Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

The problem with this challenge is the people who assert that all art is political mean "I can interpret this as political if I use a definition of 'political' that's so broad as to be meaningless." I could draw a black dot on a paper and they would say... it's about the plight of being a minority in a white world or something. The intention of the artist doesn't matter because they can make up whatever political interpretation they want, thus it becomes "political". It's like asking someone to guess what number you're thinking of, and then just saying you were thinking of a different number even if they guess right. It's disingenuous. Here's a video where I make fun of this sort of thing by "analyzing" the "deeper meaning" of a Filthy Frank video in a pseudo-profound tone. I made it in 2017. It's hardly even an exaggeration. In fact, there were people who thought I was being serious at the time.show more

Possum Reviews

105,748 subscribers

13,502 görüntüleme • 5 gün önce •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

19 Yorum

FortheEmporor profil fotoğrafı

FortheEmporor5 gün önce

I will die on the hill that the intention of the artist is more important than the opinion of the viewer. Just because you can see what you feel relates to you in the art, doesn't mean it was the intended meaning of the art.

Reddit Lies profil fotoğrafı

Reddit Lies4 gün önce

You can just tell they absolutely LOVED writing those "explain why the drapes are blue" essays from English class

Kamen Rider Zi-Onist profil fotoğrafı

Kamen Rider Zi-Onist5 gün önce

I like how you pick up this example even tho there is another one you already made. Really putting in the effort. But these ppl are not worth the effort

Hoppou Mechanicus profil fotoğrafı

Hoppou Mechanicus5 gün önce

At some point you realize the bitches going around pointing out "political" part intentional or not by the artist are unironically a bunch of privileged smart-ass who think they know shit, who can never just shut their brain off and stare at rainbow without being PCorrectness

EF Comix profil fotoğrafı

EF Comix5 gün önce

Still trying to figure out the politics of this one

Elvick profil fotoğrafı

Elvick4 gün önce

It's not even just that, they'll just say "the motivation behind you making that cheeseburger was political" because you made the image to show it's not political, therefore making it political. Which is retarded, they're just stupid.

LimeWolfSandwich🌠 profil fotoğrafı

LimeWolfSandwich🌠5 gün önce

Anyone can wear tinted glasses, doesn't mean the world is tinted. Same with viewing the world through political lenses

MESG profil fotoğrafı

MESG5 gün önce

Then the exact same people will dismiss "woke" interpretations of artistic decisions like race-swapping as "it's not that deep" or retroactively distance themselves from cringe political interpretations of media as "it's so long ago"

Becky 🇨🇦 profil fotoğrafı

Becky 🇨🇦5 gün önce

The real thing is that "all art is human" meaning that all art is made by humans and about how humans experience the world. People are confused and think this means "all art is political"

Dylan Antill 🇺🇸 profil fotoğrafı

Dylan Antill 🇺🇸5 gün önce

I miss Filthyfrank.

𝑫𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒌🌹 profil fotoğrafı

𝑫𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒌🌹5 gün önce

Even if one was to grant that the word political is this broad, whatever people are referring to is still real. There's objectively a distinction between literal propaganda, media with a specific message and media made with the sole purpose of making you laugh

Precise Calibre profil fotoğrafı

Precise Calibre4 gün önce

And people wonder why certain individuals become pedantic when they notice the meaning of words slipping over the years.

morganimal profil fotoğrafı

morganimal4 gün önce

Yes.

Slyck profil fotoğrafı

Slyck4 gün önce

My favorite quote on this is from The Act Man “Is all art political? No. Art is what you make of it”. There’s also a difference between politics IN art vs politics AROUND art that people prefer to mix together. Tetris itself isn’t political, but its creation in the USSR could be

Aporian profil fotoğrafı

Aporian5 gün önce

You could have just said the curtains were blue lol

Captain profil fotoğrafı

Captain4 gün önce

This reminds me of that robot that was made to suck up its own leaking fluid and everyone thought it was about the mundane nature of having to work a job. But then the artist came out and said “no, it’s about immigration”.

Ryan profil fotoğrafı

Ryan4 gün önce

Holy fucking shit this brings back memories

Benicooling profil fotoğrafı

Benicooling5 gün önce

Black dot on paper clearly represents the black minority surrounded and suppressed by an ocean of whiteness

wildfire top guy profil fotoğrafı

wildfire top guy5 gün önce

"All art is political" is just a way for them to justify whatever retarded shit they are going to say.

