Thank you, George, for doing what you thought was good, not what others thought was right. God that been the most boring and bland minutes of Carlin i've seen to date
It's amazing how much racism and bigotry has come since those days. Even someone as progressive as Carlin was, was quite the racist in the 60's as were so many. It shows just how far we have come, yet we have so far to go until racism and bigotry are eliminated.
Racism is just one form of hate, and hate will never completely disappear - it's part of human nature. That being said, I think racism can disappear... once we all become the same color and follow one culture. Even then, as human beings we naturally have differences (like personalities), and thus we'll find other things to discriminate against. And then there will be hate just like racism, but under a different name.
first of all its not a question about whos blood is more dear.
of course you cant weigh who suffered more.
that being said - the Holocaust was a worldwide tragedy that whole people lost tens of millions to the nazi murdrers and not just the jewish people.
so if you look at it from a world prospective - yes its a more critical event in human losses than the terrible tragedy that happened tohe american indians in that respect.
Oh my goodness look how young and gorgeous he was! its neat to see actors when they are young, i am young myselkf so i always saw George n his older years, so seeing my favorites in their youth is really special. Thank you Youtube for having all of these neat old clips.
Oh my goodness look how young and gorgeous he was! its neat to see actors when they are young, i am young myselkf so i always say George n his older years, so seeing my favorites in their youth is really special. Thank you Youtube for having all of these neat old clips.
@shabido1 I take your point, but I don't think that all mentions of Native Americans must necessarily be accompanied by a discussion of their massacre.
You aren't saying more people died in the holocaust are you!? Are freaking insane? I don't know how logic wouldn't tell you otherwise, but it's 2011, you can type pretty much any question you can think of in a rectangular bar and find out.
Native American conquest= 50-100+ million
Holocaust= 10-17 million
Are you kidding me? Do you know what it involved? Extinction of races.
@diegoricepogo LOL. I am not. I am very white, but gassing people isn't the only way to kill them. No, we killed them with plagues and guns, look it up. I think when you die you should put chill on your tombstone. It's very fitting.
@shabido1 OK i get it, so we screwed over the native americans and took their land. regardless this is a George Carlin video do you think he gave a fuck.NO. its funny and thats all that its supposed to be. If your that hurt and ruined from it then dont watch George Carlin videos and sign up for the peace cor or something. have a nice day:)
@diegoricepogo OK I'll do that, because obviously you're a caring, understanding, and logical human. You're not driven simply by your desires at all. You also probably do not understand sarcasm, so I can write this and make us both feel better. That will solve everything. Ignorance is bliss. I'll bet Carlin would agree with me, and you can say it's 'his' video and it's comedy, that doesn't put it into comment restraints last time I checked. I know where you're coming from though.
@diegoricepogo OK I'll do that, because obviously you're a caring, understanding, and logical human. You're not driven simply by your desires at all. You also probably do not understand sarcasm, so I can write this and make us both feel better. That will solve everything. Ignorance is bliss. I'll bet Carlin would agree with me, and you can say it's 'his' video and it's comedy, that doesn't put it into comment restraints last time I checked. I know where you're coming from though.
@shabido1 WTF dude do you seriasly compare less then 2 milion ppl to the 6 milin ladys kids and babis killd in the colucost! im jewish and proud and you have no right disrespecting the holocust
@tamirgolan1 Well since I didn't lie about numbers and provided a source that I stated from, yes I do consider European conquest of the Americas to be far worse than the holocaust. You are Jewish and it makes you sad to think about it. It is more than understandable that it would. The holocaust was a terrible trajedy. But, objectively there are way more facts and variables in the events than you consider. They are both ugly and dispicable scars of our humanity.
That simply isn't true. It is like saying all murder is equally bad. The problem is one person can be murdered, or 100 people can be murdered. If we lived in a world with hundreds of millions of Native Americans, my comments would be praised constantly, but since we live in a world with hundreds of millions of Jews everybody hates them. I get it, everything is relative.
Bad comeback attempt is bad. I might be defensive, but you're the pretentious pussy that's goin oooh no he's making indian joookes, oh meeeeeeee, our ancestors were eeeeeevil. Shut up shut up shut UUUUUP!
@geitepung Bad grammar is bad. They were evil Sherlock. And maybe you're Spanish, or English, but those aren't my ancestors. This is you, "Oh I don't care bout anything dog. Screw anything that doesn't have to do with me. Now let me get back to sucking my daddy off. Shit dog shoot, yo yo."
