Violence | ContraPoints

  • Published on Nov 24, 2017
  • No dolls or mannequins were harmed in the making of this film.
    Support this channel:
    ✿Live Stream Channel:
    ✿Twitter: ContraPoints
    ✿Facebook: ContraPoints/
    ✿Instagram: contrapoints
    Zoë Blade music:
    Lindsay Ellis:
    Claudia Brown:
    Check out my videos about:
    The Left:
    Decrypting the Alt-Right:
    Gender Dysphoria:
    Free Speech (Part 1):
    Free Speech (Part 2):
    Debating the Alt-Right:
    What is Race?:
    What is Gender?:
    What the Alt-Right fears:
    Punching Natsees:

Comments • 3 008

  • ContraPoints
    ContraPoints  Year ago +2139

    Violence-it's fun! Is that bad?
    This video goes to dark places so please take the content warning seriously.

    • Neko
      Neko Month ago

      First dislike

    • Scooters Videos
      Scooters Videos 2 months ago +1

      When you become enlightened, real violence isn't fun.

    • SubversiveMemes
      SubversiveMemes 3 months ago

      This is an American thing, thinking you can enjoy violence as long as the people getting hurt are "villains" and there is some sort of Judaic old testament revenge violence involved. That's why the world thinks American films are retarded and pathetic

  • Jojo Quinoa
    Jojo Quinoa 2 days ago

    Bro Natalie was on some heavy shit making this video because it feels like such a fever dream compared to her newer content

  • Mac Jones
    Mac Jones 3 days ago +1

    0:39 You're one of them, huh? A runny yolk....You make me sick!

    MOOSELINI 4 days ago

    That opening was like the dexter opening

  • Billy b
    Billy b 4 days ago

    The book is better!

  • It's Ja-Boy
    It's Ja-Boy 8 days ago

    I know I know important political an philosophical things and all but nothing will bother me more than the fact you didn’t cut that beef on a cutting board.

  • milkamilla
    milkamilla 10 days ago +2

    Not going to lie, that clip of Richard Spencer getting decked in the face always makes me smile, and I can't even feel guilty about it.

  • Aaron Hoover
    Aaron Hoover 11 days ago

    Did she just make a Bloody Mary with fucking Malibu? Gross!

  • CommissarKozlov
    CommissarKozlov 11 days ago

    Why can't humans stop killing animals? Clearly you support the meat and dairy industry given the start of your video.

  • Robert Kunkle
    Robert Kunkle 14 days ago

    So here's the issue - it's really useful to a government to hide and justify its own violence, while vastly overemphasizing the violence of anything threatening it. Because Fred Hampton and those like him were so good at connecting working people, including armed self-defense against brutal policing, the state assassinated him and his family in their beds. It seems like the 'but revolutions are violent too!' line responds to an equality of sides that's actually a huge distortion.

  • Sunflower Socialist
    Sunflower Socialist 15 days ago

    What about defending actions of the IRA and ETA?

  • luemsaga1994
    luemsaga1994 20 days ago

    Natalie, por favor, haznos un video en donde nos enseñes a hacer tu bebida de chocolate. Se me antojó mucho 🙏🏻

  • Cynic The Hedgehog
    Cynic The Hedgehog 22 days ago

    You should talk about the superhero fad and the philosophy of violence present therein.

  • Cynic The Hedgehog
    Cynic The Hedgehog 22 days ago

    Isn’t it fun being an animal? Also that mistress sketch at the beginning.. uh, I’ll be right back for the rest of the video

  • sofielundsskolan
    sofielundsskolan 23 days ago

    I once read an interview of some game developer, who spoke about the fact that most video games are violent, or at least include violence to a great degree. His perspective seemed sound, and I just thought I'd share it here.

