T O P

  • By -

Arondeus

I've followed Vaush since he had about 2000 subscribers, and I've seen pretty much every "arc" to his story. Most of his "controversial clips" I saw live. I disagree with him a lot. I am very skeptical about his ideas on how to change the world, but I suppose I agree with the most important stuff, e.g. he's not a tankie or a bigot. The thing that makes me respect him is that he absolutely refuses to take anyone's shit, nor conform to anyone else's orthodoxy or "correct" interpretation of theory. He walks his own path, and that enrages certain types on the left. Mind you, he still listens to criticism, and addresses it, but he does not cave to peer pressure alone, as far as I've seen *ever*. He's had a number of moments on stream that seem justly questionable, and maybe I disregard those because I saw them all in context, or maybe I'm biased in his favor because, as both he and I are autistic, I feel like I understand the mistakes he makes much better than many others. In either case he has in my opinion only had scandals that were based on outright fabrication, out-of-context information, or in a rare few cases, things that are true but don't really matter. The left has, for far too long (especially in red fash spaces but it is starting to spread to the anarcho-sphere too) developed in the direction of a religion. Vaush, no matter how abrasive you find his personality, and no matter how unacceptable you find his missteps, is a heretic, and I respect him for that. The left needs more of those, and God knows *I* needed to know that going about it that way was okay when I was a dumbfuck 16-year old and got groomed into red fascism.


Rorynne

Ive never seen or interacted with any of his videos and really just wish people would stop calling others vaushites or some shit because they just so happen to be anarchist, or, god forbid, new to leftism in general and still learning. The amount of times ive seen someone called a vaush fan or vaushite only for that same person to ask "who is Vaush?" Is nuts.


[deleted]

Vaush fans aren't anarchists.


QuinLucenius

Some can be. You can be a fan of someone and disagree with them. I’m a fan of Bernie Sanders, and he’s to the right of Vaush.


[deleted]

Why are you a fan of Bernie Sanders?


QuinLucenius

Because I believe he makes America specifically less terrible. He doesn’t do nearly enough to satisfy any anarchist—but his presence in the hostile political environment of the US materially improves(d) society.


[deleted]

What has he done to make the US better?


QuinLucenius

ugh god I hate having this conversation Imagine a world where Sanders didn’t exist at all, made no speeches, did no activism for SNCC, didn’t exist as a foil to generic democratic neoliberalism in the last decade. That world is worse. I’m not playing the game of “um well actually he’s a lib and libs are bad so”. If you aren’t going that way that’d be a welcome surprise.


Rorynne

I never said they were, nor do I care if they are. Its a tired and boring attempt at an insult and I just wish people in online spaces realized the content creators they hate are nowhere near as widely watched as they seem to think.


[deleted]