Benzer Videolar

The Circle (2000, Panahi)/ Iran "Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date." --- Jafar Panahi Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: The subject matter of 'The Circle' (2000) is controversial. You mentioned that the film is still banned in Iran. In fact, when I was watching the film, I realized that through the characters, there’s a lot of fear about the system, the establishment, the police. The women can’t smoke; they have to wear the chador; they seem to want to hide every time. This is all very clear from watching the film. Did you deliberately want to make a statement about the political situation in Iran? Panahi: I have to tell you again that I’m not a political person. I don’t like political movies. But I take every opportunity to comment on the social issues. I talk about the current issues. To me it’s not important what is the reason for what has happened. Whether it’s political reasons or geographical reasons: these are not important—but the condition, the social issues. It is important to me to talk about the plight of humanity at that time. I don’t want to give a political view, or start a political war. I think that the artist should rise above this. Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date. So it doesn’t really serve a political purpose. Then it can be everlasting, for always, and it could be for anywhere. But I know that politically, with the film authorities, with any kind of film that has some political background in it, they would take issue with it. And for this reason, that is what the problem is. Interviewer: Still, your film makes a very strong statement about the problems that women face in Iran. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. Interviewer: So that is humanitarian, of course, but it’s also political. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. It has the elements. It all depends on how you look at it. If a person has only political views, then he will only see the political. But if you are a poet or an artist, then you see other things as well in the movie. If you are a socialist, you see political or economic or whatever different points of view. You mustn’t look at a film with only one point of view. If you want to see 'The Circle' (2000) as political, then it is one of the most political movies in Iran. By political, I mean partisan politics. But even the police, I didn’t want to show them as bad. In the first instance, you are afraid of the police. Because you are looking at them from the point of view of someone who is now in prison. And normally you see him in a long shot, but when they come nearer and you see them in a medium shot, you can see their human faces. Then it comes down to, “Do you need any help?” But he goes back again and becomes frightening. If I were being political, then I would always show the police as dangerous or bad persons." (Jafar Panahi's interview with Stephen Teo, Senses of Cinema, 2001)

The Circle (2000, Panahi)/ Iran "Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date." --- Jafar Panahi Full Excerpt: "Interviewer: The subject matter of 'The Circle' (2000) is controversial. You mentioned that the film is still banned in Iran. In fact, when I was watching the film, I realized that through the characters, there’s a lot of fear about the system, the establishment, the police. The women can’t smoke; they have to wear the chador; they seem to want to hide every time. This is all very clear from watching the film. Did you deliberately want to make a statement about the political situation in Iran? Panahi: I have to tell you again that I’m not a political person. I don’t like political movies. But I take every opportunity to comment on the social issues. I talk about the current issues. To me it’s not important what is the reason for what has happened. Whether it’s political reasons or geographical reasons: these are not important—but the condition, the social issues. It is important to me to talk about the plight of humanity at that time. I don’t want to give a political view, or start a political war. I think that the artist should rise above this. Political movies have limited time. After that time, it doesn’t say anything anymore. But if the whole thing is said in an artistic way, then it doesn’t have an expiration date. So it doesn’t really serve a political purpose. Then it can be everlasting, for always, and it could be for anywhere. But I know that politically, with the film authorities, with any kind of film that has some political background in it, they would take issue with it. And for this reason, that is what the problem is. Interviewer: Still, your film makes a very strong statement about the problems that women face in Iran. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. Interviewer: So that is humanitarian, of course, but it’s also political. Panahi: Yes, I agree with that. It has the elements. It all depends on how you look at it. If a person has only political views, then he will only see the political. But if you are a poet or an artist, then you see other things as well in the movie. If you are a socialist, you see political or economic or whatever different points of view. You mustn’t look at a film with only one point of view. If you want to see 'The Circle' (2000) as political, then it is one of the most political movies in Iran. By political, I mean partisan politics. But even the police, I didn’t want to show them as bad. In the first instance, you are afraid of the police. Because you are looking at them from the point of view of someone who is now in prison. And normally you see him in a long shot, but when they come nearer and you see them in a medium shot, you can see their human faces. Then it comes down to, “Do you need any help?” But he goes back again and becomes frightening. If I were being political, then I would always show the police as dangerous or bad persons." (Jafar Panahi's interview with Stephen Teo, Senses of Cinema, 2001)

DepressedBergman

43,871 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

“Bridgerton: Benedict and Sophie speak about romance rumours in real life” Luke: I think people can think and say what they like. […] I think it's a reflection of the show. I think that's all it is. I think the interest only comes from the fact that you're being presented with an illusion, which is Benedict and Sophie. And so you want to sort of, I don't know, like it's lovely in a way, it's sort of wish fulfillment” +

“Bridgerton: Benedict and Sophie speak about romance rumours in real life” Luke: I think people can think and say what they like. […] I think it's a reflection of the show. I think that's all it is. I think the interest only comes from the fact that you're being presented with an illusion, which is Benedict and Sophie. And so you want to sort of, I don't know, like it's lovely in a way, it's sort of wish fulfillment” +

malu saw riize! benophie promoter🪁

142,722 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

When they were asked about "rumors" 👀 Luke: People can think and say what they like, (...) I think it's a reflection of the show, I think that's all it is. It's lovely in a way, they want it to be real..

When they were asked about "rumors" 👀 Luke: People can think and say what they like, (...) I think it's a reflection of the show, I think that's all it is. It's lovely in a way, they want it to be real..

eri 🪁

46,946 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Robert Pattinson on his experience producing Primetime: "It was great. I mean, I'm still not entirely sure what producing is other than being like, 'I'm just trying to be involved in everything even if they don't want me to be.' I think it was one of the most inspiring things I've done, starting the company, mainly because you can just approach anyone in the industry in a totally different way. If you're an actor, it's very strange to call up an editor and say, 'Can we do a meeting about something, just because I like your work?' There's nothing to say, whereas if you're meeting someone as a producer, you can meet anybody you want and just kind of start this new network of people. Now I just have a completely different relationship with the industry as a whole, which is great for me. It feels like you've always got something to do, whereas if you're just acting, you just keep calling up your agent. A lot of people, even on this, we cast them through Instagram. We cast just random people who I thought were funny, then you can just message people and just be like, 'Do you want to be involved in this thing?' It's so satisfying."

