I hate that this is true, plus he’s already said he would “take the best of the left and the best of the right” as some nonsense enlightened centrist candidate.
Yup. He had a community post saying he was too young to run but if he could run it wouldnt be about left or right, he’d sit down with both sides and work out a compromise. Previously i thought the minimum age should be lowered but after seeing something so naive i reconsidered.
IMHO that’s not just age. I’ve met middle aged to old people with similar beliefs.
To be fair, i think making an effort to de-radicalize and deescalate american politics would go a long way
I don’t watch Mr Beast, nor do i know anything about him, but my gut says he’s not a good fit for this purpose
I don’t know, i just wish politics wasn’t such a cult-of-personality, us-vs-them scream fest. I just can’t be bothered to care when everyone is at each other’s throats over everything
Would he take the best of ‘maga,’
Cos they literally tried to shut down the whole thing. Left right etc. There evidence!! Americans confuse me, man
What’s wrong with that?
It’s centrist nonsense, if someone says a waterfall flows downstream and someone else says the waterfall flows upstream, that doesn’t mean the waterfall is stagnant, or that the person who said it flows upstream has a good point.
The left and right aren’t arbitrary collections of disorganized and incoherent positions you can combine ad-hoc.
You might be too optimistic about the coherence of either side
Removed by mod
I do regularly, what’s up?
Looks like overanalysis to me. Not sure the massive metaphor was necessary to attack ‘them centrists’.
That being said - the notion that centrism is a compromise is only something I’ve seen from people who are not partaking in said centrism. Not that I give a shit or anything.
Why is it “overanalysis?” It’s a common problem, people who grow up privledged and don’t consider themselves to be very “political” tend to think politics is about listening to everyone and compromising. It isn’t limited to Mr. Beast.
As for the metaphor, it was, like, 2 sentences. I don’t think that’s “massive,” and it seemed to get the poijnt through.
As for Centrism, why is Centrism good? Why are Centrists Centrists?
Why are you calling people who want to do what’s good for the nation, centrists?
You’re smearing them since they are wanting to do something different than what you want, that doesn’t automatically make them bad.
This is the state of US politics… can’t even have someone poke their head in without being insulted since they aren’t fully in the left or right. Two party democracy doesn’t work, and you’re perpetuating and making it harder for your country to try and accept this needed change.
Don’t just insult and call people names who don’t agree with you politically, that just makes you an ass.
Yeah, I think you’ve been whiffing too much of the city air. All those exhaust fumes did a number on you.
Your comment makes it seem like there can only be two sides, that’s the entire issue with the US democracy from an outsider, where’s the other parties? Why only two, and why are you defending that there should be only two on divided lines?
I’m not talking about parties.
And neither are they, so what’s your point? They’re just saying that both sides have good points, and they’re the “party” that will get what the nation wants done. Is trying to do what the nation wants as whole centrist to you? Or are trying to smear someone who doesn’t align fully with you? That’s the issue that they are also trying to bring to light, you are saying there is sides, there shouldn’t be… since to be centrist requires sides… or parties… you’ve no contradicted yourself in your explanation.
What’s centrist about that? I think you’re just reading way too far into this or trying to make it into something it’s not. Both sides have points, both are wrong, and you’re trying to decry someone saying this. That’s frankly wrong dude.
There shouldn’t be sides, and that makes centralism impossible, it’s only possible with the two party system.
both sides have good points
I seriously wish this were the case. As someone who genuinely finds policy and political theory fascinating I wish I could have actual good faith policy discussions with people who don’t mostly agree with me, but the unfortunate fact is the Republican party doesn’t have any clear policy other than “whatever is good for the party members individually” or more currently “whatever Trump wants this week” (seriously, what isn’t listed at all on the shiny new Republican Party Platform speaks volumes to how the party doesn’t have any coherent political ideology to even pay lip service to)
They’re just saying that both sides have good points
Which is wrong. What “good points” do right-wingers legitimately have?
Is trying to do what the nation wants as whole centrist to you?
Saying “both sides have good points” places a mystical property on whatever is in the middle, as though the middle is inherently correct.
You’re batting a bit too hard for someone that thinks correct answers come from finding the midpoint. If someone says 2+2=4, and someone else says 2+2=6, the answer is still 4, not 5.
You are comparing basic addition with extremely complex social economics. You can’t just do A and guarantee B will happen. But if B actually happens it can be good for one group of people and bad for another one. Often the best solution is some kind of compromise. That said there surely can be some obviously bad ideas.
Which is wrong. What “good points” do right-wingers legitimately have?
This is why US politics are wild….
Saying “both sides have good points” places a mystical property on whatever is in the middle, as though the middle is inherently correct.
