Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Milos Uzelac

Breadtube serves Imperialism - Excerpts about Ian 'Vaush' Kochinski

36 posts in this topic

BreadTube Serves Imperialism: Examining The New Brand of Internet Psuedo-Socialism by Caleb Maupin.

Excerpts from the book about Ian 'Vaush' Kochinski:

Don't have the book just found about it, it's 18 bucks on Amazon. 

Looks very intriguing. 

 

419rKZfNHPS._AC_SY780_.jpg

E56QjtfX0AElyKN.jpeg

E56QjteX0AAS3tQ.jpeg

E56QjwxWQAI9_Js.jpeg

E56Qj1CXoAEYUxg.jpeg


"Keep your eye on the ball. " - Michael Brooks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Wow, what a ridiculous hatchet job. What is this guy's personal grievance with Vaush?

He's a streamer kid who shared hundreds if not thousands of hours of videos of himself talking off the cuff about every kind of political subject. Of course he says dumb shit from time to time. From what I have seen of his content, he is pretty immature but he is on the right path generally speaking. Hell I might have said some of the same shit when I was his age.

I just saw this.. he also wrote a similar chapter on Though Slime? Haha, how did he get this published in an actual book?

 

Edited by Stomatopod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Stomatopod said:

As for insinuating he is some sort of pedophile and sexual predator, I think that might qualify as libel.

First time hearing about the pedophilia but it truly is sad how many people don't know about the sexual predator stuff. 

And the writer forgot to put in how he lies all the time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Stomatopod said:

what a ridiculous hatchet job.

It's not a hatchet job if there's credible evidence that the guy is fraud who deceives his audience and his fans about who and what he is, what he stands for, his past and misguiding them and funnelling them into some idiosyncratic self-serving interpretation of what socialism and activism is and what is the main focus and goal of people who adopt such a lifestyle principle and attitude towards politics. 

1 hour ago, Stomatopod said:

What is this guy's personal grievance with Vaush?

 

Probably exposing someone who he thinks is fraud and who lies who he is and what he stands for and trying to swade his audience and fans who watch him to think twice who they are giving money to and giving views to so he can profit off of their naiveness and uneducatedness and indoctrinate them with false teachings of what is and isn't socialism, Marxism, leftism etc. and what a true socialist, leftist, Marxist and activist stance towards some issue should and shouldn't be and how and should and they shouldn't feel towards certain groups and demographics i.e. Trump republicans and populists. It's an indoctrination online cult centered around the ambiguous online brand of Vaush created by a guy from an affluent Beverly Hills family called Ian Kochinski who preaches what he in his mind thinks true socialism is and how one should act, think, feel and behave in accordance of his version of socialism with the side of his peddling contempt, hate, intolerance and bias towards certain groups and demographics while worshiping and praising others and himself and his self-inflated ego uncritically. A makings of an online cult-leader with a narcisstic personality disorder and traits of a sociopath towards certain people on the social ladder and of a demographic background. 

If you have credible evidence against a fraud with traits of a sociopathy that he deceives people in order to profit off of them and exploit their naiveness or ignorance of the person than you can levy your accusation credibly in the book if your goal is to swade that audience and fanbase from being deceived into thinking that their supporting a cause that they are actually not and that their being exploited and fooled by the person who lies to them that they are actually supporting that cause if they follow him. 

And he is smug as hell in responding to Maupin's accusations of what he is actually doing and contributing towards in the youth that follow him. 

 

Edited by Milos Uzelac

"Keep your eye on the ball. " - Michael Brooks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just the title of that book is so so stupid. Breadtube is so small, how is it serving Imperialism? Is it because they partially support Capitalism?


لا إله إلا الله، وليو رسول الله

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Anyone know what this guy's deal is (by that I mean Caleb Maupin)? 

From what I've been able to gather the guy is apparently a nazbol, which is combination of National Socialism (aka Nazism) and Bolshevism; something I had no idea was even a thing that existed until I started looking in to it. 

If that's accurate, he sounds like a real piece of shit (or at the very least a toxic ideologue whose motivations are extremely suspect, to be incredibly charitable).