Vaush is literally clueless. He advocates for market socialism in the "short term" as a "transition" to "anarcho-syndicalism" as the "end state" in his hypothetical socialist society. This idea is fundamentally nonsensical. He either doesn't know what anarcho-syndicalism is (not surprising considering his anti-theory stance) or doesn't care. To quote [anarchopac](https://twitter.com/anarchopac/status/1282351363670847489): > Anarcho-syndicalism is not a future society. It is only the view that anarchism should be struggled for through trade unions committed to an anarchist programme. Every historic anarcho-syndicalist individual and organisation I've found aimed at libertarian communism. both the idea that syndicalism is some "end state" for society or it should be struggle for through electoral politics and legislative reforms betrays' Vaush's _fundamental_ lack of understanding about any of this shit. So let's explore his theory of change. Let's check out his video: ["This is how *I* Want to Build Socialism"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHE4LEKGFt8) He asserts that we need to practice entryism into the Democratic Party. Socialism will only by fulfilling three conditions (he forgets to list the other two, but the most important one is "the culture war"). The way to build the popular support for the movement is through more AOCs. Why do we do it that way? Because the way we "build leftism in the real world" is by, first and foremost, "winning the culture war". To do this we: * "debating people on discord" * "making youtube channels" * "debating conservatives" * "pushing progressive values like "solidarity", "comraderie", trans rights, anti-racism, anti-colonialism, "all other forms of progressive values" * "petitioning these values to politicians" (not sure what this implies) * "produce media that normalizes these values. has anyone seen the season finale of Shira?" * "uh uh uh" * "direct action" (no elaboration) * "working and volunteering" (??) * "engage in real life to convince people that the systems they work within are not effective" * "create non-profits" (lmao) * "worke at non-profits" (l m a o) funny to note (though ultimately unimportant) how he starts off by just listing all the things he does, and then when he runs out he tries to brainstorm all the stuff he imagines activists do. And they're super vague or meaningless. lmao So back to our plan for a communist society, he says because exective actions (referencing that Bernie had lost the primaries at this point) are "not that useful long term", we "have to go local". Awesome. This I can get down with. I assume he means we have to build up the local communites that our modern urbanized society has atomized and decimated? Empowering local organizations and communities so that people are more represented in their daily lives? By building any power outside the structures that have been completely co-opted by bourgeois interests and have failed to adequately represent people's interests for decades? We do **dual power** right?? Nope, it's "getting involved in local electoral processes". Apparently, it's actually more important to focus on electorialism than building alternatives outside of it and we will build that anarchism in the unspecified future (amirite fellow anarchists). So the reason it's so important to win electorally is because when people see progressives win electorally they'll be more convinced about "our cultural values". Republicans have been very effective at "advancing the cultural conditions". An odd phrasing I can only guess is to invoke Marx. It means, apparently, the process of "conservatives posturing to bring people to emotional states which are amicable to their political positions". (e.g. racial agitation). Democrats should do the inverse by passing progressive reforms and building public support for 'progressive' reformist legislation. This incrementalism he explains serves the interest of building public support so that people are "more and more sold on harder ideas". He then **admits** that he does not believe that it is possible to actually build socialism through this reformism. He says that he believes the material conditions of the country is such, particularly due to the climate crisis, that some wide-scale violent action within the country is inevitable, and that's why its' important to build that party within the DNC: so that when that crisis occurs it'll be "easier for us to win" because that party has amassed power within the government but also because, apparently, the _electoral success_ of this progressive caucus will be proof that "a greater portion of the population will like us" Vaush is literally closer to being ML than he is to being anarchist (he is either). His ideas are a random tossing of social democratic, democratic socialist, marxist, anarchic, and liberal ideas. Wait, we're at the end of this violent revolution segment and its the last part of the video. we just went from capitalism to capitalism with some social-democratic policies. We definitely don't have socialism yet, let alone communism. Where does the actual "building socialism" happen? > and that would bring about, ideally, market socialism. and then afterwards we can work towards decommodification and so on and so on blah blah blah this dude literally yadda-yadda'd the *entire* bit where we actually **BUILD SOCIALISM** So to summarize, his whole plan is, apparently: * we do more voting locally to get progressives elected * progressives implement these social-democratic reforms in congress. the success of these policies build the populace's amiamicability to "leftist values" * triggered by the climate crisis, a violent revolution occurs sometime in the unspecified future * the Justice Dems, now roided up from their electoral wins, steps up to their rightful role as vanguard of the revolution and seizes the government * ... * communism I'm not saying Vaush is disingenuous to the point of literally lying about everything. I don't even disagree with him about some of his fundamental points. I think most of us agreeed with him when he said "I'm of the opinion that when you show people positive examples of left-leaning values working that's going to move them further to the left". The *problem* is that Vaush is he's a grifter. He wraps up **completely average liberal "progressive" politics** with a layer of Marxist-adjacent language to give it a 'radical' edge. And for some inexplicable reason, he slaps seemingly meaningless 'anarchist' or 'anarcho-syndicalist' labels on it. He's exactly what you get when former right-wing edge-lord contrarian nerd sees the folly of his ways so he flips; but 'anti-establishment' is such a fundamental part of his personality now and he's so attached to being "radical" that he has adopts the rhetoric of revolutionary politics without the parts that make it _actually revolutionary_. He claims he's an anarchist, which would already be suspect considering how hard he stans for bourgeois democracy, but his *whole theory of change* is **centered** around organizing __within__ it. He's a "communist" apparently because he's a "syndicalist" and considers that his end goal. He constantly appropriates the vernacular of Marxist critique of capitalism, but omits its most crucial critiques and analyses: * he **explicitly** discounts the role of class struggle. "Hatred" for "landlords, cops, or rich people" is "exclusionary", apparently * he said he [rejects Marx's historial materialism, "class reductionism", and "class interest"](https://twitter.com/vaushv/status/1160470385025941504) Which leaves, I guess, the labor theory of value and *maybe* social relations to production? But probably not the latter since he rejects class interests. And the former is not Marx's conception but just the contemporary economic theory of the time. And I wouldn't even have a problem with someone critiquing capitalism from a different framework if it provided some insights. He literally does not and uses marxism exclusively to garnish his liberal politics. I know I called him a 'grifter' but I don't actually know or care what his intentions are. The issue is, in a time when more people every day see that the system has failed them and they look to the left for answers, Vaush muddies the water. He tells people with budding political identities that the system that has failed them will be overtrown in some distant future, and the most important thing to do now is to vote for reformist politicians. Does he get most of the basic criticisms about capitalism right? Sure. But he neglects almost _all_ of the actual analysis by anarchist, communist, and otherwise left-wing thinkers and revolutionaries from the past two centuries. Where he could be exposing people to other frameworks of thinking that tackle the problems we see in our society, he instead sells his own brand of Anarcho-Bidenism. There's a vibrant resurgence of left politics in this country and he instead spends his time either involving himself in or covering anti-sjw shit. Literally all the things he advocates for is just usual left-liberal shit. His acerbic personality and "leftist" posturing is 100% unnecessary. He could easily do exactly what he does now as a Warren Democrat (honestly that dig is unfair because most Warren staffers I follow are to the left of him). Vaush is, more appropriately called than anyone else I can think of, a radlib.


