Crowder owned by Yusef The Nat Soc

>Yusef

Is he a Ba'athist?

It was ad hominem, Yusif lost the debate. Crowder went too far and should had dropped the autism bit.

Hey buy my pamplet for 6$.
Whats a shills?
A faghole like Crowder that had to kick yusef off the debate since he needs to plug his bullshit narrative and sell paper bullshit.
Frisking wont stop someone from knocking that faggots teeth out on air.
Crowder lost and proved he is a shill.

Thats like arab-jewish name right?
I'd like to hear him talk some more that guy has potential

Who is this kid? He seems high IQ

The whole thing was at an ECON-101 level.
Crowder sees he is losing an argument and his only argumentation is to enlarge the ad-hominem and the wording of Yusef.

Yusef is /ourguy/ confirmed

it's not an ad hominem
he called the libertarian argument autistic, not crowder himself

Quick Rundown on Yusef's argument?

Attached: Hitler Tuxedo and Top Hat.jpg (690x1600, 80K)

The point is that he got stuck in the wording to avoid the real critique and his tautological reasoning.

It seemed like the argument was just warming up desu. Crowder got so visibly irritated though, he wasn't prepared. The thing about a minimum wage over there is that cash in hand payments to illegals would still continue, cause people wouldn't want to pay more to hire people for all those menial jobs they do. isn't it a large portion of mexicans that are illegal and do those jobs?

crowder is such a huge faggot every time he triggers the sjw cunts with saying words that triggers them and says that pc culture is cancer

then he proceeds to get triggered by a fucking word which wasn't even aimed at him

>> the absolute state of crowder fan cucks

basicly that the so called '' conservatives '' aren't real conservatives and are a problem because they ( the rich ) benefit from illegal immigration because they can keep hiring people below the minimum wage and exploit them

breddy gud

wrong. he was going into why it was informally autistic (right after he says that it's easy to argue from syllogisms and axioms) but then crowder interrupted him to ask whether he thinks it's actually autistic to do so.

yusif is /ourguy/

yusif you absolute madman if you read this know that we got your back

you know what was also so fucking annoying? crowder asking him to define '' shill '' and autistic ''
like wtf why does that even fucking matter

we gotta spam his video with comments about him being a cuck

wait. who are you talking about getting stuck? if crowder, then yeah, you are correct. if yusuf, then no.

I'm not Yusuf, but I do approve.

Use your big boy words.

Attached: What is Fascism.png (886x1322, 125K)

Attached: Fascism.png (1487x711, 94K)

Attached: Welfare Destroys.png (952x778, 67K)

Attached: Unbridled Capitalism.jpg (1807x933, 902K)

Attached: NatSoc.jpg (1024x878, 196K)

Thank you user.

Attached: 1505740680350.jpg (188x250, 10K)

yeah it's a very transparent tactic that he used after he realized yusuf was much smarter than he was used to. he was also attempting to dominate him through body language (moving in closer, waving his hands, staring him down and then telling him to look him in the eyes), controlling the mic, constantly interrupting, claiming that he likes to sound intelligent and talks in paragraphs (he also did this against joe rogan during his blow-up on joe rogan), changing goalposts, constantly looking to support from the audience (heh heh, t-tim cook and apple iphone is so shit! heh heh!!) and then finally thanking yusuf for his time because he knew he was done.

it is extremely pathetic.

when you wear a "socialism is for fags" shirt, you relinquish all rights to get triggered after someone says "autistic" or "shill."

i have always thought crowder was dumb and thought he might not be trustworthy, but found some of his bits entertaining so i watched him from time to time. i found it a bit unsettling how he treated his staff but hadn't seen anything too damning so i continued.

now, after having watched this interview and the one of him crying like a bitch on joe rogan, i can finally drop him and not feel the least bit bad about it.

Crowder.

Crowder was only looking to avoid the arguments the kid was making, he had no counter so he becomes defensive and aggressive, constantly interrupting the kid as well, kid makes a good point that without taxation violence will be inevitable because of inequality which is correct, crowder could not even address it, crowder says theft is theft, yet not when for police or military, how convenient for him. i mean there was some serious aspects could have been debated and crowder could only spin, straw-man, avoid and ignore, even threaten to kick the kid off which he did anyways, calls the kid rude instead of addressing his points which he can barely make without having the mic taken away, fucking pathetic display by crowder, he looked like PC Principal.