 

Edited by DocWatts

"The mind is inherently embodied.
Thought is mostly unconscious.
Abstract concepts are largely metaphorical." - George Lakoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He seems generally unable to adress and criticize any of the Maupin's accusations and criticism of him with any substance, disproving them or debunking them. Instead he resorts to ad-hominems of Maupin and Empanada calling them 'mentally deranged' and 'unhealthily obsessed about him' while not addressing a single one of their criticisms and accusations of them. Basicly he is performing a smug narcisstic deflection strategy labeling and gaslighting to his audience his critics as lunatics and crazily obsessed people. The way he presents and reads this book to his audience is full of irony and cynicism without actual criticism or disproving of its contents again to solidify his cult following and for him not to lose viewers and fans.

And also the Serfs pulled the quote from the book and laughed off its contents and substances cynically while again not actually responding to the criticisms and accusations of what effect does their content have on their viewers and followers. 

I see this as a desperate attempt to save their credibility and following of their audience after the expose of this book on the effects of their online personality cult-following and effects of their content on their fanbase and audience. 

In my opinion Maupin did an excellent job of exposing of the mechanism of this whole online personality following indoctrination cult and detailing the origin this whole subsection of the niche market and class on YouTube and how fraudulent they exactly our in their content and what they stand for and how they indoctrinate their audience in their online personality cult-followong. They are online profiteers looking to make money off their audience by misguiding them and indoctrinating them into false narratives about the cause they are following and others and keeping them stuck in their own echo chamber and online bubble while demonising and smearing the other side they see as rivals, competition or threat for their free ride profit-making scheme. 


"Keep your eye on the ball. " - Michael Brooks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

Anyone know what this guy's deal is (by that I mean Caleb Maupin)? 

From what I've been able to gather the guy is apparently a nazbol, which is combination of National Socialism (aka Nazism) and Bolshevism; something I had no idea was even a thing that existed until I started looking in to it. 

If that's accurate, he sounds like a real piece of shit...

 

Again I see ad-hominems directed towards the author of the book and no actual substance dispelling and disproving any of the arguments and accusations he levied against of any of the people in the book, their history, practices and online schemes. 

That's the first I heard of the claim that he is a Nazbol, sounds like to me it was invented by Vaush or someone from the breadtube space since he is a contributor at RT, said things and supports the idea behind the Soviet Union and contemporary China, advocated in support for white working class Americans from the Midwest or Rustbelt, making him in the minds of these breadtubers a Nazbol. 

I would like to see someone defining what any of these buzzwords actually mean and how they are relevant to contemporary framing of the direction of advocating for working class-politics and are not just a label and easily invented phrase to demonise and write off opponents as evil and Nazis to a delluded fan base. 


"Keep your eye on the ball. " - Michael Brooks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Milos Uzelac said:

It's not a hatchet job if there's credible evidence that the guy is fraud who deceives his audience and his fans about who and what he is, what he stands for, his past and misguiding them and funnelling them into some idiosyncratic self-serving interpretation of what socialism and activism is and what is the main focus and goal of people who adopt such a lifestyle principle and attitude towards politics.

What is a hatchet job then? If you want to critisize a public figure I suppose it's fair enough to quote mine their old streams and tweets to find dumb statements, but it's pretty obvious what it is when he also throws in random stuff like "btw, he also once sent a dick pic, he sent inappropriate texts to girl, he is showing signs of personality disorder, i think he is a narcissist and sex addict, etc"... What do you call that other than trying to smear the person in any possible way you can think of? That book sounds like it's just one long late night rage tweet on print, sold for $18.00 on amazon. Haha, are you kidding me??

And I don't even care for him personally. Vaush is very smug and arrogant for 20-something year old who often doesn't know what he is talking about. I don't want to defend him. The same goes for Thought Slime. They are not nefarious people. I would much rather young impressionable minds listen to them over someone like Tim Pool or Steven Crowder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

57 minutes ago, Stomatopod said:

What do you call that other than trying to smear the person in any possible way you can think of? That book sounds like it's just one long late night rage tweet on print, sold for $18.00 on amazon. Haha, are you kidding me??