Robert Pattinson on his experience producing Primetime: "It was great. I mean, I'm still not entirely sure what producing is other than being like, 'I'm just trying to be involved in everything even if they don't want me to be.' I think it was one of the most inspiring things I've done, starting the company, mainly because you can just approach anyone in the industry in a totally different way. If you're an actor, it's very strange to call up an editor and say, 'Can we do a meeting about something, just because I like your work?' There's nothing to say, whereas if you're meeting someone as a producer, you can meet anybody you want and just kind of start this new network of people. Now I just have a completely different relationship with the industry as a whole, which is great for me. It feels like you've always got something to do, whereas if you're just acting, you just keep calling up your agent. A lot of people, even on this, we cast them through Instagram. We cast just random people who I thought were funny, then you can just message people and just be like, 'Do you want to be involved in this thing?' It's so satisfying."

Robert Pattinson Photos | Fansite

29,401 görüntüleme • 2 gün önce

Sam Altman: “Concentration of power with AI is a terrifying thing.” "A lot of the talk about safety concerns is well-founded, and then a lot of it is about people that just really, even if it's slightly subconscious, wanna concentrate power. I don't think anyone should want to live in a world of AI overlords, where someone is making decisions for all of the future, and in exchange for a cure for cancer, which obviously is a wonderful thing, we collectively cede all agency. I am terrified of a world where the very real fears of AI are used as a way to say, “Only this small group of people can have it because it's too dangerous, and only they understand it. But don't worry, they're gonna make the right decisions for all of us.” I was a child of the internet. There were no rules. It was amazing, and I think it's critical we preserve that spirit with AI."

Sam Altman: “Concentration of power with AI is a terrifying thing.” "A lot of the talk about safety concerns is well-founded, and then a lot of it is about people that just really, even if it's slightly subconscious, wanna concentrate power. I don't think anyone should want to live in a world of AI overlords, where someone is making decisions for all of the future, and in exchange for a cure for cancer, which obviously is a wonderful thing, we collectively cede all agency. I am terrified of a world where the very real fears of AI are used as a way to say, “Only this small group of people can have it because it's too dangerous, and only they understand it. But don't worry, they're gonna make the right decisions for all of us.” I was a child of the internet. There were no rules. It was amazing, and I think it's critical we preserve that spirit with AI."

Patrick OShaughnessy

67,444 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Elon Musk Exposes the "Corporate Terrorists" Controlling Half of Wall Street's Voting Rights Elon Musk: “I do think we've got a fundamental issue with corporate governance in publicly traded companies, where you've got about half of the stock market controlled by passive index funds, and most of them outsource their decision to advisory firms, particularly Glass Lewis and ISS.” “I call them corporate ISIS. They’re just terrorists.” “Glass Lewis and ISS control the vote of half the stock market.” “They own no stock in any of these companies.” “Now, if you're a political activist, you know what a great place would be to go work? ISS and Glass Lewis. And they do.” “You know where political activists go? They go where the power is.” “I think that this is a fundamental breakdown of fiduciary responsibility here.” “You know, the Tesla thing is, it's called sort of compensation, but really it's not about compensation.” “It’s not like I'm gonna go out and buy, you know, a yacht with it or something.” “It's just that if I'm going to build up Optimus and have all these robots out there, I need to make sure we do not have a Terminator scenario, and I can maximize the safety of the robots.” “I feel like I need to have something like a 25% vote, which is enough of a vote to have a strong influence, but not so much of a vote that I can't be fired if I go insane.” “But my concern would be creating this army of robots and then being fired for political reasons because ISS and Glass Lewis fire me effectively, even though I've done everything right.” @jason: “If you don't get that vote, if it doesn't go your way, it looks like it's going to, would you leave?” “I mean, is that even in the cards? I heard the board was very concerned about that.” Elon: “Let's just say I'm not going to build a robot army if I can be easily kicked out by activist investors.”

Elon Musk Exposes the "Corporate Terrorists" Controlling Half of Wall Street's Voting Rights Elon Musk: “I do think we've got a fundamental issue with corporate governance in publicly traded companies, where you've got about half of the stock market controlled by passive index funds, and most of them outsource their decision to advisory firms, particularly Glass Lewis and ISS.” “I call them corporate ISIS. They’re just terrorists.” “Glass Lewis and ISS control the vote of half the stock market.” “They own no stock in any of these companies.” “Now, if you're a political activist, you know what a great place would be to go work? ISS and Glass Lewis. And they do.” “You know where political activists go? They go where the power is.” “I think that this is a fundamental breakdown of fiduciary responsibility here.” “You know, the Tesla thing is, it's called sort of compensation, but really it's not about compensation.” “It’s not like I'm gonna go out and buy, you know, a yacht with it or something.” “It's just that if I'm going to build up Optimus and have all these robots out there, I need to make sure we do not have a Terminator scenario, and I can maximize the safety of the robots.” “I feel like I need to have something like a 25% vote, which is enough of a vote to have a strong influence, but not so much of a vote that I can't be fired if I go insane.” “But my concern would be creating this army of robots and then being fired for political reasons because ISS and Glass Lewis fire me effectively, even though I've done everything right.” @jason: “If you don't get that vote, if it doesn't go your way, it looks like it's going to, would you leave?” “I mean, is that even in the cards? I heard the board was very concerned about that.” Elon: “Let's just say I'm not going to build a robot army if I can be easily kicked out by activist investors.”