Another shit comeback, really? I don't give a fuck how evil they were, my whole point is how irrelevant it is to what he's saying. Literally zero people here gives a shit about how the indians had their tents burned and their women raped, GOOD! That means the majority here is smart enough to filter what comes outta this guys mouth as jokes that arent related to it and not a queue for chicks like you(that's just me assuming you're a woman from the way you talk) to play the semi victim
@geitepung Wow you're brilliant. No you're not. Did you even read your own post?
geitepung: 'I don't care about killing and raping. GOOD! You just have to filter what I say on your own. It's not like I meant that first bit. There's never truth to what I say. I'm a blathering butt pirate who drinks grog from my grandpa's corn hole. OK, there's some truth.'
@geitepung I didn't read your first comment, but your second one tells me that I'm getting to you. Now get back to working on your tractor or burning an anarchy symbol on your arm.
Getting to me? Is that really what you were trying to do? Son, if you're gonna "get to me", you better start insulting me in bigger and better proportions cause this little thing we're having here is playful at most. Your one dimensional insults may not sound like it in your head as you're writing them, but on virtual paper they come across very sterile. I didn't lie when I said you're too retro with your insults. Good luck "getting to me" btw ^^
@shabido1 don't forget that they also massacred whites. lack of genetic immunity to "old world" disease and lack of massive, specialized, "civilized", organized armies led to their defeat in the long run. but there were plenty of indians who were masters of torture, and lovers of warfare and power. many scalped and literally ate the hearts of the people they defeated, and whites did not teach them how to do that. because they did not need to be taught how to be humans. try "crow creek massacre"
@shabido1 also, see if you can get a copy of Thomas Abler's paper "Iroquois Cannibalism: Fact not Fiction". I am not trying to give whites a free pass in any way, but i wouldn't be so quick to portray indians as only innocent victims. I think people point to the barbaric acts of the whites and romanticize the "virtuous indian", simply because the whites won the conflict. But the defeated were equally as human, and equally as ruthless and cruel, in like proportion to their white counterparts.
@juglanscinerea But no matter how they acted, it's completely unrelated. It was for all intensive purposes their land. If pilgrims really came there with no guns and said, 'we want to be friends forever. Not take your land, but just get to know you.' It's still there fault for continuing to come! They invaded their land without pretense. And of course, they did come with guns (far superior killing devices to arrows), and they were not there to make buddies and not take land.
@shabido1 "they" were not one group, and they took land from one-another, and killed one another exactly as the whites did to them. for example, we throw iroquois and algonquins into the same category "native american", but they hated each other and fought with each other and took land from each other in exactly the same way as the french and the germans, the chinese and the mongols, the greeks and the persians. and their languages weren't even remotely related.
@shabido1 i'm not giving whites a pass. whites took and culturally expanded into land that was not theirs. but that land was not in an edenic state of static peace. native americans are and were essentially no different from any other human group, and their most complex civilizations were as rapacious and excessively violent as any other. look at the aztecs or the inca. i'm by not saying it's right what the whites did to the sioux, any more than it's right what the aztecs did to the tlaxcala.
@shabido1 i think whites are viewed as the worst of the worst, because they are the most recently dominant group in a lot of places around the world. but i imagine you might have a similar opinion about iroquois if you were an algonquin in 1400 AD whose relatives had been literally torn limb from limb by iroquois warriors, had their balls cut off and stuffed in their mouths and burned to death slowly, their villages burned, their women kidnapped and raped, and their territory occupied.
@juglanscinerea Yes I sure do feel the same way towards other groups. All humans have it in them to be selfish tools who just take what they think they want. So, yes the raping pillaging Natives were horrible too. But wiping out entire groups of humans is a different story. A bigger scale= a worse crime. And the scale is enormous in comparison.
@shabido1 the myth that we are taught today in liberal academic education, is that white people are inherently more violent and unjust than any other group. but it makes no sense. every group of humans has exceptionally violent, cruel individuals as well as peaceful ones, and every single human group on earth has a history of warfare, merging, splitting and change in territory. to say otherwise is a political tool for the present. i'm not saying it's a great thing. we are not a great species.
@juglanscinerea That is simply a degrading gross generalization. If it were true, we'd all be dead by now I promise you. Humans can be evil, we can be good, we can live in fear, we can progress and change. We aren't a horrible, or a great species. We 'can' be either or anything in the middle. You can't lump all human action together. In terms of this, Europeans 'exceptional violence' trumped the rest of the world at that time 10 fold.
