I find it hilarious that conservatives claim to support rights of the individual when they are always trying to stop policies that allow for more individuality and self-expression.

Fun thing about pyramids: Without the wide base, the top rests on nothing. The bottom can exist in a lesser state without the top, but the top *absolutely* needs the bottom so support itself.

"Conservatism: a reactionary politics that has at best, mixed feelings about democracy" I fucking love that quote. This series is legendary.

As a former conservative fighting with this entire video series, everything you have said was deeply and uncomfortably true up to this point, and anybody who says otherwise is simply lying to themselves.

Fun fact: Ayn Rand was on welfare when she died. Such a principled person!

"This should ideally be... war, but capitalism would suffice" It's honestly crazy how accurate this is, well done as always

"do your research" is just a hot button for them. They don't care if you do your research or not.... they just want to stir the nest.

I used to think conservatives meant to conserve culture and morals.. Now I understand all they want is to preserve power.

3.20 that guy casually riding on someone's shoulders above a crowd full of people carrying bayonets DUDE WHAT if you slip you're gonna get impaled, dog! 6.25 Daddy

I'm finishing my philosophy degree right now and you touched on a point with Nietzsche that always frustrated me, which is that Nietzsche always said he wasnt a conservative or a nationalist or a Nazi, but God damn his ideas were REALLY useful to conservatives and nationalists and Nazis

Wealthy people saying "I'm superior, I should have more power" in very creative ways.

It's weird that critics claim you nothing about conservatism. If Burke is lauded as the "father of modern conservatism," then all your critics need to do is to give a superficial glance at "Reflections on the French Revolution" to see where you're coming from. Burke can't stop himself from not only praising property and the monarchy but also lying about the French Revolutionaries. Another read that could accompany Burke's is Thomas Paine's reaction "Rights of Man." In it, Paine goes into depth about the flaws of Burke's argument and the lies Burke spreads about the revolution. It's funny, too, how conservative rhetoric-which consists of false narratives about the "left"-has always been filled with lies, even in its origin with Burke.

That’s the most perfect Jordan Peterson quote to ever exist. Bravo.

This is very good and It's always nice to see someone cite Peterson properly

My far less eloquent summation of conservative thought: "People who look and live like me are worth more."

I showed this and the Bigger Fish video to a friend who described themselve as a Conservative, she is no longer a Conservative.

*me, drunk:* scrolling through comments *Innuendo:* THE AUSTRIANS! *me, an austrian:* wat?!

As a Brazilian I really appreciate how you acknowledged the US imperialism in South America in the 80's

Being probably much older than your average follower of this channel, I have to say that not all older people are Conservatives, not all support white supremacy and more of that idiotic nonsense. As I said in a previous post, I've beaten up plenty of neo Nazis and fascists in my time (trust me - it feels damn good to see them cry like a baby) and I am now thoroughly happy with the fact that more and more people here and elsewhere finally are getting aware of the idea that the alt-Right is nothing but a rebranding of fascism and Nazism. Happy that finally a stance is being made against their neverending assault on democracy and people. You do it by reason and education of what this monster really entails and are not afraid to call them by their real name. At the height of the alt-right infestation, I sometimes felt I was the only one fighting them off, but it's such a relief and really heartening to see more and more young people doing the same what i have done for nearly 30 years now. Keep up the good work in educating the masses of the dangers imposed by the pepe the frog men. Not a big fan of violence nor am I propagating it, but in some cases you just have to "communicate" at their own level or the level they think is so tough. Because you always need to remember that they won't have any qualms about using violence against YOU. You will find that the vast majority are just teeny whiny little boys when you do. Again, not propagating violence, but as a very last means, it's effective against vermin like fascist and neo Nazis and all other names they cloak themselves in. So kids, remember, in some cases it's ok to beat a Nazi. Use their own means against them. Start hoaxes which are embarrassing to them, attack them relentlessly online when they spill their garbage, in short use their own tactics against them. Remember: Richard Spencer stated it was no fun being a neo Nazi anymore since the event of antifa. So it does work.

What conservatives "conserve" is wealth and power for the wealthy and powerful. Any reference to "values", or "tradition" made in defense of so-called conservatism is just a figleaf.