And you’re saying only the left is right in both of your statements, obviously you aren’t impartial and have a bias, as pointed out in my previous comment
You’re batting a bit too hard for someone that thinks correct answers come from finding the midpoint. If someone says 2+2=4, and someone else says 2+2=6, the answer is still 4, not 5.
That is some fallacious strawmanning right there, you’re saying only one side can be right, that’s not someone who is willing to have a discussion, you’re obviously just throwing shit at anything you don’t agree with.
Which is the entire point of his joke running, it’s hilarious that you can’t see this, but not surprising since you think there’s only one party. This is American politics people.
He’ll take people that believe in science and human rights, AND entitled bigot fascists! What’s wrong with that?
I really wonder what would happen if, say, Taylor Swift or MrBeast actually ran for president.
Who could compete with that? You can say the parties would try to oust them, but look how that worked out for Trump, and he had far less name recognition back then.
I would love to think that people wouldn’t just vote based on who they recognize most from TV but here we are
Well, that already happened for Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger.
At least one of those two was actually competent at his job.
Schwarzi?
He actually did a lot to reduce gerrymandering practices in California
As a Republican? That’s surprising. Although Cali mostly swings democrat, so it might have even been beneficial for R.
He was an old-school republican and honestly pretty liberal overall. He’s still far from MAGA as far as I know.
Jesse Ventura
deleted by creator
the advtage they have is that they wouldnt be able to be easily be influenced by money, because well, they have a lot already. it would probably be the main reason why neither poltical party would want them to run, because they wouldnt be able to be controlled as easily. a lot of powerful people would not want a populist to gain control.
Rich people are counterintuitively more susceptible to bribery.
They’re more susceptible to money, that’s how they got rich
More likely though, they would just pass the reigns after a day or a week or something. Being a President is exhausting, your daily schedule is constantly meeting and travelling nearly all the time. Even the presidents who would go golfing and the like were signing off on stuff and answering urgent phone calls.
You would think that, but there is never “enough” money for the wealthy.
The problem is that the very wealthy have either gained that through the exploitation of others or born into it. And neither create a healthy mindset as for how the general population should be treated.
We’re long overdue for a new reform party to run on few or single issue platforms, eg. to end FPTP and institute national ranked choice or star voting. They’d certainly be immune from corporate bribe money trying to drop these policies.
If they ran as independents to do just that, they’d have my vote. And it’s crazy enough it just might work.
It would be typical murica… that’s for sure.
We missed our chance to put Myspace Tom into office.
You gotta go with the people who don’t want the job. Should have forced him in before he took the money and ran.
You gotta go with the people who don’t want the job
Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy has got you there!
The major problem—one of the major problems, for there are several—one of the many major problems with governing people is that of whom you get to do it; or rather of who manages to get people to let them do it to them. To summarize: it is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
In a similar vein:
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
There’s a considerable overlap between intelligence of dumbest tourists and smartest bears.
- Some Park Ranger
for a little while he was my only friend
When did he unfriend you?
he sold our friendship for $580 million and never heard of him again
You’re so unbelievably right here.
I would take Mr. Beast over a lot of presidential candidates tbh
So many people would vote for him or not entirely based on his party affiliation.
No way he’d run without being independent
You need the party apparatus to campaign for you at the local level. No way to win a state without that.
I never said he’d win :P
words cannot properly articulate how much i hate this dude and his jackass face
I just don’t understand it. I once watched a video of his out of curiosity, as he had the largest YouTube channel, and I just don’t get it. Our country’s TV channel for children is more interesting.
That’s because he aims at a very specific hyper engaged demographic. The pre-pubescent teenager. Then they keep watching either out of habit or emotional stunting. They might not be a very sofisticated audience, but they are very dedicated. It might be all they watch, they construct their identity around the content they watch and demand parents to spend money on the products pushed to them by their favorite influencers.
This is not unusual, all generations have done it and diverse agents have capitalized from it. From boy bands, to star wars, Disney kids/adults… They are the unicorn audience in marketing, if you can get your claws on a person during that development stage, you got yourself a consumer of your brand for life.
watching paint dry is more interesting. Dude is so bland his entire personality can be boiled down to is “i have money please someone love me”
I know about 20 guys in my town with the exact same face and the same expression. Blandness personified.
What is Mr Beast? Is he like a new form of Pewdiepie who just does shit and gets assloads of money to film himself doing some script stuff with the caption “I DID THIS TOTALLY WEIRD THING AND LOOK WHAT HAPPENED”
He often does the reverse, paying people exorbitant sums to do mundane things like spending 3 days in a circle. He practically started and got famous of that genre.