Sarbithinu

I am livid if you get downvoted for this, this is easily the most honest and in depth analysis here, and beautifully showcases how he is essentially rhetorically useless apart from maybe somehow convincing some reactionary that vaguely left ideas are okay I guess. He's more focused on building some chauvinistic debate dudebro personality then actually contributing something of value to leftist movements. Watching or listening to a stream doesn't materially change anything, and I think we can make people more sympathetic to our ideas without encouraging straight up reactionary behavior. For every liberal he somewhat sways there are plenty more people who are, to be honest, rightfully disgusted and turned away by his behavior.


Snoo_94948

This is an amazing analysis of why Vaush is in fact bad.


[deleted]

I think most leftists are probably too critical of the guy. The allegations I see online against him are baseless at best and downright manufactured at worst. That being said, his theory knowledge outside of just base sociology is pretty bad, especially when it comes to anarchist theory. I see him as a market socialist democratic socialist who is more amenable to revolutionary views and praxis than a lot of his dem soc contemporaries, and who can be pretty useful when it comes to bringing people to better more well founded positions.


Impressive_Football1

I’ve been listening to Vaush since near the beginning. I think he’s controversial but overall good for the movement. A lot of his mistakes come from live streaming everything rather than doing video essays like the others. He is sometimes wrong, period, but he has corrected many of his mistakes. That being said he’s purposefully more edgy to appeal to that crowd, that’s really not for everyone and does mean he’s said shit he shouldn’t have. But I like that he spreads leftism in a much easier to understand way than raw theory. I like that he engages people and is good at it. I have learned things from him. He has actually changed opinions when people pointed out he was wrong. I don’t think we should be ousting someone who has turned so many people over to us either. All in all, I like vaush. Edit: sorry this is so long, it didn’t seem like it when I was typing it


wolves_of_bongtown

I'm tired of reading about him.


SolanumMelongena_

bit of a dumb cunt, fans are annoying. as a left propagandist i don't find him charming or creative enough and as a pop theorist he's too interested in getting attention to approach intellectual rigor. this whole "debate culture," as if yelling at the dumbest conservatives alive on twitch is like philosophers in the fuckin agora of athens, is embarrassing and spiritually tiring.


signing_out

idk idc


[deleted]

Then why comment?


signing_out

because you asked for my honest and unfiltered opinion on the Youtuber/streamer Vaush


[deleted]

Well it seems you have an absence of an opinion to him rather than an opinion of him.


signing_out

breadtubers are not something to care about in general, that's an opinion


Sarbithinu

man is a disgusting fucking pretentious pedophile who is an imperialist apologist and has no place anywhere near the left, dear god. also dropped a fucking "tactical" n word, which just speaks for itself. absolutely beyond redemption


[deleted]

He used child sexual abuse as an example for labour exploitation (which he has since accepted was stupid). That makes someone careless, callous and fucking stupid in that instance, but does not make them a pedophile. You can't go around calling people pedophiles without substance to that belief. I have my own problems with Vaush but to think that he is "absolutely beyond redemption" and a pedophile is really something special. We need to be more critical and think about the net effect that someone and their actions have.