The All-In Podcast

91,349 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

Joe Rogan: "Joining a political party or being in a political party like ideologically in your head is not good for you. There are a lot of things that people who are on the right that I agree with and there's a lot of things that people on the left believe and I agree with. I refuse to be a part of this left versus right thing."

Joe Rogan: "Joining a political party or being in a political party like ideologically in your head is not good for you. There are a lot of things that people who are on the right that I agree with and there's a lot of things that people on the left believe and I agree with. I refuse to be a part of this left versus right thing."

Joe Rogan Podcast News

44,890 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Rick Rubin tells Andrew Huberman how he deals with creative or writer’s block. He treats his work like a diary entry (and doesn’t worry about internal or external judgment): ➡️ “What's the cause of the block? The block is usually something that's either personal ("I'm not good enough") or it can be a confidence issue ("I don't have anything to say") or it could be...thinking about someone else ("nobody's going to like what I make"). Do you know what I'm saying? So, it's either fear of self-judgment or external judgment. If you're making something with a freedom of "this is something I'm making for myself for now", that is all [you have to do]. It is a diary entry. Everything I make is a diary entry. The beauty of a diary entry is that I can write my diary entry and you can't tell me that my diary entry wasn't good enough. Or that [the diary entry] is not what I experienced. Of course it's what I experienced: I'm writing a personal diary for myself and no one else can judge if it is my experience of my life. Everything we make can be that: a personal reflection of who we are in that moment of time. It doesn't have to be the greatest you could ever do. It doesn't have to have any expectation that it's going to change the world. It doesn't have to sell a certain number of copies for any reason. It doesn't have any of those things at all. It is "I'm making this thing for me and I want to do it to the best of my ability and to where I feel good about it". [The work] is honest of where I'm at and if you're living in this world of just being honest to where you're at, there's nothing blocking you. There are no blocks. The blocks are all based on dealing with a different force or a different perception that is made up.” ⬅️

Rick Rubin tells Andrew Huberman how he deals with creative or writer’s block. He treats his work like a diary entry (and doesn’t worry about internal or external judgment): ➡️ “What's the cause of the block? The block is usually something that's either personal ("I'm not good enough") or it can be a confidence issue ("I don't have anything to say") or it could be...thinking about someone else ("nobody's going to like what I make"). Do you know what I'm saying? So, it's either fear of self-judgment or external judgment. If you're making something with a freedom of "this is something I'm making for myself for now", that is all [you have to do]. It is a diary entry. Everything I make is a diary entry. The beauty of a diary entry is that I can write my diary entry and you can't tell me that my diary entry wasn't good enough. Or that [the diary entry] is not what I experienced. Of course it's what I experienced: I'm writing a personal diary for myself and no one else can judge if it is my experience of my life. Everything we make can be that: a personal reflection of who we are in that moment of time. It doesn't have to be the greatest you could ever do. It doesn't have to have any expectation that it's going to change the world. It doesn't have to sell a certain number of copies for any reason. It doesn't have any of those things at all. It is "I'm making this thing for me and I want to do it to the best of my ability and to where I feel good about it". [The work] is honest of where I'm at and if you're living in this world of just being honest to where you're at, there's nothing blocking you. There are no blocks. The blocks are all based on dealing with a different force or a different perception that is made up.” ⬅️

Trung Phan

1,652,308 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

"Courage is far shorter in supply than genius." - Peter Thiel "One of the challenges in writing a book about entrepreneurship or teaching a class on this is that there is sort of no formula. And I think science always starts with a number two. It starts with experiments you can repeat, things you can do over and over again. But there's sort of a sense in which every moment in the history of business, every moment in the history of technology happens only once. The next Mark Zuckerberg will not be starting a social networking company. The next Larry Page will not start a search engine. The next Bill Gates will not be starting an operating system. And so if you are trying to copy these people, you're in some sense not learning from them. And so I think one of the really big challenges in teaching or writing about entrepreneurship is what can you say about being an entrepreneur at all when the key thing is always to do something new, different, that's not precisely been done before. And so the point of departure I start with in Zero to One is a somewhat indirect approach by asking a series of contrarian questions. The business question is, what great company is nobody starting? The more intellectual version of this question is, tell me something true that very few people agree with you on. And this is a fantastic interview question. It turns out to be quite a hard question, even when people can read on the internet that you ask of everybody who comes in the door, it still is a hard question. It's one of those unusual questions where if you know it's on the test, it's still hard. And it's hard not just because we sort of think that new things require brilliance or something like that, but because it's socially difficult. If I ask you that question, if you tell me something like the education system is screwed up or our political system doesn't work very well, those are true answers, but they're not actually good answers because all of us already know them to be true. The good answers are ones that are somehow uncomfortable that the person interviewing you does not actually want to hear. And I think we live in this world where courage is in far shorter supply than genius. And so it is sort of this, it is in a sense this problem of political correctness properly understood, is this very deep, very, very broad sort of a problem."