@shabido1 and may i remind you that the natives were more than happy to throw away their bows and trade for superior european guns, more than happy to use those guns on their pre-existing enemies, and more than happy to ally themselves with certain groups of whites in order to fulfill their own historical agendas of war against their "fellow" native americans. they were no foolish innocents, just trying to "make buddies" with the whites. they were just as shrewd, and just as cunning.
@juglanscinerea Yes, many natives were barbaric murderers too. No doubt about that. I also never said they wanted to make buddies. You completely missed, glossed over, or forgot my point. Murdering each other is horrible enough your right. I'm just stating that invasion coupled with even more murder is worse.
@shabido1 invasion coupled with murder is shitty. i'm with you there. my point is that native american tribes were murdering and invading each other's territory long before europeans joined the theater of war in north america. every piece of land that the whites stole from the various native american nations had been fought over and changed hands many times before. whites were not the first "invaders" in NA. they just happened to win because of the historical chance of disease and technology.
@shabido1 let me say again, i am not saying that whites were wonderful people who did wonderful things to native americans. what i am saying is that they were not the first people in north america to take land away from people of different ethnic groups. i find it is sort of dehumanizing of native americans to pretend that they had no concept of territory or had never invaded one another's land. historical, anthropological and archaeological evidence do not justify that portrayal.
@shabido1 it seems to me that to your mind it was okay for pre-columbian Iroquoian speaking people (for example) to wage war upon and drive out Algonquin speaking people in what is now new york state, and to occupy their land for their own agriculture and hunting, which is most likely what happened, though the lack of written history makes it difficult to know precisely. but it was not okay for whites to do essentially the same thing to the iroquois. i say neither one is "okay", but it happened
@shabido1 we are all descended from this kind of shit. if you're white, you're probably descended from celts, romans, germans, pre-indo-european people, etc., all of whom hated each other's guts at various points in history, and warred with each other and took over each other's land for thousands of years. it is the same story anywhere you go in the world. we are an exceptionally violent species. we should stop looking for pure, innocent cultures, because, the sad fact is, they do not exist.
@shabido1 i think if we want to be peaceful as a culture and civilization and move forward, we have to recognize that, although what our ancestors did was genocidal and incredibly unjust, they did it to people who were people, just like us, who would have done the same to us if they had had our disease immunity and technological development. to say we are exceptionally evil as a culture is to become unreasonably self-loathing, and it dehumanizes ourselves and our enemies from the past.
@juglanscinerea Well I won't lie, I am proud that I am not Spanish, English or French. My ancestors didn't have anything to do with this conquest. But even if they did, 'people are just people' still doesn't fly in this context. It is not a given that everybody/culture takes whatever they can at every chance. We all have the same human traits, but depending on our environment, those traits change/form differently. All societies are far from being created equally.
@shabido1 and what would you propose to do with someone like me, who is part english, part french, part welsh, part irish, and has a small amount of algonquin blood, and in all likelihood some hushed-up african blood? my ancestors are both the victims and the perpetrators. if you want to fully give back wales to the welsh, or ireland to the ancient gaels, rhode island to the wampanoag, who do you give it to? how much of me would you hate? which part of me should i hate or blame?
@shabido1 we think of the irish, for example, as one of the victims, because of recent history, but they themselves pushed out, killed, or culturally dominated the people who were living in ireland before the indo-european expansion. the germanic ancestors of the english were invaded by and persecuted by the romans. the perpetrators become the victims, and no one is not descended from "perpetrators". maybe you can wash your hands of the most recent struggle, but you are still human.
@juglanscinerea America is not that any of those cultures/societies from the 14/1500s that I mentioned either. I never said we are or were. To say give a pass to a culture/society because you think they're all the same is what dehumanizes. You can fairly say that Ghengis Khan and the Mongols from whatever era that was were far worse than the eskimos of well, just about anytime.
@shabido1 dude, the inuit fought and killed each other plenty. i'm not denying that there have been periods of peace in history, but you would be pretty f-ing hard-pressed to find a person who has no blood or genocide on their ancestral hands. the irony is that it is an excellent excuse for war to pretend that you don't.
@shabido1 where on earth did you get the idea that eskimos never waged war with one another? the fact that their populations were not as dense?
a small group of people annihiliating another small group of people is still a genocide. you can't have nazi germany genocidal statistics when you don't have 6 million people available to be massacred.
@shabido1 let me say once again, i am not giving anybody a free pass. but, neither am i going to condemn anybody over anybody else, or pretend that there are groups of people on earth who have always been victims and never been oppressors. we're all pretty condemnable, whether we want to admit it or not. it's overly optimistic to think human violence can end forever, but a temporary state of peace can only be sustained when people recognize that everyone has a violent, brutal human heritage.
@juglanscinerea If you aren't willing to see relatively, than you'll keep missing my point no matter how many times I make it. Relative to other cultures at points in history, some cultures are far less aggressive, more peaceful, less violent among each other, etc.
If I had some emotionally charged comments about this that gave the wrong impression I apologize, but...
Take that idea or leave it, but I'm telling you I objectively see relativity as truth and important.
@shabido1 it's certainly all relative. i think the main point to keep in mind is that it is all cultural rather than genetic. because of the horrific behavior of my anglo ancestors, i live in an age and a culture where it is perfectly acceptable to talk about my demographic as though people who look like me were in some way racially exceptional in violence and greed and expansionism. as a result, i tend to be sensitive to bogus racialized ideas of peaceful, kind, non-expansionist "non-whites"
@shabido1 i'm certainly not saying that my ancestors weren't violent, greedy, genocidal, expansionist assholes. but they sure as shit weren't the first, and i doubt they will be the last. and when seen from a culturally detached viewpoint, cultural peculiarities, skin color, nose shape, etc. aside, their behavior was the same as that of any so-called "higher", money-based civilization. and these civilizations arise from tribal and hunter-gatherer groups in which such behavior is also present.
@shabido1 also not saying that there aren't cultural groups that espouse and practice peace. but i would argue that they are, unfortunately, very rare, and often as not they are fabricated for the purpose of present politics, to establish a false mask of innocence, perpetuating a form of the noble savage myth.
There's an interesting paper: A Bioarchaeological Perspective on the History of Violence, for free if you google it.
@shabido1 if you can access jstor, try the 1993 paper "The Osteology and Archaeology of the Crow Creek Massacre". mass graves of over 400 people, corpse mutilation, mass-murdered women and children, the works, well before the arrival of columbus. any idea of native american warfare as being purely low-casualty and ceremonial in nature is a bunch of bullshit (although it certainly existed)
@shabido1 well, i should say it is genetic in a broader sense, inasmuch as genetically we are all humans, and a fundamental aspect of our behavior as a species is the tendency toward violence. it happens everywhere on earth, regardless of culture, though there may be long cultural stretches of peace.
there is no such thing as a cultural group of humans that has not known the feeling of hatred and the desire to annihilate other humans. i think that is, unfortunately, part of what makes us human.
@juglanscinerea Of course you're right that it's part of our humanity to be violent and greedy, but it isn't the only part, and external influence has a bigger role than you give it. We don't have be violent. We don't have to act subconsciously. I do not know enough about all the thousands of cultures that ever existed to point to the least violent, but there is more too it than just the interior. The exterior greatly influences the interior.
@shabido1 we don't have to be violent, agreed, and it seems we are becoming less and less violent.
my concern is mainly with the accuracy of history. in hindsight it is very easy to blame the white man for everything, but the white man did not "invent" smallpox and other old world diseases, which was by far the main driver of european success in colonizing the new world, and many tribes were just as violent and expansionist as whites, if not more so, but this is thrown in the dustbin of history.
@shabido1 certainly there is the famous use of smallpox blankets. but you can be damn sure that if they tables were turned in terms of immunity, that some native chief or other would have done the same shit to the whites.
it's a tragic history, and not a pleasant one to think about at all, with a lot of bad luck of historical chance for the indian tribes, and a shit-ton of violence, deception, and massacres of innocents and not-so-innocents carried out by the many factions involved.
@shabido1 europeans would certainly not have won out without the medley of agriculture, disease, domestic animals and technological development that they brought with them. but you would have to blame some guy in china for inventing gun powder, some pig centuries ago in europe for transmitting the pox to humans, some ancient middle eastern tribe for domesticating that pig's ancestors, etc. etc.
to say white people were morally inferior as a racial trait, as many do, is to ignore the context.
@juglanscinerea Well I blamed specific cultures that just happened to be white. Not all white cultures with plenty of guns jumped on that band wagon. I clearly am not saying it's because they are white. I said numerous times it is human, but also cultural.