    According to him, the prevalence of violence in video games would probably have emerged even when you do not factor in purely social influences, because of the limits of technology, and because of historical propagation. See, today, it's becoming possible for video games to simulate a great deal more than violence, but back in the day, it was pretty much the norm. The reason being, that the act of violence is very easy to "digitize", since the act of eliminating some element in general can be construed as changing a binary value - 1 meaning alive going to 0, meaning dead. Of course, there are counter-examples, like Pong or whatever. But that can be likened more to a sport, which also employs a form of this "elimination think", though it doesn't necessarily have to be seen as violent. A true counter-example would be non-violent text adventures (though they could just as well be violent too, depending on the story). And therein lies the problem. Text adventures are really damn hard to make, because the developer needs to consider a whole slew of contingencies for player behaviour - especially when you, like today, would expect a graphical representation of what is going on. Comparatively, a game like Space Invaders needs very little overhead, because player input and AI behaviour is so limited. It lends itself to be digitized a whole lot more. So because the act of elimination is so easy to incorporate into games, this would likely have been a feature even if we were the most pacifist beings imaginable (though in that case, maybe the initial violent games wouldn't even have been conceptualized at all), and as technology allows for more and more elaborate video games, this will naturally carry over, because that fundamental process of elimination is *still* really easy to pull off. Comparing that to, like, a believable and interactive conversation between people with hundreds of possible dialog lines at every junction, you'd need produce so, so much more code. Maybe if video game development had been less concerned with stuff like graphical fidelity, we maybe could have gotten "conversation engines" in addition to, or instead of, graphics engines. Who knows. Video games are costly both in man hours and money to make, and keeping it simple will always be a priority for developers, meaning that violence isn't going away anytime soon, or ever.

    Another way of seeing it is thus. Video games tend to have more general avenues of concepts compared to other media, which is generally concerned with narrative. Games can incorporate narrative and stories, but they can also be "pure games", more akin to sports. Most multiplayer games are of this latter category. But, consider this: in both cases, the premise usually necessitates some kind of conflict. Of course there are exceptions, but this holds true even in other narrative media. The difference is usually that other forms of media can easily broach a wider variety of conflicts, be they intrapersonal, social, or what have you. In fact, for movies and TV, it is objectively easier to produce a non-violent drama as opposed to shooty bang bang action. For games, it's the other way around. I'm not saying that you can't do drama in games, only that the interactivity aspect makes it a lot harder, unless you severely restrict possible player action, in which case - why even make it a game and not a movie? For a game developer to concern themselves with all the nuances of the human condition of digital characters is a lot harder than their state of being alive or dead.

  • Tyler Larkey
    Tyler Larkey 28 days ago

    I love the nuance in this video. It makes an acknowledgement of both sadistic violence and systemic violence.

  • Elise Atkinson
    Elise Atkinson Month ago

    Uwahhh pretty :):):)

  • Paul Mckenna
    Paul Mckenna Month ago

    The most unethical part of this video was getting that rasputin song stuck in my head

  • shiny x
    shiny x Month ago

    Sadism is a particular psychological trait, but it doesn't account for every kind of violence. Most violence is committed because it is justified by a moral code or seen as "necessary", or it indirectly benefits the person doing it. For example, some slaveholders enjoyed beating their slaves, but every slaveholder enjoyed being rich by having free labor, and they all had moral codes that justified it. If you are a slave, it harms you either way. So I think it matters more to focus on the impact and creating justice, rather than trying to understand motivations for violence (unless you are trying to rehabilitate someone who has committed violence, then it matters why they did it).

  • Laura
    Laura Month ago

    I love her so so much

  • Skeefus
    Skeefus Month ago

    I will never understand Natalie's obsession with milk

  • Jessica Elkins
    Jessica Elkins Month ago

    Love the dubstep “Ode to Joy” during the credits

  • JonnesTT
    JonnesTT Month ago

    You don't want to be governed by anyone who doesn't take both sides seriously... Well, then both America and big parts of Europe are out of the picture, aren't they?
    Tell me when you find a politician who doesn't take the violence/thread a police and military force excerpts as a given.

  • JanCarol11
    JanCarol11 Month ago

    Smartest channel on RUclip!