"Courage is far shorter in supply than genius." - Peter Thiel "One of the challenges in writing a book about entrepreneurship or teaching a class on this is that there is sort of no formula. And I think science always starts with a number two. It starts with experiments you can repeat, things you can do over and over again. But there's sort of a sense in which every moment in the history of business, every moment in the history of technology happens only once. The next Mark Zuckerberg will not be starting a social networking company. The next Larry Page will not start a search engine. The next Bill Gates will not be starting an operating system. And so if you are trying to copy these people, you're in some sense not learning from them. And so I think one of the really big challenges in teaching or writing about entrepreneurship is what can you say about being an entrepreneur at all when the key thing is always to do something new, different, that's not precisely been done before. And so the point of departure I start with in Zero to One is a somewhat indirect approach by asking a series of contrarian questions. The business question is, what great company is nobody starting? The more intellectual version of this question is, tell me something true that very few people agree with you on. And this is a fantastic interview question. It turns out to be quite a hard question, even when people can read on the internet that you ask of everybody who comes in the door, it still is a hard question. It's one of those unusual questions where if you know it's on the test, it's still hard. And it's hard not just because we sort of think that new things require brilliance or something like that, but because it's socially difficult. If I ask you that question, if you tell me something like the education system is screwed up or our political system doesn't work very well, those are true answers, but they're not actually good answers because all of us already know them to be true. The good answers are ones that are somehow uncomfortable that the person interviewing you does not actually want to hear. And I think we live in this world where courage is in far shorter supply than genius. And so it is sort of this, it is in a sense this problem of political correctness properly understood, is this very deep, very, very broad sort of a problem."

Founder Mode

12,339 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

Erik Torenberg on the information problem in Silicon Valley: many of the people you want to meet also want to meet you, but neither of you know it. "One of the best events I ever went to was this SV Angel conference in 2018. Before I went, they had this list of 150 people that they sent out... and they said, 'Swipe who you want to meet, who you want an intro to.' If they swiped right on me, we would get an automatic intro." "I ended up meeting with most of those people. That event provided the context for us to become friends and collaborators. There are so many people in the world who we want to meet who also want to meet us. It's just an information problem." "What [Cosign has] enabled is this private signal. It's more granular. It's not just, 'I want to meet them.' It's also, 'I would fund them if they start a company,' or, 'I would hire them if they consider leaving.'" "There's some cost in sending a DM. You might feel rejected, or it takes time, or whatever it is. This is passive. If they also express interest, then it's an introduction with high intent. I think that can unlock a lot of good stuff." Erik Torenberg Cosign

Erik Torenberg on the information problem in Silicon Valley: many of the people you want to meet also want to meet you, but neither of you know it. "One of the best events I ever went to was this SV Angel conference in 2018. Before I went, they had this list of 150 people that they sent out... and they said, 'Swipe who you want to meet, who you want an intro to.' If they swiped right on me, we would get an automatic intro." "I ended up meeting with most of those people. That event provided the context for us to become friends and collaborators. There are so many people in the world who we want to meet who also want to meet us. It's just an information problem." "What [Cosign has] enabled is this private signal. It's more granular. It's not just, 'I want to meet them.' It's also, 'I would fund them if they start a company,' or, 'I would hire them if they consider leaving.'" "There's some cost in sending a DM. You might feel rejected, or it takes time, or whatever it is. This is passive. If they also express interest, then it's an introduction with high intent. I think that can unlock a lot of good stuff." Erik Torenberg Cosign