Exposing evidence of proving someone is a legitimate fraud is not smearing and its a way for people to have a another perspective on the person they didn't have or was hidden from them to reconsider if they are truly following a guy that aligns with their stated cause and their principles or if he is a fraud deluding them and swindling them for money and donations. 

If people truly care about what socialism stands for and what it is about then they should have all the info about if their following of a certain person aligns with that cause and are not being misguided into following something else that only has a facade of that cause and actually stands for something else. 

The title of the book suggests they are following and agreeing to something else which has more to do with U.S. state, foreign policy, media and oligarchic interests than of actual international working-class politics, solidarity and struggle. 

57 minutes ago, Stomatopod said:

I would much rather young impressionable minds listen to them over someone like Tim Pool or Steven Crowder.

Yes, I agree. They are a step up in the right direction on the spiral. However the effect of their following and content is a grossly miseducated audience who is taught incorrectly about what socialism is about and how activism of its advancement is carried out and who it suppose to primarily target. Hint its not so much towards as college youth as much towards the people they despise and demonise as an inferior rabble, the actual or future working class of the country. Sure its vitally important to sway away the youth from radicalization into hateful ideologies but it is equally important no to teach that youth to hate and despise their more unfortunate counterparts in the more underdeveloped parts of the country as Nazis, Nazbols, fascists and déplorables who have fallen prey to such ideologies as the unredeemable main foe of your cause who deserve nothing but contempt and hatred. 

Also to dismiss and demonise as equally dangerous as the right-wing harsh critics of the U. S. in your country who are amicable to some other foreign powers policy towards the world and  working class people in their own country as agents for a foreign power and tankies since they point to the way the U.S. foreign policy has been against and undermined these countries efforts is implicitly rhetorically supporting and enabling imperialist policies of your own country by demonising and equating these critics with facists and with ulterior motives to radicalize your audience by exposing them to some unsavory truths about the mechanicsm in which the U. S. Empire sustains itself and its hegemony in the world and how the global oligarchy in the country sustain themselves, their system that perpetuates huge disparities in wealth, and their narrative power. 

Edited by Milos Uzelac

"Keep your eye on the ball. " - Michael Brooks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vaush isn’t the best person to follow, nor is he the worst. He’s pretty solidly above average, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Milos Uzelac said:

Again I see ad-hominems directed towards the author of the book and no actual substance dispelling and disproving any of the arguments and accusations he levied against of any of the people in the book, their history, practices and online schemes. 

That's the first I heard of the claim that he is a Nazbol, sounds like to me it was invented by Vaush or someone from the breadtube space since he is a contributor at RT, said things and supports the idea behind the Soviet Union and contemporary China, advocated in support for white working class Americans from the Midwest or Rustbelt, making him in the minds of these breadtubers a Nazbol. 

I would like to see someone defining what any of these buzzwords actually mean and how they are relevant to contemporary framing of the direction of advocating for working class-politics and are not just a label and easily invented phrase to demonise and write off opponents as evil and Nazis to a delluded fan base. 

Basic Media Literacy 101 involves assessing the tone and style of a piece, along with the biases of its author, to determine how trustworthy of a source something is. So whether the guy writing a takedown piece on Vaush is in part motivated by an authoritarian ideology (ie  Bolshevism and Nazism) is completely relevant.

The fact that he lists China, a country that's engaging in active genocide against ethnic minorities within its sphere of influence, as an anti-imperialist state(?!), is a good evidence for the ideological bias I indicated.

I'll take this guy about as seriously as I'd take a Neo Nazi or White Supremacist's "response" to one of Leo's actualized.org videos.


"The mind is inherently embodied.
Thought is mostly unconscious.
Abstract concepts are largely metaphorical." - George Lakoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Willie said:

Vaush isn’t the best person to follow, nor is he the worst. He’s pretty solidly above average, though.

