Tldr (go watch Angela Collier’s video on him for the full story), Richard Feynmann was a really good physicist and educator, but his most popular stuff is usually him being a misogynistic asshole [going a strip club and playing bongos, speaking gibberish and saying he was simply speaking a “regional dialect” to foreigners, forcing waitresses to earn their tip by making them answer physics questions in the middle of their shift, etc.].

That really how I feel with Bad Empanada. Because his main channel is good, well sourced and does a good job at educating people on anti imperialist causes.

But I never hear about that really. All I hear from people who like him are all of his really bad takes and his constant brain rot on Twitter and bluesky.

I would much rather hear about his really well researched videos on the Iraq War and Israel’s genocide. I don’t want to hear about some tirade he made on twitter/Bsky about something or other.

Like, 90% of his videos on his main channel are good, and the ones I criticize are at the very least still professional. But I don’t see content from those, I only constantly see content from his live channel and his Twitter. And I’m like…why? Why emphasize this part so much? Sure you can’t separate the two, but there’s the really, really good part of the person, and then the part where he’s an abrasive asshole. Why are you emphasizing on the second part?

Sorry, this isn’t some in depth debunking of him on anything. Like I said, I do like what he does and I think he is mostly correct. But for some reason people [who support him and all his views] love emphasizing the bits where he’s wrong for some reason. So I just wanted to vent that out.

Edit: There’s also the flipside of this, which is Hasan. I think Hasan is very friendly, pretty mature, and someone who is all round respectable. At the same time, I think his actual work is pretty meh at best, detrimental at worst. To go back to my Feynmann analogy, I might think that Neil Degrasse Tyson seems like a pretty okay guy who I would like to have a conversation with, and not as much of an ass as Feynmann. But Feynmann was definitely a much, much better physicist and educator than Tyson

  • June@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    12·
    8 days ago

    None of those are reactionary statements.

    The claim he makes in the first image (that some people falsely claim to be part of a marginalised group for the perceived social cred and then use said marginalised status as a cudgel whenever they’re attacked) is objectively true. Have you ever heard of a Pretendian?

    In the second image, BadEmpanada was talking about “POCD”, or “paedophilic obsessive-compulsive disorder”, which one of his detractors claimed to have. It is not a real diagnosis, nor should we allow would-be child rapists to portray their subhumanity as a simple mental disorder which they don’t have any responsibility over. The only treatment for paedophilia is a bullet to the head; and I am genuinely horrified that people in the comments of that post are actually running defence for those lowlives.

    And the argument he makes about First World trade unions supporting imperialism is likewise correct. All one needs to do to prove this is look at the history of the labour movement in the West during World War I, World War II, and the Cold War.

    you’re talking about him like conservatives used to talk about donald trump back when anyone cared about his transgressions.

    The difference is that, in BadEmpanada’s case, it’s actually true. When you actually examine the essence of what he is saying as I have done instead of just looking at a thumbnail, soyfacing, and parading around as if what he is saying is self-evidently wrong like a thoughtless imbecile; it is progressive.

    • the rizzler@lemmygrad.ml
      41·
      8 days ago

      of course first world trade unions can act in support of imperialism. saying “don’t join a union” is a reactionary response to a very real fact. as for your first and second responses, just because you’re the same type of reactionary as badempanada doesn’t mean the rest of us don’t understand what he’s saying. communists can read and understand subtext just as well as whatever it is you are

      • June@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
        11·
        8 days ago

        of course first world trade unions can act in support of imperialism. saying “don’t join a union” is a reactionary response to a very real fact.

        In the context of 21st-century imperialist countries, it really isn’t. In Lenin’s time when only a minority of workers in the first world were labour aristocrats, you’d have a point, but that’s not the case anymore. It’s no longer the case where the leadership of the unions were reactionary but the membership by-and-large weren’t. Also, BadEmpanada explicitly says in his video (which has since been renamed to “DON’T Just Join a Union” to clarify the fact that he’s arguing that unions aren’t an end in and of themselves and that the primary focus must be on fighting imperialism):

        I’m not saying “Don’t join any union”. I’m saying at least think more about the decision. Be conscious about it and be very careful about what you do within a union because you are ultimately human, you are ultimately gonna follow the carrot on the stick; and the carrot on the stick (when you’re in a union in the first world) is often “support imperialism”. There may be genuine anti-imperialist unions where you are that are way more involved in broader politics—in broader global geopolitics—than other unions are. Look into that maybe. Who knows? At least think about this stuff. You know, stop focusing your politics around unionism, around organised labour in your own country—which is just unionism, really. Start focusing more on imperialism.