I'm glad people, more and more, are treating Jordan Peterson with the respect he deserves

Another element in which Conservatism falls short - and part of what made me break from it - is that despite aligning itself culturally with Christianity, I can scarcely think of a political movement that is more un-Christian. Conservatism posits that those in power are those who "deserve" to be in power. Christianity insists that _no one_ "deserves" to be in power (except God), because we humans are all, equally and habitually, sinners. And so that those who have privilege should stoop down to help our brethren - as God stoops to save our souls, even though He doesn't have to - because it's only by grace of God that we're in that position of privilege. It could just as easily be US in the gutter. It could just as easily be US as the weak, sick, disempowered, etc. We must not turn up our noses at the less fortunate, because we are just as much flawed and foolish and childish as them (from a godly perspective). If we didn't help them - if we weren't kind or charitable or forgiving to them - how could we expect those same things from others? Further, there's the fact that hierarchies put people into the unenviable position of trying to serve two masters: God and the ones at the top of the hierarchy. It's impossible, of course - no man can serve two masters - which leads to people having to choose between yielding to the fiats of the "King" (whether actual monarchs, dictators, or CEOs), even when it's immoral, or rebelling against the King to remain loyal to God. Not to mention that hierarchies have a habit of providing humans with the opportunity to rise through the ranks and seize power, no matter what immoral acts they must do or who must they screw over to get there. Conservatism engineers that system by design. As such, the most Christian, moral action would be to encourage Democracy, so as to not only elevate the downtrodden, but to remove temptation from the paths of those too (morally) weak to not seek power and wealth for its own sake.

Hey man, the fact that you are willing to post what you've consumed that influences your perspective and arguments makes you 1000% more approachable and respectable than many others. At least if I disagree with you on something, I can look at what helped you form your decision and say, "Well, I understand where he's coming from.". It's super refreshing to see ideas and interpretations backed up with something other than "JUST GOOGLE IT!".

5:50 "humans are innately unequal" "power goes to the deserving" sounds a lot like Peterson who denies his conservatism.

I'm someone who believes in the importance of exceptional individuals, which is why I find socialism appealing. It's hard to do anything cool or interesting when you're trapped in poverty, and when high class folk use their clout to suppress culture that doesn't suit their tastes. Fascism has an antagonistic relationship with art and science because it sees all deviation as insubordination.

This is a phenomenally charitable reading of Burke. He was actually way more crazy than this video implies.

“The Man at the bottom contributes nothing to those above him” Wait till this dude learns how rich people get money…

". . . And Jordan Peterson, who believes blehblhebheblehblheble."

Your short side tangents would be masterpieces to anyone else. Never stop.

You know.. this is the first time conservatism has made any sort of sense to me. I never was even aware that there was a cohesive worldview underlying all the reactionary stuff. But it seems to me that there's a fundamental flaw in the hierarchical model -- hard work can only get you so far in a capitalist economy. Luck plays a far bigger part than most people realize, as does cheating, so to some degree at least those who make it to the top have climbed on the backs of everyone else in reach. The market isn't a level playing field, so its results aren't truly meritocratic. Also, if the pyramid is truly meant to be organized on the basis of effort they wouldn't be nearly as anti-inheritance-tax as they are. An inheritance in the millions gives you a massive leg up due to an accident of birth, requiring zero effort in the inheritor's part. This suggests to me that conservatism is just as interested in making sure the hierarchy benefits them (rather than any ideal of objective ranking) as they suspect liberalism is.

I was brought up in a Conservative Christian fundamentalist (Evangelical) household. I am the black sheep of my family in part because, while I understand conservatism from an intellectual and educated point of view, I revile it. Your videos are spot on with what I was brought up with, what I was taught from the time I was able to understand the written word. The one break with conservatism my parents (and especially my father) had was a deep respect for education and knowledge. Even though I am a female, I was still encouraged to read and become educated, but only so long as I wanted to immerse myself in conservative and Evangelical Christian viewpoints. When I didn't, when I strayed into other aspects of history and philosophy and/or expressed my own nascent and far more liberal views, I would get grounded and have permissions taken away (or even get "a spanking") with the stated reason that I was "sassing". In simplistic terms, I define myself as one step left of socialist but it's really a lot more complicated than that. Intellectually, I comprehend conservatism and their view of how the world works. Emotionally, I cannot fathom it.