But is annoying how Crowder feels the son of Friedman just because he knows some buzzwords that he thinks that make him look smarter, but the moment someone else can play on that field he feels threatened.

>Yusif lost the debate.
I watched it and I fucking hate commies and socialists and I still think Yusuf won. Not because he's right about socialism, but just because Crowder attempted to dominate the conversation with his body language and behavior rather than his words.

Any time Yusuf brought up something he couldn't counterpoint effectively, he switched to an entirely different topic to avoid admitting that he was wrong on a point or needed time to consider a response.

So even though I think Yusuf was wrong in areas, he quite clearly won the debate between the two of them.

There are hardly any genuine Conservatives in the USA.
Most mainstream figures who are labelled "Conservative" in America are actually Neo-Liberals who are more influenced by Milton Friedman than Edmund Burke.

Conservatism is almost entirely a Western European phenomenon (especially British).

Prove me wrong. Pro-tip: you can't.

>( the rich ) benefit from illegal immigration because they can keep hiring people below the minimum wage and exploit them

This is just wild speculation. The rich have no problem opening a factory in a shithole country if they needed cheap unqualified labor, and locally the rich pay in general way better wages than the not so rich.

>kid makes a good point that without taxation violence will be inevitable because of inequality which is correct

So taxation is good because if you don't give money to Tyrone he will kill you?

The epitome of cuckoldry right there. Violence is rampant even though we're paying 50% of our income, so tell us, how much we have to pay to actually feel safe? 70%?

Is Crowder unironically autistic? That was pretty fucking autistic.

>So taxation is good because if you don't give money to Tyrone he will kill you?
>The epitome of cuckoldry right there. Violence is rampant even though we're paying 50% of our income, so tell us, how much we have to pay to actually feel safe? 70%?

The whole point of living in a society is to avoid the violence that comes with the natural state.
If your system of morality inevitably results in the destruction of society, then your system of morality is just wrong.

>So taxation is good because if you don't give money to Tyrone he will kill you?
Taxation is one of the basis for equality of opportunity. If Tyrone gives up his chance to succeed, taxes will pay for the police force that will arrest him and the judicial system that will lock him up or execute him.

It's okay that socialism leads to the collapse of a rich society as long as you can temporarily have gibs for everyone.

YUSEF KILLS THE CROWDER

WHO THE FUCK CARES ABOUT CROWDER?!
He is just an average neocon. Is looking bad in one debate against a suposed natsoc worth 15 threads a day about him? Stop giving him so much attention.

Attached: fucking hell.gif (250x250, 1.16M)

>The whole point of living in a society is to avoid the violence that comes with the natural state.

I have a fundamental issue with the notion that you have to give money to savages just so you can keep the peace, firstly, because it works for a time, until it doesn't. Secondly, I'd prefer giving it to someone less savage but better equipped to make sure I don't have to worry about the other savages. Thirdly, because by paying savages you encourage savagery.

In order to guarantee a society is kept civil you don't need to give away the massive masses of money you're giving away in taxes, less than a 1% of your income would be enough. There's absolutely no justification for current taxes if your only argument is keeping people safe from savages.

>WHO THE FUCK CARES ABOUT CROWDER?!
1.7mm of his followers do

GUYS
GUYS
IF WE KEEP MAKING A THREAD ABOUT THIS
MAYBE WE CAN GET PEOPLE TO BELIEVE A NAT-SOC WON AT SOMETHING

>t.stormfag

Natsocs are literally autistic.
They are incapable of letting things go, so its best to just ignore them

Cuckservative tears are best tears

>I have a fundamental issue with the notion that you have to give money to savages just so you can keep the peace, firstly, because it works for a time, until it doesn't.

The faulty premise is that the people you're giving money to are somehow more savage than you are. Any human will turn to violence if there is no other hope of their survival. Humans are animals that have evolved to survive.

I agree we should get rid of blacks (a race which is more savage than the white race)... but even assuming racial homogeneity, there needs to be some system in society that prevents a critical percentage of the population from falling into absolute poverty.... otherwise the society will be unstable. Ideally these systems will take effect BEFORE the people resort to savagery... and that way would not encourage savagery as you suggest.

