Communism in theory vs in practice

Support for chasers and sex-pests like Vaush is pretty awful, not to mentions his awful politics and constant butchering of Marxist theory for an audience that usually can't tell the difference.

Theory is important. Much of my list is newer, some is older when it holds up, some is newer when it meaningfully adds to the discussion. However, as someone who had your approach, reading theory directly genuinely is much faster than rolling the dice.

I have audiobooks linked as well that people can listen to if they prefer, and importantly they won't be distorted by a sex-pest who complains about Marxists constantly while misrepresenting them.

Where can I find audiobooks you talked about? My app probably doesn't show your userpage right.
- I have audiobook links after (almost) each listed work.
I am pretty familiar with Vaush's arguments on Marxist theory. What are your points of contention?
- The vast majority of them, to be honest. He has no grasp of Dialectical and Historical Materialism, has no knowledge of AES, and horrendously distorts Lenin.
  He's a liberal that cosplays an Anarchist and pretends to have beyond a Wikipedia understanding of Marxism.
  That's, of course, ignoring that he's a chaser, pedophile, sex offender.
  
  He has no grasp of Dialectical and Historical Materialism
  Can you list a specific example? I think he has a good understanding of this.
  
  One of the worst issues is when he depicts AES as "not real Socialism" because they contain contradictions, when Dialectical Materialism shows that all systems contain contradictions and must resolve them, that doesn't mean they aren't that system. Ie, Capitalist states contain public ownership, which is a contradiction but does not define the system.
  One of the recent and larger-scale issues was when he tried to explain Lenin advocated voting Socialism into existence.
  I don't make it a point to hate-watch sex offenders that do the work of the US state department.
  
  Yeah, I am not surprised that you have disagreements behind Lenin and AES. The two are pretty related and hard to pull apart. I was just surprised that you would disagree with any of his Marxist takes. I think you both agree what the problems are from a Marxist perspective.
  As for the sex offenders/sex pest stuff. I don't think he is those things, but I understand I am just one person. From the stuff I have seen it is mostly people that disagree with him that label him as such as a way to get around the fact they don't really have a leg to stand on; Fascists and the like. Not saying that is you of course.
  Thanks for taking the time to talk this though by the way. I figure you get hit with a lot of stuff.
  
  Vaush has to, by virtue of his profession, at least pretend to know what he's talking about with Marxism, so it can seem convincing. The issue is that it is abundantly clear every time he makes a mistake to anyone who takes theory seriously, yet that isn't Vaush's target audience, who are mainly western liberals and occasionally pro-US Anarchists.
  That's why I recommend reading theory, the only way to be 100% sure is to go the source.
  And no problem, ask any time!

I like Vaush

Lmaoooo, ye I always follow the political opinions of some dude who watches child porn ... oh wait, not child porn, it's "shortstack goblins"

As far as I know, all the criticisms of Vaush watching child porn has been misinformation.
- Then you clearly don't know much. Maybe you should actually learn about the people you recommend
  
  I watch Vaush a lot and I haven't seen what you are talking about.

You DO have to read theory. Just because it is old doesn't mean it's wrong or outdated.

Also I'm not opposed to watching YouTube videos, but it shouldn't be your only source for it, and recommending Vaush is a huge problem, don't do that.

If anyone wants some actual good recommendations:

In english: Second Thought, Hakim, Yugopnik, Luna Oi, revolutionary_thot, azurescapegoat. There's also Hasan, but he does commentary and not theory teaching or analisys or anything like that.

In portuguese: Ian Neves/História Pública, Laura Sabino, Jones Manoel, Tempero Drag/Rita von Hunty, João Carvalho.

There's of course others, I'm just going by the ones I remember right now.

How can you have a problem with Vaush when he is so ideologically similar to Hasan? Unless you have have disagreements with Hasan.
- Comrade Cowbee already listed the issues with Vaush that I'll not repeat here.
  That being said, I can't really say much about Vaush's ideological stance since I don't watch him. What I can say is that I doubt he's anywhere close to Hasan ideologically if going by how his fans act. Most of the times what I have seen is a pretty clear anticommunist stance from them that I cannot comprehend, specially when they love to laud Vaush as such a great leftist youtuber.
  Unless you have have disagreements with Hasan
  I do have some issues with Hasan actually, which I'll use this comment to inform anyone that reads it after my recommendation. I don't watch a lot of Hasan, I usually see bits and pieces of him here and there when youtube recommends him to me, and I mostly disagree with some of his instances on China, from the little I seen he's mostly pro China, but I have seen some iffy stuff on his knowledge about the Uyghurs. I also don't think his format of reaction/commentary to be that great either, specially since he likes to leave mid video a lot while it is still playing for his audience. I think his content could benefit a lot more if he actually paused on key points of the videos he reacts to to explain, debunk and or give context to the stuff said while also giving his opinion and stance on that as a Marxist. If you want an example of what that would be like, the brasilian youtuber João Carvalho I mentioned before does this, a lot, like to the point of even being a bit tiring sometimes, lol, but makes the content usually pretty transformative instead of just content theft.
  That being said, Hasan is a very important figure in radicalizing and propagandizing for the left in the english speaking internet since he's at the top of the left pipeline on youtube at least. I recommend this video by Yugopnik to learn more about this.
  