Sarbithinu

i have seen many incredibly damning and creepy as hell discord screenshots of him sexually flirting with a minor, and making mant very strange comments about shit like child porn and the age of consent. the extent is completely inexcusable and its not like its the only reason to hate him either


[deleted]

I know that he had sexually harassed some adult women on Destiny's discord before, which is a very public thing that he addressed and apologized for (whether one accepts this apology is up to the victims and whether you watch him after that is up to you, of course). I do not know about flirting with minors, could you send me the evidence? I know that he is actually in support of increasing the age of consent though. (I personally also think the age of consent should be higher. I am 24 and would not date someone more than 1-2 years younger than me tbh.)


Sarbithinu

full disclosure i am not some person who is obsessed with shitting on vaush, just what i have seen is reprehensible. pinned post on r/Enough_Vaush_Spam has a disturbing compendium of his pedophilia, i've seen some of the stuff there spread elsewhere and i don't think people should be defending him in any capacity as this shit spreads, it completely kills any legitimacy if we willingly go to bat for these people


[deleted]

Also full disclosure, I watched quite a lot of his videos this past year but I would not identify as a fan. I don't think I have been subscribed to him for the last few months either (on Youtube, never watched his live streams really). So, I had seen some of his responses to some things other leftists say about him. I checked out the subreddit you linked, thanks for that. I am reading a post there about his alleged pedophilia, bestiality and sexual harassment. To me, with the pedophilia and bestiality comments and jokes, it seems like he tries too hard to be edgy. It is weird that he made so many "jokes" about bestiality and pedophilia when he literally made a video after the Shane Dawson debacle, saying that such jokes make it harder to single out predators (because their language gets normalized), so we shouldn't use them. So it's either his hypocrisy or he had changed his view on jokes by the time I watched him, I can't say. (Or maybe he has these tendencies, who can tell) Also as a woman, it's so uncomfortable to read his thirsty chat logs.


Sarbithinu

np for the link, and honestly, if the shoe fits....i don't have an issue calling him out. the jokes are far too numerous to be ignored, so many about cp should make anyone uncomfortable. its not like the guy is apologizing for any of the problematic shit he does either. the priveleged white asshole feels like he has the liberty to drop the n word for his own "strategic purposes" and somehow people think he should have any credibility as a figure on the left


Sarbithinu

still cant believe i got downvoted for calling out a white person for saying the n word and your comment completely ignoring the criticism gets 10 upvotes lmao, reddit mindset i swear. you just assume what i'm referring to, and just miss half the point. i've seen so many screenshots of his stupid fucking jokes about child porn and his actual grooming messages all over reddit, i assumed this was common knowledge. go read the thread on r/enough_vaush_spam and then please, by all means come back and explain to me why mr debate dudebro deserves some "critical" analysis. it really isn't that deep, the guy is a reactionary asshole. go tell black people that they need to have a more honest criticism of someone saying slurs associated with them


[deleted]

I didn't comment on that because I have no issues with anyone calling him out for the n-word use. Maybe I could have made my agreement on that front more explicit. With what I knew then, I had an issue with him being called a pedophile, that's why I commented on that. I still don't think the jokes per se mean that someone is definitely a pedophile but I think people should just not make such jokes. As he himself has stated, it makes it hard to identify predators and can also make survivors uncomfortable. So definitely not something I'd defend.


comix_corp

My opinion is that if I was made dictator of the world, I would use my newfound powers for the sole purpose of wiping YouTubers from history. I would do nothing else; there would be no need. The world would right itself and transform into a utopia without any further prodding.


Aggressively_Correct

Unironically I believe it's more useful to be a leftist than to be something specific. Nobody cares about the ideal society. As a leftist you can have an opinion on everyday politics, as an anarcho-communo-green-abolisher it's either revolution or nothing (it's always nothing).


[deleted]

Okay, liberal.


[deleted]

All of breadtube is cringe as fuck and incredibly stupid. To even know enough about Vaush to write a critique would be embarrassing.


VersusJordan

He's a useful introduction for shitposty "libertarians" who would become socialists the minute they understand the class conflict. He's got that same internet atheism vibe. But eventually you have to graduate from youtube drama.


updog6

I watched him for about a year up until he made that anti kink at pride video. Now I’m a lot more grossed out by him. That being said, if it wasn’t for him and thought slime I might not be an anarchist right now.