  • Sam Ford
    Sam Ford Month ago


  • Sam Ford
    Sam Ford Month ago +1


  • T F
    T F Month ago

    I always feel called out for enjoying the punching of Natsees, I am a deeply empathetic person, I can't even watch fail compilations, because I can only think about how the people might have gotten hurt... but god do I enjoy a good natsee punching :/ can't even rationalize it

  • Natdude
    Natdude Month ago

    Just started the video, but I want to point out that you always season your steak before you cook it. C'mon folks. GET IT TOGETHER.

  • Jordan Allen
    Jordan Allen Month ago

    I feel attacked rn.

  • Violet Violence
    Violet Violence Month ago

    I'm high key attracted to Taby.
    It's not relevant, I just thinks it's strange that my on button comes pre-packed in a far-leftist stereotype and I wanted to comment about that

  • Die Soldaten sie SS

    Peak degeneracy

  • Bob Newby Superhero
    Bob Newby Superhero Month ago +1

    I’d really rather stand with the side that’s aware of the possible pitfalls and problems in the human psyche, instead of the right wing which seems more apt to deny and ignore their existence.

  • Zach Cole
    Zach Cole Month ago +1

    I'm watching all her videos in order, and a PragerU ad plays before this one, featuring their lawyer talking about free speech. Super trippy.

  • Maxwell Zephyr
    Maxwell Zephyr Month ago +2

    You make some great points...
    But your clockwork orange eyelash is on the wrong side
    *_-leftissts distroyd-_*

  • marina filippa
    marina filippa Month ago

    Hi! How can I contact you? I wish we can discuss "topology of violence" (by Byung Chul Han). In case you are not familiarized with his work, I recomend you "Psychopolitics: Neoliberalism and New Technologies of Power". Im from Argentina. Thank you for all!!

  • Adam Red panda
    Adam Red panda Month ago

    I know this is old but the preview is the best it’s contra eating steak really sassily

  • Aethel Yfel
    Aethel Yfel Month ago

    Damn you should do a cooking channel that breakfast looked great. Real violence is terrifying and boring. Hollywood violence is a form of dancing ballet.

  • de132
    de132 Month ago

    "We think of the police as peacekeepers". Not me 😂

  • EveryTimeV2
    EveryTimeV2 Month ago +1

    Humans can't stop killing each other because killing is an expression of power, and people just love power.

  • Jenny Tokumei
    Jenny Tokumei Month ago

    Violent media doesn't make people violent. It does however however have the potential to inspire violent people not so much to commit the violence itself, but the way in which they do it. Such people are going to commit violence anyway. It's like, I'm going to the grocery store to buy groceries. I buy some cheese because I saw a good cheese based recipe recently. Whether I saw the cheese recipe and buy cheese or not, point is I'm still buying groceries. Heck, I might buy cheese even without the recipe.

    Along this line, and on the other side of the same coin, guns do not cause violence any more than having a cheese shredder causes cheese to be shredded. I might have a cheese shredder and never even buy cheese. Or I might buy cheese and never shred it.

    If we want people to stop violence, we need to address the cause of the violence, not the tools used. There will always be tools that can be used for violence. Whether a given tool for violence is designed to be used for violence or not is completely immaterial to the question of whether or not it can be used for violence, or how effective it is for committing violence is.

    A disgruntled taxi cab driver in South Korea killed nearly 300 people with just some gasoline and a match. Gasoline and matches weren't designed to commit violence. A group of people worked together to hijack some planes and fly them into buildings, killing even more people. Those planes weren't designed to commit violence.

    Whether guns are designed to commit violence and a pressure cooker or a car isn't is entirely beside the point. Guns being designed to commit violence and other things not being is made even more irrelevant by the fact that non-gun methods of committing violence can be even more effective at doing so than a gun.

    Mass shootings for that matter constitute only about 1.4% of the murders in America, and that's even counting the mass shootings that never make it on the news. Wait, mass shootings that never make it on the news? You've never heard of such a thing? Of course not, they don't make it on the news. The number for people killed in mass shootings kept by law enforcement is based on the definition of "more than 4 people dying in a single gun related incident." This does not exclude when two drug dealers and their thugs go at it over territory, and 2 people from both sides die, totaling just 4 people. In fact, that kind of mass shooting happens to be far more common than Bubba Joe shooting up El Paso over his hatred of Mexicans.