  Thank you for your reply.

Big yikes

Vaush's whole thing is controversy bait. He purposely crosses lines to get people mad at him while maintaining some form of "plausible deniability" to where his fans can always find a way to defend and excuse his actions by talking about "you don't understand the context" or whatever, it's a very common and tiresome tactic. Like, if you're trying to promote a shitty video game that can't stand on it's own merits, just do something to antagonize either the left or the right (doesn't matter which) and then go to the other group and be like, "Look, the guys you hate hate us, you should check us out." Controversy generates clicks. A big reason for Trump's success is that he cracked the code on how to apply this formula to a political campaign. If you know how to recognize it, it's very obvious that Vaush does this.

This sort of opportunism is very detrimental to actually understanding the world or promoting ideas or building a movement. It's essentially brain-poisoning and a cognitohazard. You're much better off reading actual books than just following whoever's best at attracting attention on the internet. If you are going to shun books for videos, you should at least go with someone more educational, like Shaun.

I don't know where you are getting the idea that he purposefully generates controversies. He lost subs during most of his controversies, not gained. And it has down stream negative impacts on his channel other than just sub count.
He is just very careless.
- No way it's just carelessness, nobody forces him to say edgy shit. It's the classic "no such thing as bad publicity," or, "but you have heard of me" thing. I'd have never heard of him without the controversies (of which there are many), and despite making a conscious effort to avoid him, even I've seen clips of him. When you get people talking about something, people will get curious and want to see it straight from the horses mouth, then some percentage of the people who show up "to get the full story" will like what they see and stick around, and even if they don't, a hate click is still "engagement," it doesn't matter why you click, if you click, it boosts him in the algorithm.
  Going into examples will naturally only play into this effect, but I recall him once talking about performing eugenics to eradicate trans people from existence, under the idea of detecting gender dysphoria in the womb and aborting the fetus. This is an example of walking right up to the line and getting people mad on purpose, that's not something someone just "organically" says out of "carelessness," it's specifically formulated to generate outrage, while, as always, leaving him an out that he can fall back on.
  
  There is 100% such a thing as bad publicity. Your post here is a literal example of this, you actively avoid him and there are many people who feel the same way as you.
  Hes not forced to say edgy shit, he just doesn't put much effort into not saying edgy shit and he naturally wants to. He doesn't police his own words, for instance, his frequent use of the word "removed" and his joking about hating women. He also constantly blurts out shit and then his audience points out he misspoke and he gets annoyed and says "You fucks know what I meant". He has no anxiety or shame about his wording of things. There is no worry on his end about saying something shameful, he's literally said that he thinks shame is a worthless emotion.
  He doesn't "mask" essentially. He is not careful. Maybe to some degree that helps his internet career because of reputation of authenticity or something but it also frequently pisses off his own audience. The controversies have lost him subs, they've severely damaged his ability to engage with other creators because he has either alienated or outright insulted them, which means he doesn't debate anyone anymore, left or right.
  Its not on purpose. Hes not playing 12D chess to boost his youtube career. He wouldn't be a leftwing creator in that case, he'd be a rightwing grifter instead. A lot more money in that.
  