If you want to learn about what socialism and what it is about and how to approach the world when adopting such a stance I would argue he is a source that delludes people and grossly miseducates on the topic and grossly misrepresentats other creators, authors and figures stance on the topic. You have much better and more credible authors and creators on the topic that can put one on a much better direction than what Vaush does to his audience and fanbase. 


"Keep your eye on the ball. " - Michael Brooks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Milos Uzelac said:

Sure its vitally important to sway away the youth from radicalization into hateful ideologies but it is equally important no to teach that youth to hate and despise their more unfortunate counterparts in the more underdeveloped parts of the country as Nazis, Nazbols, fascists and déplorables who have fallen prey to such ideologies as the unredeemable main foe of your cause who deserve nothing but contempt and hatred.

Well, I agree with this. That's the one area where I get frustrated with stage green people. Just because they are way more developed than the "fascists" they are demonizing, they think they are at the top of the moral pyramid. It seems extremely confusing and counterintuitive that not judging the "bad people" is the morally superior position. They can't understand it.

But regardless of the limitations of stage green, we want as many people as possible to become green ASAP because time is running out on climate change. What's the point of discussing what is the correct form of socialism is when the house is on fire?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Caleb Maupin is a tankie who plays cover for authoritarian regimes just because it’s anti-West. Trash ideology 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, DocWatts said:

The fact that he lists China, a country that's engaging in active genocide against ethnic minorities within its sphere of influence, as an anti-imperialist state(?!), is a good evidence for the ideological bias I indicated.

Lol. 

Just because he's an idiot doesn't mean all his criticism is invalid.(some of it is) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

6 hours ago, Opo said:

Lol. 

Just because he's an idiot doesn't mean all his criticism is invalid.(some of it is) 

And a broken clock is right twice a day, I know.

The problem isn't that he's an idiot, it's that the criticism itself is dishonest, ideologically motivated drivel written in Bad Faith towards someone he has obvious personal animosity towards.

No surprise, since anyone who watches Vaush knows that he has a very low opinion of Authoritarian Socialists (or 'Tankies'), and is quite vocal about this, seeing them as no better than the Nazis and White Supremacists whom he debates on his channel.

As to authorial intent being an important part of whether or not a critique is valid, a White Supremacist who writes a character assassination of Martin Luther King might manage to get a few things factually right (ie 'MLK cheated on his wife'), but the critique itself cannot be separated from the context it was created in.

Edited by DocWatts

"The mind is inherently embodied.
Thought is mostly unconscious.
Abstract concepts are largely metaphorical." - George Lakoff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Breadtube is so small, how is it serving Imperialism

It's because, at least Ian Kochinski does, I don't know about the others I haven't watched them, they demonise and smear harsh critics of U.S. domestic and foreign policy, State Department propaganda and corporate media propaganda as monolithic and homogeneous group of 'tankies' who use it as a cover to support authoritarian regimes aligned against U.S. interests or who openly work for the advancement of the interests of those régimes. Example if you are against U.S. escalation of arms supply to Taiwan, are skeptical based on the supplied and surfaced evidence of the extent that what is happening in Xinjiang is an actual 'concentration and internment camp genocide of the Uyghur ethnic minority group carried out in open sight by the Chinese government' and that it can't be characterized as something else for example government suppression, forced secularisation and Sinofication or discrimination against a group or suppressing that group for the fear of infiltration and support of separatist and terrorist group such as the ETIM or even call it cultural genocide if you will, while ignoring the fact that China has done that to most of its religious groups under the policy of state atheism and not just Uyghurs, being against the murderous economic sanctions and warfare imposed on the Venezuelan government carried out by the U. S. government and being amicable and in support of that governments struggle against those sanctions and some of their policies towards their people and being in support also of the Iran and Cuba governments struggle against U. S. sanctions etc. and what do these authoritarian regimes have in common they are curiously all the target of U. S. economic sanctions and military might and somehow those other authoritarian regimes like in Colombia and Azerbaijan and others around the globe aren't, and that to me is why it's fair game to call them, like Maupin said, anti-imperialists state because they are only demonised and despised as authoritarian by the U. S. State Department because they go against the logic of U. S. economic imperialism and financial hegemony in their geostrategic constellation and functioning. 