Favorite Quote (9:36) = Conservatism: a reactionary politics that has, at best, mixed feelings about democracy.

Conservatism is and always has been the Loki speech from the first avengers film. "You were made to be ruled" or whatever.

Peterson fans will say this quote was out of context

8:42 "and start a war with no exit strategy" O wow, Trump literally said exactly that for Iran just yesterday. "I don't need an exit strategy"

I see you have "The Dictator's Handbook" on your research list, which is a title I've been interested in hearing more analysis of. It really changed my mind about how power is accumulated, distributed, and maintained, and--sadly--has caused me to question whether democracy, as a form of governance, is even technically possible in the long term. As it stands, I sort of feel like there isn't a form of government we have thus far developed that can sufficiently emphasize empathy, cooperation, specialization, and fairness, while also resisting corruption. I'd be quite interested in hearing your thoughts on the subject, if you are so inclined.

I used to be a conservative when I was younger. Most of what you say matches up with my experience while I was on the inside. Well done.

Well, today's uploads were enlightening on how many conservative beliefs I turned out to unconsciously hold.

The role of conservatives throughout history has been to lose slowly. The victories tend to be atrocities.

This remains one of the most succinct and important videos on describing conservative political theory-both its origins and *what it is* in *practice*-anyone could watch, and it deserves a MUCH bigger reach than what it has

What I like about your work is that you define foundational values for each movement - and I have read much of what you cited - and then debate the moral validity of each position. Which strikes to the core of the value systems and ignores petty matters in the news that consume attention and divert away from the central debate. For this reason, your work is dangerous to the conservative movement.

So if conservatives think government should stay out of business, how do they square away rich people bribing politicians to give them favorable laws that gives them an advantage over other people? Like tax loopholes only they can use, for example. Or subsidy for corporate farms and other big corporations that small businesses and ordinary individuals don't get? And I disagree that the US is a capitalist democracy. These days it operates more as an oligarchy.

People who say this guy doesn't do his research are inevitably revealing that they didn't do theirs

Love doing a microeconomics class and learning about Walrasian equilibriums and being like "oh wait it's that Jean Valjean guy"

This video man. Pure truth spoken.

According to Burke's philosophy, the environment has no intrinsic value until it's despoiled to produce goods, and even then the poor slob who does the digging and refining is second best to the buyer. It's no wonder then that conservatives couldn't care less about the environment.

I want to genuinely thank you for making this series of videos! I introduced them to my significant other, and we were able to finally have an open conversation about our political views. It challenged me to think beyond my preconceptions, and it’s refreshing to know that open debate is still possible despite hyperpartisanship of modern politics. Thank you!

I just wanted to say that the first time I watched this i was quite conservative and simply never really looked into the people who lead the party or what it represented and merely took smaller independent YT channels(like timcast) for their word. Along with that i really thought the their trickle down economics worked. needless to say I'm now a staunch leftist and want to say to anyone who is still a conservative who's watch this video and does have conservative leanings. try looking up what neo-liberalism is and its a effect on the world post Reagan, thatcher and the 70s because it really put things into perspective and changed what I think and I think it'll change yours as well. and if Ian reads this thanks this changed my opinion.

Thank you for pointing out the disconnect between Adam Smith and everything people (conservatives) say is Adam Smith.

In spite of most conservatives vehemently claiming to being the "real" "free-thinkers", there sure seems to be a lot of blindly conforming to centuries-old dogma and ideas and avoiding questioning the state of things in any sort of depth or detail going on in this here ideology. 🤔 (Yes, yes, I know I am not being very original here...)

As someone who actually genuinely believes in the things conservatives claim they believe, that’s literally what made me leftist, because everything conservatives support is actually completely opposed to how to even achieve those alleged principles of equality and freedom.