  Your post here is a literal example of this, you actively avoid him and there are many people who feel the same way as you.
  And yet, I've given him clicks. And I'm talking about him. That's what he wants, that's why he does what he does. Were it not for the controversies, I wouldn't watch him either because I wouldn't have heard of him, and also because I'm not his target audience.
  Hopefully my criticism calls out the pattern directly enough that people take away that they should just ignore him, as opposed to playing into his specific controversies that are calculated to make use of criticism and outrage.
  Hes not forced to say edgy shit, he just doesn’t put much effort into not saying edgy shit and he naturally wants to.
  All I can see is that I see a pretty clear method to the madness. There's always an out, it's always "you don't understand the context." It's the same tactic Trump uses, and the same tactic used in countless ad campaigns. I can't really prove it because it's just a matter of pattern recognition, but suffice to say, I don't fuck with what he does. Even if your interpretation were correct, associating with someone so careless about messaging and so prone to controversies is more of a liability to the left than an asset. But also, your interpretation is not correct.
  The first time I see someone holding a bloody knife over a dead body, I might be willing to listen to their explanation and their side of the story. The 17th time I see the same person in the same situation, something's going on. How many times am I expected to give him the benefit of the doubt? Because whatever that number is, he's exceeded it, because he's doing this constantly, and you can pretend that it isn't a clear pattern of behavior all you want, but I'm not going to.
  He wouldn’t be a leftwing creator in that case, he’d be a rightwing grifter instead. A lot more money in that.
  No, there's lot's of little niches that one can carve out, regardless of being left or right. There's plenty of opportunists with supposedly left-leaning brands. The right-wing grifts and personality cults are more profitable, but it's also a fairly saturated market with a lot of competition. There's plenty of room for people like Destiny, Jimmy Dore, and Vaush to carve out their respective "left-leaning" niches.
  Also, btw, I have never heard about any actual insight that watching Vaush gives. His content isn't educational or edifying, the way someone like Shaun's is. It's all about aesthetics and personality. The best thing anyone can really claim about Vaush is that criticism towards him is invalid, or that he makes people they don't like mad, nobody actually seems to learn anything from watching him.
  
  And yet, I’ve given him clicks.
  I thought you said you only watched clips of him? I assumed you meant by other creators.
  All I can see is that I see a pretty clear method to the madness. There’s always an out, it’s always “you don’t understand the context.” It’s the same tactic Trump uses, and the same tactic used in countless ad campaigns.
  Trump supporters don't actually care about context though. They say that shit for propaganda purposes. Vaush supporters bring up context because he literally gets clipped out of context for oppositional propaganda purposes.
  Also, there isn't always an "out". Some of the things Vaush has said/done are bad even with context. Like when he told his followers to go harass Contrapoints on Twitter once because he was upset with her and wanted to "Force her to see reason" or whatever. When he was unnecessarily nasty to TJ Kirk during some debate. Or when he flashed on screen AI generated and drawn porn of a canonically 16 year old character and bestiality.
  There are a few other things I'm probably forgetting.
  No, there’s lot’s of little niches that one can carve out, regardless of being left or right. There’s plenty of opportunists with supposedly left-leaning brands. The right-wing grifts and personality cults are more profitable, but it’s also a fairly saturated market with a lot of competition. There’s plenty of room for people like Destiny, Jimmy Dore, and Vaush to carve out their respective “left-leaning” niches.
  Jimmy Dore is 100% vapid grift. Destiny is a terrible human being but he is also almost certainly not a grifter. He says what he means and means what he says.
  Vaush is someone who is significantly egotistical, narcissistic, impulsive, and short sighted. But he is not a controversy-monger, on that front he is just a dumbass.
  
  I thought you said you only watched clips of him? I assumed you meant by other creators.
  No, I have seen videos he himself put out to see the full context.
  Trump supporters don’t actually care about context though. They say that shit for propaganda purposes. Vaush supporters bring up context because he literally gets clipped out of context for oppositional propaganda purposes.
  Also, there isn’t always an “out”. Some of the things Vaush has said/done are bad even with context.
  Trump has also had controversies where he's crossed a line, like the "Access Holywood" leak that ones one of the very few times Trump actually issued an apology. He still survived it, just like Vaush still has a following despite some instances that were either genuine mistakes or miscalculations. If you live right up by the line, occasionally you are going to cross it.
  If I point out Trump's failure to denounce the KKK, for example, his supporters will point out that he claimed there was a technical issue and later did denounce them. Likewise, if I point out some shitty thing Vaush said, they'll pull out some similar excuse or context. There's no reason to assume good faith in one case and bad faith in the other. Perhaps some Trump voters wouldn't care if he didn't have an excuse (though some might), and perhaps some Vaushites wouldn't care if he didn't have an excuse (though some might). It's the same tactic, the same formula, the same kind of calculations and the same psychology. Just as Trump supporters will make fun of critics for "Trump Derangement Syndrome" (which is caused by his controversy bait), so too do Vaushites have "Vaush Derangement Syndrome" (caused by his controversy bait).
  Vaush is someone who is significantly egotistical, narcissistic, impulsive, and short sighted. But he is not a controversy-monger, on that front he is just a dumbass.
  In any case, he is 100% not worth watching and is best completely ignored. He contributes nothing but controversy and brainworms, whether unintentionally as you claim, or intentionally as is actually correct.
I do get that vibe from Vaush occasionally. Unfortunately the attention economy is a real thing and I would be impressed with anyone with the same reach as Vaush wouldn't be doing similar things. I am not sure I would be as far left as I am without his content.
- Doesn't Hasan have a larger audience without doing that sort of thing?
  
  Hasan has drama/beef with H3H3 & Lonerbox.
  
