss it further because I would hate to have to listen to more Haidt.

JESUS- All this labeling BS is one of the more irritating problems with our system. Social labels, political labels, labels about labels. Why don't ya'll have a good old fashioned fist fight over who calls who what. WHO GIVES A DAMN. Talk about some content instead of pkging

They don't work hard at all to do so. You do all the work for them. You can vote third party, nobody is stopping you except for you.

Here we go again. -___-

"It must be that disgust is on a scale and that conservatives just have more at the primitive and moral level than liberals and libertarians." I am viscerally disgusted by plenty of things on a primitive level. If an 18 year old boy were to start dating a 72 year old woman, I would think it's gross and I would disapprove, and if I saw them smooching I would probably yak up my lunch. But it's also none of my business. The difference is they politicize their personal disgust and I don't.

I totally agree that its atrocious they sign those contracts that disallow 3rd party candidates and it is a form of suppression. But YOU know about this. YOU atleast have the upper hand. And even knowing they participate in those types of tactics you still support them! This is insanity. My point is that you have the power if only you were willing to excercise it. You recognize they want you to vote 2 party but they can only do so much. In the end it is only you who can vote for your beliefs.

False Dilemma

Jim is butthurt he lost lol

I agree with not voting the lesser of 2 evils, which is why I don't vote Libertarian.

Because he gave up on it thats why. If you and I are arguing about something - anything and I lose my patience and all of a sudden start bringing in things that have no bearing to the discussion at hand like idk a new born child your dress appearance how you handle yourself in life, guess what I lost.

Sure there's a scale. That's fine. It's how he frames what's "conservative" and what's "liberal". Then I watched this video: watch?v=Pmz10uQsTYE and it all made sense. He's a libertarian. That's why he paints conservatives as being good for stability and getting stuff done, and liberals for being nice to have around, but not very serious. At 14:30 he calls Libertarians the smartest and most rational of all political affiliations. *gag* Excuse me, there's that sense of disgust again.

LOL

Jill Stein comes to mind.

So maybe his professional papers are okay, but if he's going to go out there and say a bunch of bullshit and try to use his status as a researcher to lend his nonsense an air of credibility, then I have no respect for the guy.

There is no lesser of 2 evils. I want you to really stop and think. You need to explain how voting for evil can ever be considered moral.

Oh give it a rest troll boy.

Wow....Jim is seriously reality-challenged...

lol