Thank you, Innuendo Studios! You are doing great work! This series deserves to blow up on UKposts, it speaks to so much of the content that we've all seen, stumbled on, or been told about by a friend at some point. It's the type of content that we should all be posting links to in the comments sections of the conservative and Intellectual Dark Web streams that have been mushrooming across UKposts, sanitizing some pretty bad ideas.

I'm a little drunk and I'm gonna share something that's on my mind. I'm from Kazakhstan, yesterday, our president (our only president, the one wo's been a president for almost 30 years) stepped down. Following this, they renamed our capital to Nursultan, which is our former 1st president's first name. They also plan to rename all our major cities' biggest roads to Nazarbayev, which is his last name. I'm sitting here, working on my master's degree in social anthropology, living in Europe. And I have zero idea what to do. I sometimes whish we had conservatives and democrats at each other's throat. Gee. I'm just a little shaken with this and love you, innuendo studios.

This is legitimately one of the best series on YT I've ever seen. For those of us that don't have the possibility to do all this research on our own it's nice to be able to do some cursory reading to understand what's what.

From the pharaohs of ancient Egypt to the self-regarding thugs of ancient Rome to the glorified warlords of medieval and absolutist Europe, in nearly every urbanized society throughout human history, there have been people who have tried to constitute themselves as an aristocracy. These people and their allies are the conservatives. The tactics of conservatism vary widely by place and time. But the most central feature of conservatism is deference: a psychologically internalized attitude on the part of the common people that the aristocracy are better people than they are. Modern-day liberals often theorize that conservatives use "social issues" as a way to mask economic objectives, but this is almost backward: the true goal of conservatism is to establish an aristocracy, which is a social and psychological condition of inequality. Economic inequality and regressive taxation, while certainly welcomed by the aristocracy, are best understood as a means to their actual goal, which is simply to be aristocrats. More generally, it is crucial to conservatism that the people must literally love the order that dominates them. Of course this notion sounds bizarre to modern ears, but it is perfectly overt in the writings of leading conservative theorists such as Burke. Democracy, for them, is not about the mechanisms of voting and office-holding. In fact conservatives hold a wide variety of opinions about such secondary formal matters. For conservatives, rather, democracy is a psychological condition. People who believe that the aristocracy rightfully dominates society because of its intrinsic superiority are conservatives; democrats, by contrast, believe that they are of equal social worth. Conservatism is the antithesis of democracy. This has been true for thousands of years. The defenders of aristocracy represent aristocracy as a natural phenomenon, but in reality it is the most artificial thing on earth. Although one of the goals of every aristocracy is to make its preferred social order seem permanent and timeless, in reality conservatism must be reinvented in every generation. This is true for many reasons, including internal conflicts among the aristocrats; institutional shifts due to climate, markets, or warfare; and ideological gains and losses in the perpetual struggle against democracy. In some societies the aristocracy is rigid, closed, and stratified, while in others it is more of an aspiration among various fluid and factionalized groups. The situation in the United States right now is toward the latter end of the spectrum. A main goal in life of all aristocrats, however, is to pass on their positions of privilege to their children, and many of the aspiring aristocrats of the United States are appointing their children to positions in government and in the archipelago of think tanks that promote conservative theories. Conservatism in every place and time is founded on deception. The deceptions of conservatism today are especially sophisticated, simply because culture today is sufficiently democratic that the myths of earlier times will no longer suffice. _Philip E. Agre_ _August 2004_

It seems as if this video has elevated the discourse, and encouraged no small proportion of people to read more, myself included. Thanks for that.

It's nuts to me that Ian hasn't broken at least half a million subs yet. This is one of the best youtube channels out there.

Second the recommend for Elizabeth's book, Neoreaction: a Basilisk. It's really, really good. Also recommend Nicholas Goodrich-Clarke's various books about post-wwii nazism. Also love how she uses William Blake to counter Nick Land. William Blake deserves way more love than he gets.