For this purpose, some socialism is acceptable IMO.

The real reason we have immigration is debt. The average person is between 40 and 70k in debt. They can’t take anymore because they can’t meet interest payments if they do. They’re debt saturated. These people can’t drive the economy because they can barely spend any money. What do immigrants not have? Debt. What can you do when an immigrant comes into the country?
You give him loans, goyim. Lots of loans with interest rates he’s too stupid to understand, which he has to pay off. And for each of these immigrants who takes a loan to buy a car, a TV, or a new pair of shoes, you can just magic money out of thin air, straight into your own pocket. And you can count both the loan itself and the items the immigrant buys in your GDP calculations so it makes it look like your GDP is growing.
But this pyramid scheme only works so long as you have a steady inflow of people without debt. Once you slow the immigration down or stop it, the economy slides into recession.
That is all the reason why there is rampant immigration.
Sweden is bringing in more immigrants because they are having growing economic problems, and they are having growing economic problems because they are bringing in more immigrants. There was a point somewhere along the line before this immigration mess, where someone said “But immigration won’t solve this fundamental issue with our banking and economic systems, we’d have to completely change how our economy works” and they were ignored, laughed at, or if they had enough influence to actually change it- killed.
The people benefiting from this don’t care. They don’t care that they will single handedly ruin the nations they’re doing this to. They don’t care that they are destroying entire cultures and the achievements of a race over the past 1000 years.
They’ll destroy it all, all of society for a lifetime of personal hedonism and debauchery, funded on the suffering of billions.

Yusuf stop making these threads you weirdo you came off as weird and autistic yourself

Crowder committed ad hominem multiple times in that debate

yusef is not white. that's an arab name

I wouldn't say I won the debate because I wasn't even given a chance to. I'm open to having another discussion with Steven over skype if he's game.

Once crowder became a passive aggressive faggot and started knocking the dude for speaking intelligently he knew he lost.

faggot

Attached: 1519799483243.jpg (896x6361, 1.07M)

Timestamp proof or gtfo

Attached: Happening.jpg (1440x1074, 854K)

Is every Giuseppe not white either?

Remind me again, what did they say to each other? Thanks guys

Attached: yusuf crowder.jpg (800x468, 176K)

Attached: Obligatory.png (800x468, 101K)

Kek!

Holy shit, this has potential

Crowder is dumb. He may me a good entertainer, but he has literally 90 IQ

Attached: xPrFjCg.jpg (1920x1080, 569K)

>He may me a good entertainer, but he has literally 90 IQ
Naw he's smarter than that. You don't give him enough credit. He plays his game quite well.

Attached: REEEEEE.jpg (800x468, 74K)

>The faulty premise is that the people you're giving money to are somehow more savage than you are.

Oh they certainly are. That premise is not faulty at all, if my threshold of snapping into a violent monkey is higher than yours, then you're more of a savage than me,

>there needs to be some system in society that prevents a critical percentage of the population from falling into absolute poverty

Yeah, it's called jobs. And do you know what hurts jobs? Taxes and regulations do. So if your solution to the problem of absolute poverty passes by increasing taxes, thus reducing jobs, then all you're doing is perpetuating poverty.

Besides you should know perfectly well that these systems are inferior to decentralized charity. Firstly because these systems tend to support indiscriminately, thus not tracking progress, improvement, etc, allowing for people to abuse the system and also allowing for people to do everything possible to be despised by most members of society. Charity should be conditional, you wouldn't give money to your drug addict son unless he started going to rehab.

Secondly, because there's a perverse incentive in the fact that dependent individuals can vote what to do with other people's wallets. If you make something mandatory and expose it to democracy, there's absolutely no way it won't grow with time, and at some point someone will realize that having poor people makes him more powerful than not having them.

Holy shit.

That Yusef guy... totally owned Crowder.

And Crowder got triggered by him using the word "autistic"... Crowder was losing the argument and got insecure. He showed everyone that.

smart kid, finally an interesting conversation on a change my mind stream

>That premise is not faulty at all, if my threshold of snapping into a violent monkey is higher than yours, then you're more of a savage than me,
No, you have the same quantity of monkeyness. The idea that you are not a monkey is just a fantasy that you wish were true. Certainly not an idea that we should design a society around.
.
>So if your solution to the problem of absolute poverty passes by increasing taxes, thus reducing jobs, then all you're doing is perpetuating poverty.