I know this may sound ignorant, but who the heck watches this and gets entertained?
Kids with little experience perhaps. And morons.
Yeah, especially one of his latest videos… “Building 100 houses” or smth… Like, who watches that? Cringe
Yeah i watch 3 hour video essay on how the new star wars movies suck.
At least this engages with important concepts of story telling, society… politics… Etc etc etc.
A mystery still unsolved to this day
They’re leaving out that philanthropy is a big part of his videos. Sometimes it’s game show style where the winner(s) get huge rewards and sometimes it’s direct charity like the “I built 100 houses” video. People watch them because they’re often feelgood stories.
It can be a bit controversial as well because people who are more politically engaged often get frustrated by charity when they believe the problem the charity purports to solve is systemic. Whenever he posts philanthropy videos it triggers a huge shitstorm on Twitter of people expressing that frustration and a bunch of people coming to his defense.
He got his very first start doing weird things for views.
But he got really famous by being a clickbaity charity funded by viewers. For example he paid for eye surgeries for 1000 people.
That got him mainstream because the religious right started publicly denouncing him for helping people without it being about Jesus.
That got him mainstream because the religious right started publicly denouncing him
He’s constantly being front-paged on YouTube and getting shoved into everyone’s recommended feeds. I have never heard anyone on the religious right mention his name positively or negatively. I doubt the Zoomers and GenAlpha folks who subscribe to him have either.
Not mine. I only know of him from my son.
My feeds are all techy stuff. Cherno, level 1 techs, Adam Savage, and lots of Dragonball shorts.
Hmm I wonder what would Jesus do?
100% denounce him /s
If he had done it quietly without a video crew I would have a lot more respect for him… Actually… I would have any respect for him
If he had done it quietly without a video crew, Google wouldn’t have given him millions to do his next project which was building free homes for the homeless.
Precisely my point…
Now he has a fucking netflix deal. His face in household around the world… & he’ll get paid.
He’s a businessman, that’s for sure.
You would have more respect for him if he stopped doing charity work???
He gets money for charity from the advertisers. If he stops the videos the charity stops.
He funnels a greater percentage into charity than any other charity like habitat for humanity or the Red Cross. Would you be happier if he funneled his YouTube profits into a prostitution ring like Andrew Tate?
What do you want from him?
Intent matters to me.
He seems incredible fake and artificial. I get zero trust from him. Just because someone hide some shit to charity doesn’t mean shit. ESPECIALLY, if you consider his charity as a % of his wealth.
If you look at it that way, he gives less to charity than most of us, I would imagine.
JC yeah, he’s like a family friendly Andrew Tate… hahaha good one
His intent is to help people. If his intent was getting as rich as possible he would have continued filling swimming pools with orbeez.
It doesn’t matter how fake he is. He gets results.
That’s why the religious right hates him.deleted by creator
If he’d have done it quietly and without a video feed, he’d be called “Medicaid” and we’d be arguing over how much we need to defund him.
We? I sure af wouldn’t… Especially since I ain’t american.
Basically, yeah. He also has a habit of giving away large sums of money.
And people watch this because…? They want the money too? It’s just money.
He donates to a bunch of noble causes, and people like to see that. For example building 100 homes for people under the poverty line
And it makes pathetic contrarians seethe because they have nothing going in their lives.
Well I’ve had a similar anti-most-popular-youtuber phase too with Pewdiepe too. Logic really went through the window with me, and I’ve also felt this phenomenon with MrBeast, and idk why.
I mean it’s better than reaction channels who say you should disable Adblock because they do this for free and you are a bad person if you enable Adblock (Michelle debris or something like this said this in a video)
People definitely go overboard with their criticisms, but there are legitimate criticisms to be made. While his philanthropy is objectively good and makes a positive difference in people’s lives, it does nothing to address the systemic causes of the problems he highlights.
His content is also completely apolitical, which rubs people the wrong way when he covers topics a lot of people see as inherently political like extreme poverty, homelessness, and healthcare.
Were you also critical of Jimmy Carter for building homes for habitat for humanity?
Because Carter helped build homes for decades after retirement without politicizing it or addressing the systemic causes.
Yes, because it’s not enough. It’s possible to acknowledge good work while also criticizing the ways that it falls short, otherwise we risk cheering for the drop-in-the-bucket charity that doesn’t challenge the status quo and credulously thinking our problems are being solved when more needs to be done.
I suspect people watch it because it gives them that dopamine hit of helping someone, without actually doing anything. “Oh my gosh, he’s so charitable!”
Commodified charity is a very effective way to get views and followers, so many people copy his format, doing “charity” for personal fame and gain - i’ve heard of some “charity” tubers/tokers that start selling ad space to fucking online casinos once they get enough viewers.