a16z

34,763 görüntüleme • 5 gün önce

Retired pharma R&D executive says "the whole idea of vaccination and public health was always [about] eugenics"🩸💉 "it was always the mechanism the government... [used] to keep the population under control" "it's... especially [about] access to each and every body with injections, with needles. That's what they're always after" sashalatypova.substack.com "Due Diligence and Art" Andrew Kaufman MD ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- Latypova: "As I've been saying for a long time, this whole idea of vaccination, public health, was always eugenics idea. It was always the mechanism that the government, early on, the monarchy or some other type of government figured out that this is a great method to keep the population under control. "And they were pretty explicit about this in many, many documents, more contemporary documents as population control policies, population control strategies." Kaufman: "Well we even have vaccines that are used as birth control, right? They've been studied in, in, in clinical trials that are published." Latypova: "Oh yeah, I'm just— I'm going to publish about that. I found one paper that's, of course, in French, it's not in English, so I auto translated it, and it's very explicit. We are developing contraceptive vaccines for the developing countries for the purposes of population control. It's very explicit—" Kaufman: "I have a study published in English, very similar. It was done in Africa. I can get you a copy of that if you like...." Latypova: "So, the governments together with these 'scientists,' you know, I can't call them scientists, they are profiteers, off of this idea, like Koch, like Pasteur, Mechnikov, there was a bunch of Russian ones. So they started the whole idea of hunting viruses became very lucrative because if you could isolate and find something or virus or bacteria or some bacilli, like the Koch, then you could become rich and famous because you could be awarded big commissions from the government, given lots of power, and labs and staff." "And, of course, you can then patent your inventions and sell them in terms of rabies shots or tuberculin or things like that. There were attempts at vaccines for diphtheria, vaccines for plague, cholera, none of them worked, they all failed." Kaufman: "And they were, they were experimenting with different technologies at that time as well, right? Because I believe the diphtheria immunization was made from horse serum. Right? Rather than, you know, something in a culture or, or from a, from an animal lesion. So, sort of closer to what might be called today monoclonal antibody technology." Latypova: "Yes... it's very similar the monoclonal that they use horses for, commonly. That was how it originated. "Also, they experimented with injecting all sorts of things. So, for example, foot and mouth disease also at the same time was being claimed to be viral. And they would invariably, they will claim either it's a virus or it's a bacterial toxin, depending on the situation. "But it's always because they can't find anything in the solution that they make. So if they can't find any cells, then they will claim it's a virus or it's a bacterial toxin just because it's invisible. It's very convenient." Kaufman: "So this would incentivize the scientist or the businessman because there's a big commercial opportunity there to become rich and famous. But from the government's perspective, who may be financing these operations, it's a tool of eugenics and health control, essentially." Latypova: "Yeah, it's... especially access to each and every body with injection, with a needle. That's what they're always after. And it continues today."

Retired pharma R&D executive says "the whole idea of vaccination and public health was always [about] eugenics"🩸💉 "it was always the mechanism the government... [used] to keep the population under control" "it's... especially [about] access to each and every body with injections, with needles. That's what they're always after" sashalatypova.substack.com "Due Diligence and Art" Andrew Kaufman MD ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- Latypova: "As I've been saying for a long time, this whole idea of vaccination, public health, was always eugenics idea. It was always the mechanism that the government, early on, the monarchy or some other type of government figured out that this is a great method to keep the population under control. "And they were pretty explicit about this in many, many documents, more contemporary documents as population control policies, population control strategies." Kaufman: "Well we even have vaccines that are used as birth control, right? They've been studied in, in, in clinical trials that are published." Latypova: "Oh yeah, I'm just— I'm going to publish about that. I found one paper that's, of course, in French, it's not in English, so I auto translated it, and it's very explicit. We are developing contraceptive vaccines for the developing countries for the purposes of population control. It's very explicit—" Kaufman: "I have a study published in English, very similar. It was done in Africa. I can get you a copy of that if you like...." Latypova: "So, the governments together with these 'scientists,' you know, I can't call them scientists, they are profiteers, off of this idea, like Koch, like Pasteur, Mechnikov, there was a bunch of Russian ones. So they started the whole idea of hunting viruses became very lucrative because if you could isolate and find something or virus or bacteria or some bacilli, like the Koch, then you could become rich and famous because you could be awarded big commissions from the government, given lots of power, and labs and staff." "And, of course, you can then patent your inventions and sell them in terms of rabies shots or tuberculin or things like that. There were attempts at vaccines for diphtheria, vaccines for plague, cholera, none of them worked, they all failed." Kaufman: "And they were, they were experimenting with different technologies at that time as well, right? Because I believe the diphtheria immunization was made from horse serum. Right? Rather than, you know, something in a culture or, or from a, from an animal lesion. So, sort of closer to what might be called today monoclonal antibody technology." Latypova: "Yes... it's very similar the monoclonal that they use horses for, commonly. That was how it originated. "Also, they experimented with injecting all sorts of things. So, for example, foot and mouth disease also at the same time was being claimed to be viral. And they would invariably, they will claim either it's a virus or it's a bacterial toxin, depending on the situation. "But it's always because they can't find anything in the solution that they make. So if they can't find any cells, then they will claim it's a virus or it's a bacterial toxin just because it's invisible. It's very convenient." Kaufman: "So this would incentivize the scientist or the businessman because there's a big commercial opportunity there to become rich and famous. But from the government's perspective, who may be financing these operations, it's a tool of eugenics and health control, essentially." Latypova: "Yeah, it's... especially access to each and every body with injection, with a needle. That's what they're always after. And it continues today."

