John oliver did a segment about blackmailing a few republican senators. His show is deeply anti-corruption and the writers are as terminally online as I am.
He doesn’t seem like a total shitlib, unlike the other three. He seems like the perfect guy to make libs think a bit farther than they otherwise would, and I can’t exactly fault him for that.
He uses slurs, does harassment campaigns against leftist people of color and is overall a giant chump that is far more of a reactionary than any leftist. He's the "leftist" YouTuber for people who never had their Ben Shapiro/Sargon phase and don't understand what's wrong with that style of content.
I'm not gonna do a whole Vaush teardown here, but it's amazing how he always seems to align himself against a lot of the other leftist YouTubers I have watched and respected for years.
His obsessive need to tout his "rightness" on all matters is extremely abrasive and off-putting. He likes to cite diversity of tactics as a reason for engaging in debate the way he does, but then also doesn't respect anyone that can't debate their position. I've read a lot of philosophy and political commentary over the years, I know what I believe, but if you put me up against him I'd crumble on the spot. I couldn't debate to save my life, it's a particular skill. Watching him angrily yell at other leftists is not furthering the points he thinks it is.
Being able to win a debate doesn't make you right, and losing one doesn't make you wrong. He's just another pig in the mud.
Great breakdown on why even if Vaush wasn't a piece of shit (he is) his debate format is inherently problematic. Ben Shapiro can win debates, I used to copy his style when I was in debate class. Not completely, but definitely used the speaking at a weirdly fast pace to make it hard to follow
The comments here is basically the weirdest conversation I've seen about him, basically everyone either defending or criticising him is just getting upvoted and not downvoted.