    If we stopped the war on drugs and provided more responsible ways to solve the drug problem than creating an environment that fosters unregulated distribution of drugs in violently fought over territories, then we'd eliminate almost all the mass shootings. Find a way to deal with violent extremism (this includes Anti-Fa as much as it includes the people Anti-Fa fight against). Then we'll eliminate most of the rest of the mass shootings. From there, we have the school shootings to worry about. Given that most of the kids who do that cite bullying and the rest are abused at home, there's your culprit there...

    The thing that would do the biggest good is stopping the war on drugs. That would also eliminate most of the actual homicides in America, gun or otherwise.

  • Emily Harrington
    Emily Harrington Month ago

    You do so much wonderful work. I'm watching your whole catalogue, and I love it. You are smart, talented, and well-informed. I'm sure you do a lot of reading. I work in the social justice field (Waco Immigrants Alliance) as well, and I appreciate that you bring light to so many issues that people need to think about. You're getting people to THINK, which is valuable beyond measure. Thank you for what you do. Badass Kweens gonna Save the World.

  • Brice Burchett
    Brice Burchett Month ago

    Dan Carlin (who has some annoying centrist/lib views, but has overall good content) does a really interesting podcast on torture.
    He asks that you imagine the most violent movie you love and enjoy, but then imagine that the actors weren't acting and were really hurting each other and suffering. He asks whether this would be any less popular in this day and age if it were the case because historically you had exactly this happen at Roman games. Executions and torture used to be huge social events that tonnes of people would flock to. It seems like something that people have always been super drawn to, whether out of curiousity or sadism, for a good chunk of recorded history.

  • Tanuj Fernando
    Tanuj Fernando Month ago

    7:27 what is this logo?

  • John Jackson
    John Jackson Month ago

    I don't like the way you pronounce the T in the word "exactly"

  • ThomasUfnalCrowlake

    Still don't understand what the baby drowning is for.

  • Luisa
    Luisa Month ago

    I'm not sure about most things, but I KNOW for a fact that there is no The Sims player in the whole world who has never purposely burned their sims alive, or drowned them in a pool. CHANGE MY MIND

  • Heartworn Fox
    Heartworn Fox 2 months ago

    5:54 me around babies

  • Evan Sageser
    Evan Sageser 2 months ago

    I'm not a big Nietzsche fan normally, but I can help but identify with his notion that many of our notions of justice is kind of just a primal desire for violence that's been focused through a more recently developed moral perspective that's told us that we can't just "might makes right" everyone.

    It wouldn't be unfair to say then that the violent sadist is just the guy being more honest with that desire and has eschewed the moral lens.

    Of course that's not to say that the moral lens is bad, more that it doesn't always justify the primal urge. It's kind of the argument against the death penalty. Once you've caught someone and locked them up forever, there really isn't much meaningful difference for society if we execute them or not. It costs more to put them on death row than to just keep them locked up, it's easy to screw up so that the person suffers while dying, and if we make a mistake and execute an innocent person, there's no avenue for correction. But we're so caught up in the notion that execution constitutes a form of justice that many of us are loathe to get rid of it.

    I think the primary goal is that while the moral lens helps us avoid only being violent for fun, we ultimately need to accompany the question of "Is the violence morally justified" with "Is the violence useful" It's more than a little cynically pragmatic, but morals are a little too subjective to serve as a universal standard. I don't mean that we should kill or hurt people just because it's convenient, but if we only care about what feels "right" than we end up with a sort of righteousness that is easy to get lost in, and we can end up doing things that is fueled more by emotion than an effort at improving things.