Sense Receptor

12,325 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

🔥🛸👽 Grusch: Senior Congressional Staffers Had Their World-Bubble Burst After Being Briefed on the Biological Analysis and Physiology of Alien Bodies 👽🛸🔥 (This is one of the most important claims in the history of the topic because, if true, it overcomes the, "It-may-be-our-tech" argument.) Rogan: "So, when it comes to these...I'm gonna bring it back to these, these actual entities." Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "Do we know, or [do we] have an understanding of how many of them we're talking about, and the variety of them?" Grusch: "Yeah, there is a variety, and we have a certain number of (laughs) different things, umm. But the like, total numbers of like, what's interacting with us on Earth? I mean, nobody knows that. And, I mean, that..." Rogan: "But there's an understanding of some that they do believe are interacting with us, and there's a variety in terms of...there's variables?" Grusch: "Yeah, I talked to people who are familiar with the biological analysis and everything. So we have some idea, not a complete picture, because it's like, you know, you know, you're looking at, it's like, well, I don't even understand the physiology at all. It's like, what the heck? It's like, way different, right? So, umm...we have at least a..." Rogan: "Is there a description of this physiology? Grusch: "Yeah, no, I was in...I was in the room when, uhhh (exhales)...hmm. I gotta be careful, I don't wanna... I was in Washington, DC with a very number of senior people that work for members of Congress - put it that way - umm, when I was still in government. And I brought the people who worked on that stuff to The Hill. I mean, this is why the members were so confident to put out the Schumer amendment (UAPDA) and stuff. And I was like, 'Please explain.' "And, um, they went into all those details and stuff. And I remember, you know (laughs), some of the professional staff members were like, 'Whoa.' Like, they were like, in G-LOC, right? Because, I mean it's like a total world-bubble, umm...got burst right there for a lot of people. "And, so we have some idea, it's not a complete picture. I mean, it's just like...but you're not even bringing in the right people. Like, I think about my friend and colleague, Dr. Garry P. Nolan, which I started the SOL Foundation non-profit with. I mean, he's like, Nobel-level, biologist, virologist. Like, he's the guy that you would want on it, but he's not on it. So, I think we can make a lot of progress in our understanding once again, if this is more broadly studied in an open environment." ~ Note: G-LOC = Gravity-Induced Loss of Consciousness. In Laymen's terms, losing consciousness when a plane pulls more Gs than your body can handle. Source: dot com/blog/what-is-g-loc

🔥🛸👽 Grusch: Senior Congressional Staffers Had Their World-Bubble Burst After Being Briefed on the Biological Analysis and Physiology of Alien Bodies 👽🛸🔥 (This is one of the most important claims in the history of the topic because, if true, it overcomes the, "It-may-be-our-tech" argument.) Rogan: "So, when it comes to these...I'm gonna bring it back to these, these actual entities." Grusch: "Yeah." Rogan: "Do we know, or [do we] have an understanding of how many of them we're talking about, and the variety of them?" Grusch: "Yeah, there is a variety, and we have a certain number of (laughs) different things, umm. But the like, total numbers of like, what's interacting with us on Earth? I mean, nobody knows that. And, I mean, that..." Rogan: "But there's an understanding of some that they do believe are interacting with us, and there's a variety in terms of...there's variables?" Grusch: "Yeah, I talked to people who are familiar with the biological analysis and everything. So we have some idea, not a complete picture, because it's like, you know, you know, you're looking at, it's like, well, I don't even understand the physiology at all. It's like, what the heck? It's like, way different, right? So, umm...we have at least a..." Rogan: "Is there a description of this physiology? Grusch: "Yeah, no, I was in...I was in the room when, uhhh (exhales)...hmm. I gotta be careful, I don't wanna... I was in Washington, DC with a very number of senior people that work for members of Congress - put it that way - umm, when I was still in government. And I brought the people who worked on that stuff to The Hill. I mean, this is why the members were so confident to put out the Schumer amendment (UAPDA) and stuff. And I was like, 'Please explain.' "And, um, they went into all those details and stuff. And I remember, you know (laughs), some of the professional staff members were like, 'Whoa.' Like, they were like, in G-LOC, right? Because, I mean it's like a total world-bubble, umm...got burst right there for a lot of people. "And, so we have some idea, it's not a complete picture. I mean, it's just like...but you're not even bringing in the right people. Like, I think about my friend and colleague, Dr. Garry P. Nolan, which I started the SOL Foundation non-profit with. I mean, he's like, Nobel-level, biologist, virologist. Like, he's the guy that you would want on it, but he's not on it. So, I think we can make a lot of progress in our understanding once again, if this is more broadly studied in an open environment." ~ Note: G-LOC = Gravity-Induced Loss of Consciousness. In Laymen's terms, losing consciousness when a plane pulls more Gs than your body can handle. Source: dot com/blog/what-is-g-loc

Joe Murgia

72,088 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Hasan glazes his own speech and pushes back at chatters who said it reminded them of Dwight Schrute and that the Mao suit was a bit much Says people are being racist equating the suit to Mao, Mao is not comparable to H*tler, and more "I think it's a great f'in speech..I don't know if u know this, Dwight Schrute is working in an office..I am giving a political speech at a political event about politics..I'm not like working at Scranton PA, at a paper plant, I'm giving a f'in political speech!" "I saw a lot of ppl that were like oh, this is just like Dwight Schrute..ya the reason why Dwight Schrute is funny in that moment is bc he's working for a paper plant where they make paper and stationeries..that's why it's a silly juxtaposition" "I'm not gonna stop wearing the zhongshan suit, it's not the f'in Mao suit..it's a Chinese suit, I like it..(when u associate an Asian style of clothing with a specific Asian with the implication that it's bad - chatter)..ya it's f'in racist but it doesn't matter" "The only thing that matters..does it look good or not..and the answer is yes, it looks good, yes it's swag" "There is no comparison between Mao Zedong and H*tler..if u make that comparison, ur a f'in idiot" "I kind of cooked (in speech)..objectively aura..u can f'in cry about it all day, every day"