Also because they demonise the working-class, small businesses or rural Americans in your country who got coned by Trump and have been abandoned and outcast by the state as irredeemable fascists and as a potential domestic terrorist threat in alignment with the stance U. S. intelligence services and government who are the ones that need to go extinct and disappear from the country failing to see that their the ones who are the actual suffering working class of the country that is in alienated and in deep despair caused by the severe lack of economic justice and structural dysfunction within the country. They view them as the CIA views them as prone to white nationalist, ethnonationalist or supremacist radicalization by foreign powers while totally dismissing the underlying structural and economic causes that in the past 30 years caused the American working class to be in such a state. Zero compassion and liberal bigotry directed towards them. 


"Keep your eye on the ball. " - Michael Brooks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DocWatts said:

Basic Media Literacy 101 involves assessing the tone and style of a piece

Alright, what ulterior motives did you assess from 4 pages of the piece. Someone reading this will abandon Kochinski and what will then become amicable to Nazbol propaganda and go watch Nazbol content on YouTube or read Nazbol work. Where exactly in the piece does his Nazbol bias show itself and is detectable. 

We can flip the question. How trustworthy is Vaush a source on socialism and anti-imperialism if he gets coaching before debates from TYT contributors that are on the payroll of Democratic Party lobby groups and other lobby groups in the U.S.

"I’d be remiss to overlook the influence of twenty million dollars invested in The Young Turks from Jeffrey Katzenberg’s media conglomerate that has its fingers in the private healthcare industry.

In 2019, Katzenberg developed a smartphone app to help healthcare giants with mobile marketing.

Like Nomiki Konst, Ana Kasparian brands herself as a progressive, and even a socialist, while participating directly in NATO propaganda operations.

Last year, she beamed with pride as she interviewed Madeleine Albright at the Munich Security Conference, a NATO summit funded by Western governments, multi-national corporations, and the arms industry."

Source: https://mronline.org/2020/12/30/meet-the-pseudo-left-imperialists-fighting-against-universal-healthcare/

13 hours ago, DocWatts said:

So whether the guy writing a takedown piece on Vaush is in part motivated by an authoritarian ideology (ie  Bolshevism and Nazism) is completely relevant.

Again where in that piece does that authoritarian ideology manifest? What for second guessing the intent behind calling for that Trump supporters be disappeared after rushing the Capitol? Questioning U.S. State Department calls for humanitarian interventions across different countries? Where in the piece is it indicated that he supports Nazism or Bolshevism? Besides honestly that sounds like a stretched for the purposes of dismissing someone based on the label 1920's and 1930's stage blue  false equivalency to me. 

14 hours ago, DocWatts said:

The fact that he lists China, a country that's engaging in active genocide against ethnic minorities within its sphere of influence, as an anti-imperialist state(?!), is a good evidence for the ideological bias I indicated.

It's anti-imperialist only in its position as a counter to U.S. imperialism across the globe. The same way that Soviet Union once was anti-imperialist against U.S. influence on the globe yet internally it was a different story. Again some would not characterize that as genocide based on the supplied evidence but a government suppression of a religious and cultural liberties of a minority group, again not surprising given the policy of official state atheism in China, not to mention the fact suppressing a separatist organizations such as the ETIM that planned to carry out terrorist attacks across China such as at Beijing Olympics in 2008, that curiously the U.S. State Department in 2020 suddenly removed from its list of designated terrorist organizations. Curious. 

 

14 hours ago, DocWatts said:

take this guy about as seriously as I'd take a Neo Nazi or White Supremacist's

Only shows how deeply the narrative managers have falsely equated the two positions and manufactured the label 'tankie' in the minds of Americans and Westerners. 

Here is an article if you are curious of how that narrative management and control works and how it repeats the talking points of U. S. State Department propaganda against a group or other countries:

https://consortiumnews.com/2021/04/06/tankie-other-popular-terms-of-narrative-control/

 

 


"Keep your eye on the ball. " - Michael Brooks 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0