So those “charity” YouTubers let the online casinos have their ad space so those casinos can give them more homeless people…
That he gets money from advertising increases the effect you described because simply by watching the video, they are contributing money to the charity they are watching.
He started out doing challenge videos like “counting to x” and it was literally like a multi-hour long video where he counted to 10,000 I believe. It’s insanely boring but it showed his “dedication to the bit”. Another is saying " pewdiepie like 10,000 times. I may have exaggerated, I’m not at a computer to look up the numbers. Eventually, after tormenting himself and gaining some followers and he got paid some money from youtube. With his first paycheck he made a video of him taking that check and giving it to a homeless person (IIRC). His philosophy was always to take any money he makes and dump it right into the next video. This has allowed him to slowly make bigger and bigger videos. He still regularly does challenge videos (buried himself alive for multiple days, not eating for several days, etc.) But, him dumping all of the money he makes, into the next video has grown from giving his first, probably couple hundred dollar check, to a homeless man, into giving literally millions away per video.
He also kind of pioneered the thumbnails you are talking about. And yelling at the beginning of the video to grab your attention by showing enthusiasm was also really his thing too. I mean some people had probably used it before. But, he used it regularly and had the type of content that really was that exciting.
Whether you care for challenge content, giving away money, some combination of both, or neither he also has Beast Philanthropy. That’s his channel where he does good “because he can”. He puts a bunch of money and gets sponsors to give money for causes like, building wells, building houses, paying for surgeries, building hospitals, etc. I thought it was a bit gross to make videos out of charity work at first. But, it helps a lot of people in under served countries, and raises awareness to them and the charities that try to help them. Also, all the money they make on that channel goes to the charity of each episode.
That was more than I thought I would type for sure…
Some more examples of youtube face:
To this day I’m sure he is just laundring money. Or that he has some special deal with youtube.
I don’t believe that he “just mastered youtube algorithm”, that’s not how things normally work. Idk to me just sound not trustworthy most of the time, there’s something going on.
I did some napkin math on him when he first got famous, his giveaways represent a pretty small fraction of his yearly income before taking into account merch, restaurant licensing, etc. They seem huge but it goes to show how much a popular media personality can make if they are appropriately CEO-brained.
I like to frame Mr. Beast in the context of the NFL.
The Super Bowl had 123 million viewers this past year. A 30 second ad slot costs $7 million. This is something we can all wrap our heads around. It’s a big deal, and that’s a lot of people.
Mr. Beast puts out a video about every 2 weeks. Most get more viewers than the Super Bowl. Some almost double. If every video he makes essentially prints him $20 million in ad and sponsor revenue, I wouldn’t be surprised.
That’s why he can give away $1 million in a video.
That’s probably overshooting a bit. Mr. Beast viewers likely don’t have nearly the aggregate spending power of the average Superbowl viewer. Dude is absolutely making bank but there’s no way he’s clearing $100M/yr.
I’m not sure mr beast views are real. And youtube probably know it.
That’s all based on his info on how much is he earning. Which may be a lie.
I don’t even think his views per video are not inflated either by bots or by youtube themselves inflating the numbers.
I remember being young and making bad political decisions. If my generation got to do that why not gen alpha? I hope the legacy my generation leaves behind helps gen alpha elect the leaders that they want without being fooled by the lies.
I do think centrist nonsense like what Mr. Beast has said he would do should be opposed. He stated that if he did run, he would “listen to the best of the left and the best of the right,” which manifests a mystical property on the center of arbitrary lines being “good,” somehow.
lmao spoken like someone whose only concern is their brand. Unsurprising, but still gross.
Yep, it’s an extremely common viewpoint for privledged “apolitical” kids who think they solved politics.
Yeah. Especially the part where they think they’ll be able to get everyone to agree on what’s best about each side.
Also the naivety that, because people hold beliefs, they must somehow be good.
We could and have elected worse.
Such as a twice impeached convicted felon?
Wait, that one hasn’t happened yet. He needs to get re-elected before I can say this.
I hope I don’t get the opportunity to say it, but you never know.
Not when we find out hes been fucking kids.
Oh shit, the Rs would vote for him because of it.
I hate this trickle-down rich bitch so goddamn much.
deleted by creator
Meh, could do worse.
No thanks. He’s a fucking chode
Fun fact: I got to access to his email through my job once. It’s insane the amount of dumb fuckery people will email. One person had cc’d his email on a whole thread of emails stalking some woman.
That sounds like something that should be reported to the authorities.
They have a whole process for that, some emails were REALLY problematic