Hasan glazes his own speech and pushes back at chatters who said it reminded them of Dwight Schrute and that the Mao suit was a bit much Says people are being racist equating the suit to Mao, Mao is not comparable to Htler, and more "I think it's a great f'in speech..I don't know if u know this, Dwight Schrute is working in an office..I am giving a political speech at a political event about politics..I'm not like working at Scranton PA, at a paper plant, I'm giving a f'in political speech!" "I saw a lot of ppl that were like oh, this is just like Dwight Schrute..ya the reason why Dwight Schrute is funny in that moment is bc he's working for a paper plant where they make paper and stationeries..that's why it's a silly juxtaposition" "I'm not gonna stop wearing the zhongshan suit, it's not the f'in Mao suit..it's a Chinese suit, I like it..(when u associate an Asian style of clothing with a specific Asian with the implication that it's bad - chatter)..ya it's f'in racist but it doesn't matter" "The only thing that matters..does it look good or not..and the answer is yes, it looks good, yes it's swag" "There is no comparison between Mao Zedong and Htler..if u make that comparison, ur a f'in idiot" "I kind of cooked (in speech)..objectively aura..u can f'in cry about it all day, every day"

yeet

62,486 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

You literally can’t make this make sense “Imagine being a part of a political movement that has male political candidates claiming that they're menstruating from their anus, and then they turn around and tell you that you're in a cult” The group of people constantly having to affirm that men can be women to eachother are the literal definition of being in a cult

You literally can’t make this make sense “Imagine being a part of a political movement that has male political candidates claiming that they're menstruating from their anus, and then they turn around and tell you that you're in a cult” The group of people constantly having to affirm that men can be women to eachother are the literal definition of being in a cult

Wall Street Apes

39,620 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Greenlandic PM Jens-Frederik Nielsen: There's a man, I think he's a former banker, an American man called Cliff, walking around in Greenland and trying to make people sign some sort of paper where they say they want to be a part of the United States. And if he gets enough signatures, he will start some sort of a trust fund or something where they can have $200k each. And look, I think it's a part of the influence they try to put on the Greenlandic people in this situation between our countries.

Greenlandic PM Jens-Frederik Nielsen: There's a man, I think he's a former banker, an American man called Cliff, walking around in Greenland and trying to make people sign some sort of paper where they say they want to be a part of the United States. And if he gets enough signatures, he will start some sort of a trust fund or something where they can have $200k each. And look, I think it's a part of the influence they try to put on the Greenlandic people in this situation between our countries.

MeidasClips

23,699 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

The View whines that Knicks owner James Dolan accepted an invitation to have the team visit the White House: SARA HAINES: I think this puts the players in a really precarious position. Merely because Jim Dolan is admittedly a good friend of Donald Trump's. And to now put that on the players, your boss, the owner of the team you play for is extending this offer, accepting this offer. I don't - I know you might get people that refuse to go. I just think it's not fair to take any of the flowers and beauty of this moment and its unity and try to then place it on the players' back. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: I totally agree. I think it puts the players in such an uncomfortable position, cause it was honestly the first thing I thought of once they won the championship, as a new Knicks fan, is like, "Oh no, they're going to get invited to the White House and there's this political discourse. Should they go, shout they not?" I think they should go if they want to. If they're comfortable going, because the White House is bigger than any one president and precedency. HAINES: It's our house. FARAH GRIFFIN: They earned the right to go as champions, but I also think they have the right to refuse too. If any individual players don't want to, that's their decision. And I also they can use the big platforms they have. I mean, these guys all have millions of followers on social media. If they want to stand up for causes or if they want to potentially critique this administration, there's a way that everyone should win. I don't think it's fair if they do decide to go, I don't think they should get hate it. It's there place to.

The View whines that Knicks owner James Dolan accepted an invitation to have the team visit the White House: SARA HAINES: I think this puts the players in a really precarious position. Merely because Jim Dolan is admittedly a good friend of Donald Trump's. And to now put that on the players, your boss, the owner of the team you play for is extending this offer, accepting this offer. I don't - I know you might get people that refuse to go. I just think it's not fair to take any of the flowers and beauty of this moment and its unity and try to then place it on the players' back. ALYSSA FARAH GRIFFIN: I totally agree. I think it puts the players in such an uncomfortable position, cause it was honestly the first thing I thought of once they won the championship, as a new Knicks fan, is like, "Oh no, they're going to get invited to the White House and there's this political discourse. Should they go, shout they not?" I think they should go if they want to. If they're comfortable going, because the White House is bigger than any one president and precedency. HAINES: It's our house. FARAH GRIFFIN: They earned the right to go as champions, but I also think they have the right to refuse too. If any individual players don't want to, that's their decision. And I also they can use the big platforms they have. I mean, these guys all have millions of followers on social media. If they want to stand up for causes or if they want to potentially critique this administration, there's a way that everyone should win. I don't think it's fair if they do decide to go, I don't think they should get hate it. It's there place to.

Nicholas Fondacaro

67,122 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce