Steven Crowder BTFO'ed by National Socialist Yusef

Asking the real questions

Crowder is a brainlet, everyone knows that.

No.

That autistic fuck also said raising the min wage to $15 would stop mass immigration. So I'm sorry if I doubt anything he says has any merit or value to it.

I stopped watching his video(and any video of him ever probably) at the moment he couldn't handle getting slapped by over and over again and ended the debate.

I don't think anyone intellectual would take him seriously after this fuck up.

the kid's argument wasn't perfect, but it was better than the garbage and disrespect Crowder was spewing

>calling someone out for calling you autistic and a shill during a discussion is bad behavior.
i dont know if you have been outside your hugbox before but calling people autistic shills isnt acceptable debating tactics so yusef was the one in the wrong. its the same when chunk ogre calls conservatives these smear names and it discredits his argument.

What bothers me is his whole "Oooh I'm so open minded, I'm willing to have my mind changed" bullshit. He clearly doesn't give a shit about having an honest conversation, he just wants to win arguments. Nothing wrong with that, but be honest at least.

yeah that was retarded. spics would just work under the table, it wouldnt stop them coming. if hes natsoc hes doing it wrong. in a white ethnostate a minmum wage is not needed.

minimum wage laws are just bandaids and symptoms of the real problem, which is usury and kike meddling in the govt.

he hasnt had any convincing arguments that would contradict his beliefs yet. being open minded doesnt mean changing your beliefs every time you hear a different opinion. and why is it not honest if you dont change your mind to your opponents position after the argument.

oh my god whys he getting so mad at being called an autistic shill
does crowder have ptsd from posting on Jow Forums
he gets so emotional LOL

Attached: 1231231231211.jpg (258x245, 12K)

If he wanted his mind changed, he wouldn't have used bullshit tactics like switching subjects and interrupting. It was clear that he couldn't handle Yusef's arguments, but he couldn't admit it.

Now, I don't like how Crowder suddenly couldn't take a joke, we toss that around a lot here, or I know I do.

Yusef's argument is still shit. He's trying to argue that these millionaire and billionaire dense countries, more than the USA, are somehow socialist. Having social programs and being socialist aren't mutually inclusive.

Or how poverty is only a result of inequality and socialism cures that, because it doesn't... Unless being equally poor with the bureaucratic elites living the good life.

>he hasnt had any convincing arguments that would contradict his beliefs yet.

but thats the point of this whole schtick, he thinks he has every counter argument for leftist ideas covered that he should never lose (in his mind). hes made a dangerous mistake in assuming his worldview is correct. this is why he got mad, because he embarassed himself.

hes not arguing for The Truth, hes arguing for what the mob believes the truth to be.

>I don't have an argument so I'll attack your language
Yusef's argument wasn't reliant on calling Crowder's argument autistic. It was just a word he happened to use when describing a larger flaw in Crowder's argument. Instead of responding to Yusef's point, Crowder went on a tangent and shamed Yusef for his language in front of a live audience. But, yeah, totally, Yusef is the one in the wrong...

>its the same when chunk ogre calls conservatives these smear names and it discredits his argument
when did that ever discredit his argument
his arguments discredit his arguments
i guess unfortunately jewish histrionics regarding semantics and feelings is the normal conversation in america now rather than arguing about ideas

Mr, Mickey Dee has done a LOT of research to support his claims which are EASILY debunked by remedial science.
It's astonishing that this guy could hold a position at a university.

steven is such a faggot
>hurr durr amy schumer is fat and stupid

>hurr did you just fkn call me autistic youre a dickhead

why are jews like this

his argument was that it is morally reprehensible to steal from people to prevent violence, to which yusef responds there will be other forms of violence that come if we dont have government violence (in the context of taxation). he then goes on to not prove its morally sound to be violent or that its moral to tax and instead calls libertarians autistic, completely avoiding the question of if it is moral or not. necessary evil is still evil so crowder was right and the autistic thing was just a bad excuse for not being able to justify violence being moral. heres what crowder does after that. he says define autistic, because otherwise how could crowder prove to him that what he said was incorrect.
it discredits his arguments because he shifts from the debate to "my opponent is bad therefore he cant be right". this isnt a good argument because it avoids the original point and turns the debate into ur bad no ur bad no ur bad instead of responding to the other persons point.

the difference is his amy is fat segments arent civil discussions and he isnt misusing the definition of autism to insult people which yusef admits to doing.

>only one microphone
>Steven can speak in paragraphs but the kid can't
>Steven says autistic is on par with being called retarded and no one calls him out on that

jesus.

how many of your women were used as toilets by slavs today?

the European countries mentioned have mixed economies. There are certain aspects of these countries that could be considered "socialist". Socialism doesn't "cure" inequality, but it can close the gap by giving everyone access to health care, education, etc. Obviously it would not work in a multicultural country like the US where there are population groups with inferior intelligence. I agree, Yusef's argument was thin in a few places, but you have to consider that he wasn't given barely any time to speak, and Crowder quickly derailed the conversation when he got triggered.

Though, my biggest gripe with the video was actually the premise of the debate. "Socialism is inherently evil" is just stupid, and not a valuable thing to debate.

yelling =/= itellect

Well, everyone can tell he is not interested in getting his ideas changed, rather trying to find some retards that are not able to create any logical sentences. But showing his real intention was really amateur action for him. He is just conservative of Cenk Uygur, as much as he hates him, he is just a republican version of him.

libertarians are autistic though
so yusef isnt miss using the definition
and when crowder and amy were on a news report together he was shaming her live of tv and thats suppose to be okay but yusef calling him autistic is bad?

pls stop sucking crowder's dick

The premise wasn't meant to be an actual "change my mind" it's supposed to be a rally for people that already believe. His intention is to show that the people that make fun of you for your ideas aren't actually prepared to defend their own.

Not really defending his actions, but I'm sure this is his intention.

There seems be an actual link between autism and libertarianism.

reason.com/blog/2011/07/20/being-libertarian-may-cause-au

I remember JBP saying something about libertarians being less socially connected too.

>i'm never wrong the web series
crowders such a faggot

Being autistic > living in sweden

Attached: 1522496976714.png (500x461, 46K)

He's right you know.

Joke's on you. I'm an autist living in Sweden.

Nat soc isn't immoral cause you involuntarily pay to keep niggers away from your family, why couldn't someone just say that.

You could have just said you're living in sweden Sven.

Holy shit it's Pewdiepie.

>His intention is to show that the people that make fun of you for your ideas aren't actually prepared to defend their own.
And when Crowder found someone who had a decent defense of his ideas, he had to shut it down before he got completely destroyed. I get that Crowder is good normie bait, but he's a brainlet and his arguments frustrate me

Nat soc is perfectly fine if a large number of your populace is for it. It's the transformation that the violence happens.

He doesn't live in Sweden anymore

100% agree with you. I don't actually think Yusef was nearly as articulate as the rest of this thread seems to think, but to impress me Crowder would really need to debate with an actual moderator present that could keep him from pulling his mic away when he was losing.

greg gutfelds segment was a comedy segment, not a civil discussion segment.
but its so yummy and big, i cant stop putting it in my mouth!

his whole thing is about how socialism is immoral because it's theft, how is letting people starve or niggers not immoral.

Crowder is an absolute faggot

Attached: goyim_serve2.jpg (1000x624, 721K)

Easy. Is it immoral that you don't give homeless people the shirt off of your back?

No. It's not.

I´m pretty sure 90% of this board is autistic.

But yeah I think Crowders debates aren´t that good because he would never back down. Always the same retardet questions like "muh theft is murder, taxes are assault BUT TAXES FOR POLICE AND ARMY ARE TOTALLY DIFFERENT".Minarchists shouldn´t make the argument that taxation is theft, it´s an ancap argument. They should just point out it isn´t the governments job to redistribute wealth .

White autismostate when?

Attached: personal space.jpg (480x427, 48K)

Urban whites in cold climates are similarly autistic. I moved to an urban center from the American south and god damn I thought everyone hated me (they probably did because I liked to talk) but I'm used to just thinking of them as autistic.

is it moral to have your town filled with homeless people? No. Would the whole of the community benefit to a solution of that problem that has involuntary participation, that is less drastic as giving the shirt of your back? Yes.

Is it immoral for a society that is able to collectively come together and create a social safety net for the disenfranchised to choose not to?

A small payment to keep people from suffering. Basic human decency.

desu in white countries that arent kiked this could easily be voluntary.

>is it moral to have your town filled with homeless people?

It's neither moral or immoral. It just is.

>Would the whole of the community benefit to a solution of that problem that has involuntary participation?

No, because you'd need to ask them each individually if they want this outcome.

You're confused about the different between utilitarianism and kantian philosophy.

A lot of Americans seem to think Swedes are rude. I don't think we're rude, we just don't like to talk that much.

>Is it immoral for a society that is able to collectively come together and create a social safety net for the disenfranchised to choose not to?

> able

What does ability have to do with morality?

Again, like the other guy, you need to read about the difference between utilitarian and kantian philosophy.

He got BTFO-ed hard by everyone on that episode, it was embarassing to watch him REPEATEDLY bring up "SOME GUY CALLED ME AUTISTIC WHAT A DICK."
When he randomly drops "say it like you HAVE SOME BALLS" and then keeps mentioning that the guy doesn't have balls... This is modern day conservatism?

Crowder has said:
-He could take on the entire US military with a shotgun in his bathroom (treasonous, and he wasn't "joking around" at all)
-Believes HIV/AIDS was not that big of a deal and a lie made up by liberals
-Fired his original producer FunDipDan for saying Bailey Jay and trans women "can be hot."
-Constantly whines about YouTube and Twitter.
-Lied about being "banned' on Twitter (he was suspended. Then we he used his 'dogs' acount he sperged out hardcore about twitter 'banning a dog')
-Was banned from FOX News for shit talking Sean Hannity and other conservative radio hosts
-Is a hardcore evangelist: Does prayers before every show and will freak out if you ask him specific beliefs... Protip: You're going to hell and he isn't.
-Said "nigger" on stage before introducing comedian Earthquake, which pretty much banned him from most comedy clubs. He lost his agent because of this (the "punchline": French rap is so racist, because they can say NIGGER NIGGER NIGGER)
-Lost so badly to DL Hughley in a debate (one of his first episodes that he has removed from youtube) he literally cut his mic and then "debated" his ideas without Hughley getting to speak
-Paid for by Mercer family and Americans for Prosperity most of his adult life.
-Refuses to give interviews to any non-vetted interviewer because he got owned at an event by some random libertarian.
-Isn't funny in the slightest: Literally cringe comedy, adderall snorting and bullying his 'staff.'

Depends on where you're from. In the American south you say "you're welcome" when someone says "thank you" and "Good morning!" and yeah, you're expected to say it, but you also enjoy it because you enjoy hearing it from other people. It just creates a nice atmosphere. In the American North a "thank you" might bet met with "mmhmm" or "ok". They don't mean anything about it. They're not mad at you, they just don't care about you.

>No, because you'd need to ask them each individually if they want this outcome.
no one would want to pay but everyone would want the rewards, that's why you have to force everybody to participate. Homelessness creates and is a symptom of an immoral society and the stuff that comes with it.

so are you immoral because thousands of people died today when you had food? ofcourse not. you arent accountable for human race and you are not accountable for those people, they have autonomy. there would be literally no moral people by your standards.
its cool if you want to give them a shirt voluntarily. but when you legislate that people should be taken to jail and become felons for not joining you in your extremely stupid and unhelpful expensive programs such as giving away shirts to the homeless, then its immoral. government officials telling you give away this money or else you will have a criminal record and lose your job doesnt make your giving away money moral because it isnt voluntary. you arent a bastion of morality because you fork over money to the guys who hold the handcuffs and mallet.

if those people were my neighbors dying outside my house yes it would be pretty immoral not to share the large amounts of food i have. Was that a real question?

Oh yeah, I like being courteous and saying the standard phrases. But it would never occur to me to make small talk to the cashier, I just have no interest in talking to strangers.

Crowder is a total cunt.

Got triggered by the word autism

Controlled the only mic the whole time yet still managed to get utterly btfo

its not moral to force people to give their money to you with the threat of law. if i came to you and asked you for 2000 dollars to feed my household and you said no, then i pull out a weapon and tell you that im gonna arrest you unless you give out that money, are you now making a moral decision or are you making a decision based on my threat of arresting you?
how does it change if they are neighbors or if they are across the state or even across the world? your proximity doesnt make a difference. any money you could give to your community you could also give to unicef for global projects or the irs for federal programs. you arent immoral for having resources. once again you arent responsible for the people outside of your house, you didnt do anything to cause their suffering so why would you be accountable to their condition? sure it feels good to donate to people, i pay 20 bucks to the nice man with the offering bag every sunday at church, but it wouldnt be moral to put people in jail for not donating that 20 bucks during church service.

Yeah, the way he talks to his staff is kind of uncomfortable to watch. Then I wonder how he talks to people behind the scenes. He seems really full of himself and overly sure of his abilities.

>whats the difference between people you see everyday, raise your kids around, and socialize with vs someone on the other side of the planet

He was given almost 20 min to speak. That's pretty good time. Yes, they have a mixed economy and so do we. They have more social programs and higher effective tax rates to match. Most people can agree these programs are alright at least until people start choosing to live off it. Going any farther than that and getting too close to socialism is going to start fucking shit up. A couple extra programs are necessary for large societies like education and some health programs because society like ours needs educated healthy people to keep society going.

Would you prefer "socialism doesn't work"? Or rather than calling it "change my mind" or "let's debate"? If anything it just shows how other people are so unprepared to defend their points. That's what we've seen in previous non Livestream shows.

What does familiarity have to do with morality? Do you even hear yourself right now?

because as humans we depend on a strong community to be succesful, the morality comes from doing whats best for a bright future for your children.

Fucking sucks because that was actually an interesting debate I wanted to see keep going. Wish the guy didn't let the anonymous message board banter language slip out because it provided Crowder with an eject button.

Attached: 1483064890967.gif (492x376, 339K)

This one?

youtu.be/g3nNaP3Pky0

Not talking much and standing like you've got a 10 foot force field around you are in two, entirely different leagues of autism.

>have
it's "has"

I wouldn't doubt if he's one of us. We're defending him like he is.

because ability creates a choice. If you aren't able to then you aren't able to, there's no decision to be made there.
yeah, it really depends on the racial make-up of the country
>wahhh I don't want to give up a few shekels to help my fellow countrymen.

his argument was that inequality results in the upper class meddling in your political system to meet their own interests at the expense of your society

AAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Crowder got so eternally BTFO there. He should never hear the end of it

He goes to these campuses because he's looking for idiots

The ultimate low hanging fruit merchant

when the majority of that 20 minutes was just Crowder "talking in paragraphs", no it was not enough time. 20 minutes is not enough time to convince someone that a certain economic system works, period.

Yes, I would prefer "socialism doesn't work" because it avoids opportunity for moral grandstanding and debates the practicality of a system.

so would mass murdering people that werent part of your community for a large sum of money that would allow you to make housing and public transportation avalible to your community and your kids be moral. its the best thing for your children and after all who cares about people in another country that you didnt grow up with and see every day? was the displacement and massive death count of native americans moral? because by your standards it was completely moral for the settlers or start a war with the natives.
a few shekels would be fine but in california most people living in the bay area get 40-50 cents on the dollar spending power due to all the taxes such as state tax luxury and sales taxes on stuff like gas and groceries and the absurd property taxes. so its a bit more than a few shekels for the fellow countrymen

You're not an atomized individual that only engages with others based on consent and contracts. If you truly lived on your own, you would die in the wilderness extremely quickly. You are a pack animal and you can only survive in the pack. And in your hypothetical scenario the state could instead of shooting or arresting you, kick you out of the pack which means cutting your police protection, prohibiting you to use the roads, cut your water and electricity and not treating you at state hospitals - or even just kicking you out of the country entirely - and it would be perfectly "moral", because you were only given access to these things voluntarily by the state in the first place.

And that is only to indulge in your autistic argument based on imaginary "morals". In a pragmatic sense groups are stronger than individualists and have no reason to tolerate people who weaken the group and will punish you in whatever way is best fit to keep the group cohesive.

Screenshot from previous thread. I'm still trying to figure this one out... Anyone care to delve more into this idea that NatSoc = True Conservatism?

Attached: Screen Shot 2018-04-02 at 9.00.05 PM.png (1156x290, 159K)

>california
>fellow countrymen
the problem is that cali is full of spics.

Doesn’t look like she’s doing much reading herself

Exactly how did Crowder get BTFO? Under socialism they pretend to work while the government pretends to pay you.

What I don't understand is how ANYONE could claim he's "normally good/funny."

He has been a dick to every single staff member since day 1. He's paying them to laugh at his "jokes," and you can tell in every episode he loathes them. He always tries to save face afterwards, but there's a number of times where they realize he's actually being a dick and push back.

It's fitting: He's so torn up about being a bully and getting made fun of for not being able to defend his conservatism, and now he's a huge bully. A bully that is making decent money from Gen-Z's who want to see "the SJWs get recked"

>so would mass murdering people that werent part of your community for a large sum of money that would allow you to make housing and public transportation avalible to your community and your kids be moral. its the best thing for your children and after all who cares about people in another country that you didnt grow up with and see every day?
If you start mass-murdering people, other people are going to see it and become afraid of you and maybe even gang up on you to remove the threat. North Korea and Nazi Germany are excellent examples for why your logic isn't sound. But yes, if you are in a position where you have almost the entire world under your heel like the US you can go kill as many people overseas to protect your economic and military interests as you want and nobody does anything about it.

18 yr olds and their supporters would think Steve o won. they're idiots.

No all my non cucksercative bros in here,
How awesome is it to see these boomer tier cuckservatives getting btfo in arguments lately? From Sargoy getting his ass kicked by Spencer, to RC "based nigger" getting rekt by Nick Fuentes and cantwell, to civcucks and lolbergtarians like Tokes, Halsey and Kokesh (who are all Jews) getting their asses handed to them.

It's been fun to watch

Attached: 0C65E310-BED9-4657-9FE6-AED8AD28FF6F-2130-0000056972E31765.png (693x983, 432K)

yeah i agree groups are stronger thats why i love supporting my community voluntarily by donating to my church and taking missions trips in the state. but if i were forced by the church to give the 200 times the amount to people then it wouldnt be a donation and it would be immoral of my church. even agreeing that some level of taxation is necessary to have common goods it would still be immoral because they are stealing my money. its especially bad when those funds go towards mayoral reelection campaigns or towards tuition and student resources for undocumented immigrants. and please explain how being kicked out of a country is the same thing as becoming a felon, having that money taken from you that you didnt pay and losing 5 years of your life in federal prison. you stealing money from me to buy me shit i dont want and keeping the rest of the money is just as bad as california collecting their state tax to give me public services i dont want and would have never payed for as a voluntary service. "you give me your money and in return i wont take that money from you with state law enforcement and send you to jail. hey as a bonus ill give you some public school funding that wont benefit you personally in any way since you dont use our shitty california public school system!" man im so grateful to daddy state for such a fair consensual contract!

so its moral for america to kill people overseas because other countries dont stop america? what nazi germany did wasnt immoral just because the allies beat them in ww2. it would have been reprehensible no matter what any other countries did. so no nazi germany and north korea aren't excellent examples of anything.

I still can't understand his position of why "socialism is evil". I thought he would want to argue along the lines of taxation being theft but the kid pressed him on that and he wasn't able to argue effectively that police, army the roads etc are any different than redistribution of healthcare for example. If you want to say that socialism is evil, you either go full libertarian or you will just be inconsistent. Much easier to argue that capitalism doesn't work for example.

Fuck off Mohammad