  I don't know what it's about or who those people are really. Aren't they Zionists?
  
  No. Or at least I know Lonerbox isn't.
  
  H3H3 is a Zionist who defended his wife's IDF membership, who volunteered for raids to "break up the monotony."
  
  No idea, I have only watch him one or two times. Seemed good to me.
  
  A big difference between Hasan and Vaush is that Hasan generally wastes very little of his time with sectarian nonsense or left-punching, while Vaush makes that one of his core focuses. Hasan networks with the Deprogram crew, Chapo, and other more Marxist aligned groups without screaming about "tankies," while Vaush leans heavily into that.
  Hasan is also generally much better with foreign policy, even though I don't always agree.
  The biggest thing is that Hasan serves as a great gateway to Leftist radicalization, while Vaush ends up preventing further Leftist movement, kinda like a more Libertarian Socialist-coded Destiny.
  My fiancé and I will still watch Hasan even when we may disagree with him on some issues because he is generally entertaining and generally more correct than not, but would never watch Vaush.
  
  Hasan avoids arguing with leftists because hes a cowardly clout monger and can't debate for shit because he isn't really that smart and is captured to some degree by his audience.
  I don't hate Hasan, I do agree with a lot of his takes but hes fundamentally a less ideologically honest person than Vaush. Vaush doesn't give much of a shit about pissing off his audience, he does it constantly.
  
  Hasan isn't the most well-read, but he also isn't a debate-bro either. Vaush constantly trying to debate people online isn't being "ideologically honest," it's bloodsport for clout, ironically enough.
  Both serve as content creators that live through having enough "clout" to continue existing, but as influences on the Western Left Vaush does more harm than he does good, while Hasan does more good than he does harm. At the end of the day, shutting up when you don't have a clear and thorough understanding of a problem is a skill, and it's one Hasan tends to have more than Vaush.
  Neither are good for theory, for that it's far better to engage with the reading yourself.
  
  Vaush doesn't debate other creators anymore. His controversies have accumulated to a point where he is essentially walled off from that for various reasons. Too many creator's alienated and controversies fueling rhetorical weaknesses.
  I'm not talking about debate really though. What I mean about his ideological honesty is that he is willing to anger his own audience, Hasan is very careful not to do that.
  
  I'll repeat, shutting up when you don’t have a clear and thorough understanding of a problem is a skill, and it’s one Hasan tends to have more than Vaush.

Choosing not to read theory is choosing to always be ignorant.

Why? Information is information. Why does it matter if it comes from books or videos?
- Firstly, “Results from the study confirmed the substantial equivalence of all conditions in immediate comprehension. Conversely, results confirmed the disadvantage of subtitled videos for deep learning outcomes.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360131520302323
  Secondly, there are no videos ever made that explain the depth and volume that many books do. They simply don’t exist
  Thirdly, you can easily refer back to other areas of books that are more difficult in videos.
  Fourthly, you can read sentence over again when you don’t understand but you have to stop to rewind which makes it more difficult to place in context.
  Fifthly, videos just don’t exist for this. There are no videos that exist that explain things in the structured format that actual theory provides.
  You cannot become educated on this matter with videos and it will just leave you over-confident and ignorant
  
  Be that as it may, the left is not going to do well if the prerequisite to having discussions is to read a bunch of literature. I think we need to find a way to make our tent bigger.

Instead of sending you to the Vaush Gulag I'm going to instead reccomend that you try audiobooks. There are many on youtube, but that is not the only place you can find audiobooks of Marxist theory. Let's just say Marxists are real keen on making sure these texts are readily accessible. While a lot of theory is old, not all of it is, but you'll be lost in newer theory if you don't know the basics.

I highly recommend "Black Shirts and Reds" by Parenti for newbies to Marxism. I also recommend "Socialism Scientific and Utopian" by Engels, "Reform and Revolution" by Luxembourg. All of these can easily be found as both pdf and audiobook, and are short, and easily digestible by lay people.

All 3, including audiobook links, are on my list in the parent comment for this thread! Great suggestions, too.

For all the people talking about Vaush and Hasan and their controversies, realize that there are other folks out there where you can learn about theory without the Twitch brainrot. The Revolutionary Left podcast is my personal favorite.

Or even better, reading books. With respect to a small minority, podcasts are not a great source to learn about anything.
- Absolutely, but many people do not have the time luxury to read dense theory books, and (good) podcasts can at least get people acquainted with the ideas.
  Also, (and I’m putting words in your mouth, so sorry for that) I think it’s a fallacy to say that every comrade must be a theory scholar. Certainly our leaders and organizers should be, but I think it’s fine if people don’t have the academic inclination and want to contribute in other ways.

Lmfao