That doesn't necessarily follow... and I don't think it's true in reality. You may decrease the number of jobs slightly, but I think you will decrease the number of starving people more.
Maybe it is inferior to charity, but in absence of charity, I think it's necessary.

>Secondly, because there's a perverse incentive in the fact that dependent individuals can vote what to do with other people's wallets.
I agree with this. If the government is democratic, there needs to be constitutional provisions that prevents this from happening. This is the most dangerous aspect about democratic systems in general.

>Yeah, it's called jobs
and what happens when there are no more jobs

Crowder literally wears a shirt saying "SOCIALISM IS FOR FAGS", but gets triggered by Yusef using the word "autistic".

I am autistic myself and think Yusef's use of the word made sense.

Attached: Changing_stephens_mind.jpg (800x468, 89K)

FURTHERMORE

Crowder criticizes the guy for talking in longer paragraphs...

LIKE YOU DO YOU FUCKING DOLT. I MEAN AUTIST.

Oh God Stephen you sound so fucking small it's insane.

I'd say he's 120-130. Probably 120. The only logical coclusion of the "goverments providing law and security is socialism" is to either go nat-soc or ancap. That's literally why Jow Forums is so full of ancaps and nat-socs.
I am a libert/aryan/ myself.

Attached: Freedom to do right.png (1562x674, 444K)

crowder didn't address a single thing yusef brought up. he kept pulling back to things yusef said earlier, asking him to define things that didn't need to be defined, cutting him off when he tried to define something, complaining about him 'talking in paragraphs' like that effects the quality of his argument, and derailing the conversation by saying yusef wasn't addressing him personally and speaking too broadly to the audience. All while crowder speaks broadly to the audience repeatedly because he's both the moderator and debtor.

crowder needs a fucking moderator

CROWDER GETTING LITERALLY MAD AT "SHILL"...

FUCK YOU CROWDER.

>debtor
debater

That's what an autistic shill does.

I am a fucking ancap and I literally agreed more with Yosef. I fucking hate people who lean center.

Nice link, you meme flag fcking faggot

Crowder's whole argument is that socialism is inherently evil but yet he support the military

yuself argument is that socialism is not inherently evil and it can be used to improve quality of life, making the point that socialism is morally justifiable and that everybody agrees with some form of socialism but disagrees at what level of it.

am I correct?

From an ancap point of view, Yosef won. You're correct.
Goverment is a tool, it can be used for "good" or "evil" but that's the point. Goverments have been used for "evil" much more often. Constantly degrading our culture, tradition, giving the economic system to jewish interests.

It's arab, jewish variations of this name are Yossef, Yossi, or just Josef

>fascism means bundle of sticks
mfw fascism litterally means faggot

Attached: 1310562868468.jpg (600x800, 58K)

...You are exactly right.

Crowder BTFO'd by a fucking kid, then tries to focus attention to banter words used by same kid because he lost the debate.

Attached: laughing-bishops.jpg (380x274, 31K)

Not a single timestamp in the entire thread.

Are any of you people real or am I talking to fucking bots again?

Attached: 237w56p8.jpg (866x600, 187K)

Attached: steven crowder sad.jpg (800x468, 73K)

>unhinged autist
This Crowder is of the annoying types of pseudo-Chads which are basically dumb brainlets but were allowed to talk nonsense their whole life.
They unironically believe they are clever.

Attached: sub125law.png (165x186, 51K)

wtf? is the real Yusef posting here?

Attached: seen some shit.jpg (452x548, 18K)

Larp more faggot

Rousseau, on of the biggest theorizers on the natural state philosophy, said wealth inequality would undermine a republic. Under a landed aristocracy, they or the king in effect are over the law and so to an extent are immune to the power of money, but in a republic extreme wealth inequality upsets the social fabric, as there is no real security against their power to supercede the law. If we listened to Gottfried Feder, we could have socialism and almost zero taxes. Socialism has nothing to do with taxes, only the Jew'd Socialism that, just like other capitalist states, get on their knees to blow loan interest capital and the usurious leviathan.

nope that's an aussie

nice larp
pics with timestamp or gtfo