    So for instance, should you punch a Nazi? On a scale of morality, I think that given their stated views its easy to rationalize that a nazi is worthy of violence. (You might disagree and that's your prerogative, morality is pretty subjective after all) Is it useful to punch a Nazi however? That's debatable. I can see compelling arguments that preemptive violence serves a purpose, but I'm mostly of the opinion that you need to have your punches directed with a little more purpose than sucker-punching Spencer on camera and running away. It feels righteous, and it gets people talking, but it's not necessarily winning people over or improving the case against Nazis. A different Nazi punching situation might be a different matter, but I'm not convinced on this specific instance.

  • Eman Moh'd
    Eman Moh'd 2 months ago

    Only americans think their armys are heroes came to liberate us third world peasnts. Here we call them what they really are ,murderers!

  • Peng Fei Dong
    Peng Fei Dong 2 months ago

    i saw the content warning and i was like "COOL ALL MY FAVOURITE THINGS PACKED INTO ONE VIDEO!"

  • AnimusTelum
    AnimusTelum 2 months ago

    1) In my opinion, it's how someone reacts to depictions of violence that matters. Books, TV, film, and other media do not have agency, so they can't really act upon morality on their own. It's how the content manifests in the consumer's mind: Do they use depictions of violence (grotesque, "justified", comedic, or otherwise) to gain a greater understanding of the genre, work, and/or reality? Or do they indulge as if the media is just as good as the real thing?
    3) Also IMO: This sort of discourse is only possible when physical well-being is a guarantee. If the world ended tomorrow and I had to fashion firearms and knives out of plumbing parts while stocking up on canned dog food and bullets, I'm not going to be concerned about the sociopolitical impact of violent media.

    This is the most politics / ideology stuff I've committed to in almost 3 years

  • Ana Cardona
    Ana Cardona 2 months ago

    Cuando vi al muñeco que representaba al bebé y vi la bañera, pensé inmediatamente que lo ahogarían y esa sensación fue incómoda. No pude evitar pensar un "Uuuugh, tal vez esto se excesivo".
    Por esa razón agradezco las muchas referencias a esa escena en el video y la temática misma del video. La escena nos lleva al cuestionamiento moral de cada uno mientras nos hacen hincapié en la violencia en la que participamos en los videojuegos. No hubo heridos reales en ambos casos.

  • Chaotic Energy
    Chaotic Energy 2 months ago

    Lindsay and Natalie in one video? Where has this been all my life?

  • Kougz
    Kougz 2 months ago

    My thought : violence bad. The end.
    Outside of the obvious "punching natzees terfs" I think violence is never justifiable. It should always be the last fcking resort. If you can't talk it out : talk it out more.

  • Æther
    Æther 2 months ago

    this video inspired me to punch and drown several babies, and I can now conclude that violence is indeed fun! if you're interested in trying it out, babies are way easier to murder than larger humans are. i'm pretty sure they were nazi babies though, so it's cool. thanks for the insperation natalie! also, that latex suit.. nice.

  • cgcoyote cow
    cgcoyote cow 2 months ago

    The intro killed me, but in a good way

  • Krillin
    Krillin 2 months ago +2

    That meat was way undercooked

  • wii3willRule
    wii3willRule 2 months ago

    Your existence makes me so happy.

  • Mangatique Miko
    Mangatique Miko 2 months ago

    I really like the video but i have problems enjoying it because the subtitles aren't present at each sentence. I mean I read english subtitles to better get what you mean since i'm not an english native but damn sometimes i have hard to get some stuffs that the subtitles doesn't write it down x)
    Still the video is great like always
    Take care of you!

  • waselny ł
    waselny ł 2 months ago +1

    I'm very late to comment on this video, but one concept that I don't think was mentioned is that there is a potential that if the concept of 'justified' violence against political opponents is justified, be it in the form of 'punching a Nazi', what's to stop them from returning the favour? If this violence does become justified, then what argument can you make against a gang of iron-toed fascists beating anyone left-of-centre to death in the street, due to the fact that pre-emptive political assault becomes rationalized, and they can turn the same argument around and say that it's okay to 'whack a Commie', due to crimes committed in the USSR and China?