8:30 and directly dollowing: "This time it's different, baby." It's never different. Regarding this and the previous video, I don't want this to be true. Not because I doubt your research, I certainly am not qualified to. But because it's a slower suicide pact than the fascist one, but it still leads to violent revolution in the long run, and I don't like that on principle. The tune is just a little different. That said, a lot of the things you've said in this and the other video seem to reflect things I've heard people say in arguments and attitudes I've banged my head against. The most maddening is "But it manipulates the market". Good. There should be no market for cars that won't break exploding ketchup bottles and poisonous waste sites near where people live. And cleaning the mess up after the fact is not a sustainable alternative. Being a person raised in the same culture as much of your intended audience, I have to agree that I do and always have seen hiarchies as . . . natural? But so's the poison in peach pits. Natural is not a synonym for Good (which would not surprise my parents because as a boy I once wanted to eat some poisonous berries that grew in our back yard and were hard to get rid of). I read the Prince and the Discorces on Titus Levy and what I got from them besides a respect for looking at things how they are rather than how you would want them to be is that part of how they are is that people absolutely hate being, in their own view, opressed. Any hirarchy where power flows to the few and nothing flows to anyone else is just asking for the sort of problems that end with guilletines and even more opression (I'm not a fan of the French Revolution). So, if you going to have a hirarchy, you want it as wide as humanly possible with as many proections for people lower down as is reasonable. Insisting that all power must go to you and your budies is not a long-term strategy for survival. You could survive quite happily for generation, don't get me wrong, but eventually, if you act like the kind of person people want to hang from lightpost, someone will hang you from a lightpost unless you're retired for your own good. An having better people in power is not a good answer because vertuous people are great and we all need as many of them as possible isn't a solution because the reason why they're great is that they're not all that common. And not everyone who thinks they're vertuous really, truely is. And any system that overly concentrates power is going to attract the sort of people you don't want to have it. That's why you make sure you have more than one locus of power when you design a constitution. It's a way of widening the pyramid. Britain avoided violent revolution in the 1840's not because they were run by better people, but because they compromised. They spread the hirarchy out and let more people into decisionmaking. I hate that there are people in my country who want to reverse that process and am now less baffeled at the people who actively vote for them. I think part of what this shows that it's hard to take a small piece of something that you agree with out of a matrix of something you don't and don't understand. It reaches out for the ideas that it used to be connected to and unless you're very careful and either replace those intellectual connection or provide the context it can attract similar ideas. Which would be why people who with a straight face insist that the form of capitalism talked about here is democratic and a meritocracy but they wind up supporting the opposite without even noticing it. Ayn Rand quoters worry me for this reason.

Thank you so much for posting a list of sources! I spend a lot of time scouring the internet for books that focus on this topic/kind of analysis, so your list is such a blessing.

And thus the lobsters did stir. For the calling of their status quo as been made.

I was worried that you were actually gonna recite a Peterson quote in this video 🤣

6:25 that's a lot of words for: "please daddy punish me"

Conservatives: "Something short, quipy, and wrong about alt-right playbook." Innuendo Studios: This video. ^^ Hmmmm I think this kind of interaction was detailed somewhere....

If I had one wish. It would be that the average magakid could get past the 30sec mark without having a seizure.

Damn I thought you just pulled all of this out of twitter wars. Now I have to read things to understand things eugh I always wanted to know how people who made these big insight essays get their big ideas though, so thanks for this. This is a lot of extra labour

"The Reactionary Mind" and "Neoreaction" are both brilliant. I'll have to get down to "The Authoritarians" and "How Propaganda Works." If you haven't read them, I'd also recommend "Suburban Warriors," "Crabgrass Frontier," and Rick Perlstein's series of essays "Thinking Like a Conservative." Hell, read pretty much anything by Perlstein, he helped get the ball rolling for Corey Robin's theories.

7:46 HELP THAT TOOK ME OUT BECAUSE I WASNT EXPECTING IT AT ALL

the softest laugh at 00:57 ".../challenged/" was absolutely d e l i g h t f u l

One major shift in European conservative thinking was the 1891 Papal Encyclica "Rerum Novarum" which sparked its own, Christian-conservative social theory parallel to the Marxist-socialist one. However, since the 1980s the Christian-Social branch of conservativism has vastly lost in power due to Reagnite-Thatcherist influence among conservative thinkers.

So if conservatism isn't about fiscal responsibility, limited government, and rights of the individual, what does that make people who advocate fiscal responsibility, limited government, and rights of the individual?