        Of course, you didn’t watch the video, did you?

        as for your first and second responses, just because you’re the same type of reactionary as badempanada doesn’t mean the rest of us don’t understand what he’s saying. communists can read and understand subtext just as well as whatever it is you are

        Exactly. You read between the lines and then you ignore the lines.

        • the rizzler@lemmygrad.ml
          4·
          8 days ago

          well it makes me feel better he’s changed the thumbnail. i still don’t see why you have to defend his other reactionary takes. is homosexuality bourgeois decadence too? or is it just the Current Thing?

          • June@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
            11·
            8 days ago

            i still don’t see why you have to defend his other reactionary takes.

            As Marxists we uphold the truth, and the truth is that the evidence you provided doesn’t even remotely indicate that BE is a reactionary. Now, your turn. Do you want to explain to everybody why you think that “paedophilic obsessive-compulsive disorder” is a real condition and anyone who disagrees with you is ableist? Do you want to explain why acknowledging the existence of pretendians is bigoted? Or do you recognise that he was correct and you’ll apologise for slander of a public figure?

            • the rizzler@lemmygrad.ml
              41·
              8 days ago

              lmao i don’t think i should have to explain to a “marxist” why ocd doesn’t make someone “subhuman”. even if they get unpleasant intrusive thoughts, which is a symptom of ocd. actually, i think you should explain why you feel it’s acceptable to use that sort of strasserist thinking

              i also don’t think it’s even a little bit permissible to misgender someone or accuse them of being “fake trans” just because they happen to be a little hitler, as most americans are. it doesn’t help anyone, trans or palestinian, to do that sort of bigotry. i don’t think i should have to explain to a self-described “marxist” that trans people are human beings, with all the good and bad that entails

              • June@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
                12·
                8 days ago

                lmao i don’t think i should have to explain to a “marxist” why ocd doesn’t make someone “subhuman”.

                Paedophilia is not a symptom of OCD. You are equating having OCD to being a paedophile. THAT is ableist, and it also makes you a defender of paedophilia. And being a paedophile (or a defender thereof) does in fact make you a subhuman.

                even if they get unpleasant intrusive thoughts,

                “Unpleasant intrusive thoughts” like wanting to rape children? YOU CALL THAT “UNPLEASANT INTRUSIVE THOUGHTS”?!

                i think you should explain why you feel it’s acceptable to use that sort of strasserist thinking

                Paedophilia is one of the most vile crimes there is. If you do something that inhumane, you cease to be a person. If you aren’t a person, you don’t have rights. And when a non-person’s mere existence is a threat to the safety of others, it must be exterminated. When a dog intentionally hurts a child, we put it down. And a dog isn’t even particularly intelligent. What do you think should happen to a far more sentient being guilty of an even more heinous crime?

                i also don’t think it’s even a little bit permissible to misgender someone or accuse them of being “fake trans” just because they happen to be a little hitler, as most americans are. it doesn’t help anyone, trans or palestinian, to do that sort of bigotry. i don’t think i should have to explain to a self-described “marxist” that trans people are human beings, with all the good and bad that entails

                I agree, and BadEmpanada likely does too. He wasn’t accusing anyone in particular. On the rare occasion that he does misgender somebody, he corrects himself

                • the rizzler@lemmygrad.ml
                  41·
                  8 days ago

                  “non-human” “exterminated” okay bro. no one said ocd makes you want to touch children. that is, in fact, not one of the symptoms. intrusive thoughts, however, are. don’t try to turn this around on me man

                  • June@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
                    12·
                    8 days ago

                    no one said ocd makes you want to touch children. that is, in fact, not one of the symptoms. intrusive thoughts, however, are. don’t try to turn this around on me man

                    I said that POCD is not a real condition and that paedophiles are subhumans. Your response to that was to falsely equate having OCD to being a paedophile (“i don’t think i should have to explain to a ‘marxist’ why ocd doesn’t make someone ‘subhuman’”) and claim that “getting unpleasant intrusive thoughts” (i.e. wanting to rape children) was “a symptom of ocd.” That is ableism and paedophilia apologia. You are a paedophile ally, and I’m going to make that fact known to everybody.