Is that debate between EMJ and Vaush worth watching? I'm kind of interested but it's also a pretty big time sink to watch the entire thing.
My thoughts on the EMJ vs. Vaush debate.
If you don’t want to waste your time watching you can waste your time reading my rant instead
This was similar to his debate with Styxx on the same subject. It wasn't really a good debate insofar as theatrics or entertainment are concerned: EMJ proceeds honestly, while his opponents are flippantly dismissive, arrogant, crude and intentionally amorphous. This debate lacks the coherent punch of a “Ben Shapiro dEsTRoYs!!” video, and that is perhaps because EMJ is not really aggressive with his tactics nor is he acting for a camera. Logos is always central, which is good. But this affords less honest opponents the illusion of scoring points or gaining ground, especially to the average or secular viewer.
A quick observation on personality types and how this factors in here:
I might get some flack for using astrology as an example (I understand astrology is not permitted or recognized by the church, though I believe that has more to do with consulting oracles/mediums and attempting to predict/cheat one’s destiny or manipulate the world through unholy means at the expense of belief in our God-given free will and salvation through the church...as such things relate to Kabbalah, occultism, Freemasonry, etc. as a portal to the demonic). But what about as a mere observation of personality patterns? If it is understood and accepted that we all have a given nature – some bull headed, some meek, and so on -- I don’t see how such an observation or insight would be incongruent with natural law. No different from noticing cultural or ethnic patterns. It doesn’t mean those patterns are absolute, but it can aid our understanding of ourselves to the end of better serving God. Perhaps a topic for another thread.
The reason for this angle is that I’ve noticed a similarity with the style and behaviour of both Vaush & Styxx, and this is congruent with the negative traits of all the other Aquarians I’ve known personally. While Styxx isn’t quite as cringe, he has a similar attitude – rude, arrogant, rebellious, disagreeable for the sake of being disagreeable, contrarian, and basically acts like a Jew (embodiment of that revolutionary spirit).
The Aquarius is said to be the ‘visionary’ of the zodiac, and so are particularly inclined to revolutionary and non-conformist ideas. They favor futuristic and wishy-washy mumbo-jumbo over what’s tried and true, and tend to view history as boring and no longer relevant. Example at 51:45 – “reality has moved forward, it’s the future, old man...sorry”). They embody the stereotypical bleeding heart granola yoga liberal who drives a hybrid to save the whales, or the more hardcore anarchist/SJW. They are the type to say the classic cringe line “I’m kind of spiritual but not religious.“ They thumb their nose at tradition and strongly dislike control or authority of any kind. They recoil in horror at the mere thought of an objective reality or imposed order. They tend to be somewhat androgynous in appearance (which contributes to their dislike of binary categories and their natural attraction to more alternative forms of expression). They seem to enjoy the odor of their own **** so much that everything around them just ends up smelling. So it would follow with regards to pornography that they are
particularly sensitive to what they perceive to be an attack on their absolute and total freedom to do as they please.
Just some insight to frame the opponent and therefore add more context to the debate.
Vaush is the reddit fedora neckbeard atheist caricature par excellence when he continually asks to “sEe ThE eViDeNCe” after EMJ provides consistent examples and makes extremely cogent points. As someone who defends pornography and pedophilia, Vaush is already lost right out of the gate and is blind to this reality.
As my man Chesterton says: “The special mark of the modern world is not that it is skeptical, but that it is dogmatic without knowing it. It says, in mockery of old devotees, that they believed without knowing why they believed. But the moderns believe without knowing what they believe - and without even knowing that they do believe it.”
It’s clear Vaush has no interest in learning anything from the discussion, but is instead focused on fighting a representative of the OpPrEsSiVe pATriArChY. His analogies are absurd and not relevant to the topic. His desperate and pathetic slur of "anti-semitism" exposes both his frustration and his true intentions.