That’s my favorite Jordan Peterson quote.

Thanks for posting this video about your research. As someone who generally doesn't read video descriptions or anything, that was really helpful. Every one of your videos are talking points for my friend group at college. You're doing awesome work!

I just got done reading Neoreaction a Basilisk. What a stellar book. I would also recommend the book Democracy in Chains, by Nancy MacLean!

A huuuuge part of things that influence conservative thought in modern day (in my humble mildly educated opinion) is the Gospel of Wealth by Andrew Carnegie, while reading this in history class i was shocked how similar it is to modern day arguments

Research is always a sticky wicket. There are those people out there who think that a peer-reviewed economics essay and a half-hour screed on Ben Shapiro's podcast are equally weighted sources. Then again there are those people who don't think they're equally weighted, but will present them as such anyway. That's kind of been the whole point of this Playbook series. Whatever wins, I guess...

Your essays on this and the previous topics have been fantastic. It helps that I agree with your conclusions, but your logic is well laid out and your insights are eye opening and compelling. Thank you for all of this series.

An extension on these two videos. I have noticed that my conservative friends tend to always argue, individual choice and always deny systemic problems. I think this is another difference between the way conservatives and liberals think.

Just found your channel. Keep up with the great work! I love it!

Man I just gotta say, your videos really helped me have a conversation with my dad. Putting together all the information from Angry Jack, to this video, really gives the bigger picture.

When I left fascism and became a conservative for a while, I noticed how similar the two were. Conservatives are actually just moderate fascist, especially in today's political climate.

Consider reading "The Red and the Blue," a history about the political tribalism arguably began forming when Newt Gingrich gained office. It's got some "faschy" themes.

These videos are really good. Enlightening, easy to follow, well-researched. I just felt I should say that. Keep it up!

You are consistently blowing my mind with these videos

So... that means we should go be progressive rather than just liberal.

I have had a gut feeling that I despise all conservative philosophy for a while. Now I know I was correct after all.

Stayed up till 12:00am exactly to watch this and it was totally worth it great video! interested to see more.

That Jordan Peterson quote 😂

Hey, I think you were taking Jordan Lobster Daddy Mad and Sad White Kermit Peterson out of context

thank you for this fantastic series. you're doing a great public service putting this information out there in this format. while i can't say you've convinced me of anything i didn't already believe, ive learned a lot from these videos, much of it stuff i never would have discovered for myself had you not extricated it from the toxic muck it's birthed from.

Stumbled upon your videos by chance, and they where eye opening. Not about my personnal values and beliefs, but more like ''damn! this is happening in my part of the world''. Great stuff, keep up the good work!

This is such great work and it’s asking a lot of the questions I ask. This UKposts channel is fucking incredible.

Capitalism and democracy are mutually exclusive imo. You don’t have a say in decision that effect you. Who elected Jeff bezos who voted on how much carbon emissions are push into the environment. The workers don’t get to say how the value they helped to make gets distributed they have to listen to there boss with no say in the matter.

Hey innuendostudios, got a trailer for Matt Walsh's "What is a woman" docu bullshit on your video, no idea if you can do anything about it but just letting you know :/

I watched the "Always a Bigger Fish" video when you first released it, and have since been thinking about a lot of stuff you discuss in this video. I'm just seeing it now, and I'm glad you released it.

Checking a lot of boxes while watching. Very thorough and balanced presentation. Actually presentations (binge watched really) 👍🏻 Thank you Ian.

Nietzsche also believed that slavery was necessary to the continuation of humanity, and that those meant to be subsidiary to others were actually happy being slaves.

What a fantastic series of videos. Well researched, argued and presented. I've just sat and watched the first 10 or so non-stop, except for the point at 7:40 in this one, where I had to pause and laugh uncontrollably for a good 20 seconds.

I only just discovered this series and I really hope to see it come back. The last two videos especially I have just not been able to stop thinking about. They're incredible and have really opened my mind to a whole new perspective.

Random internet troll: "U cLeArLy DoN't kNoW aNyThInG aBoUt CoNsErVaTiSm." Innuendo Studios: *knuckles crack* "So... I'm about to end this man's whole career."