@shabido1 alright, fair enough. but if we consider the english, for example, probably most of them were not thinking about having a fun genocide when they got on the boat. they were probably thinking "i gotta find a place where i can be free to live", and they arrived in a place that was torn by pre-existing war and decimated by european plagues, where they were welcomed by certain tribes and hated by others.
you could blame the king of england for being a maniac, but not the average colonist.
@shabido1 if you raise a white person as a chippewa or an iroquois, as did happen on occasion, you get a chippewa or an iroquois with white skin and facial features, and vice versa.
i'm not about to apologize for being of english descent, nor am i about to be overly proud of it, because it's all the same wherever you go. we get lost in the superficial details and forget the underlying 99.9999%, genetically programmed similarity between all humans
@juglanscinerea I think that number there is a gross miscalculation chief. If it were as simple as virtually 100% instinctive humanity, you wouldn't have some people who think a bearded druid carpenter is coming to save them, and others who devote their life to productive innovations for benefiting humanity for example. Our free will and thought play a much bigger role than 0.00001% I like to think.
@shabido1 i wish it were that simple. that's my point. we are delusional. if we weren't so friggin delusional, we would be more able to clearly see that we are all pretty much the same, and we wouldn't concoct insane religions and devise gang-like racial categories which lead to horrific violence.
@juglanscinerea No, I'm with you, you are right about our instinctive humanity. It guides a whole lot of us to do some off-the-wall, bat-shit crazy stuff, and not even realize it. We all are very similar, whether we let ourselves act instinctively or consciously. We're on the same page there, but those instincts and conscious mentality, are greatly affected by our surroundings. It's the whole chicken and egg thing kinda, We create our environment and it creates us.
@juglanscinerea I guess it depends on where we start. If we use those conscious, thought out parts of our humanity to create our environment, than it in turn keeps that momentum. If we start by creating an environment/society with our selfishness and hate, than it keeps that momentum.
@shabido1 part of the 99.9999% i was referring to involves the creation of othering cultural categories.
the irony is that that basic tendency to think of other cultures as inscrutable foreigners is a trait that can be found in all human cultures, amongst all human individuals at some point in their lives, which only shows that all cultures and individuals are fundamentally similar.
it's up to the individual to transcend the cultural mask and the fear of the other, to see what is universal.
but by the same token, an entire culture can't be essentialized by the actions of a portion of its members.
i'm sure there were iroquois opposed to cannibalism, english opposed to praying towns, germans opposed to nazism, etc. etc.
but sometimes you have no option but to be involved. if you were an english colonist or pequot indian in southern new england during the pequot war, it didn't matter if you were a pacifist, you were put on a side whether you liked it or not.
@juglanscinerea True to a point, but as you stated most people have no idea what's really going on in their culture or reality at all, so if all this comes down to is who gets the wrong influences because we're all running around mindlessly, then we have to examine not only our instinctive nature but those influences (leaders, governments, trends, etc) as well
@doggieman1961 Sad isn't it? The were easily the most important agents of social change on television in their day, and now they are hardly remembered.
@TheKenTerry What he really hated was the wasn't aware how edgy he would was allowed to be on the Smothers Brothers Show. He said that had he known more about the show before appearing on it, he would have done an entirely different and very controversial skit. But he would have been far from the first to do so on their show.
He went from a typical white man trying to fit in to a man of truth with the courage to voice his own opinion unmarred by the expectations of his own society. I have even more respect for him now...blessings
@MsMojomaster Not prompting any drug related talk, but he said in one of his interviews that LSD helped change his perspective. Maybe that has something to do with his later stuff being so thought-provoking.
I was just born when he did this skit, never seen it before. He was and always will be my favorite comedian. The subjects he ranted about were always about controversial views, but he had a great way of twisting it into somthing we could all laugh at. Bet he was a great guy to sit and chat with... the world lost a great person.
carlin was smoking weed since he was a teenager on the streets of new york. it was the coke & booze that really tore him apart physically. i think it was the lsd that opened his unique perspective as wide as it could go. he continued to smoke weed occasionally untll he died. he also indulged in fine wines until the end. 1972 was arrested for "7 words routine" in milwaukee. friends cleaned out his dressing room 5 minutes before the police searched it. could have been much worse for him.
Fascinating stuff. Within three years Carlin would have 'discovered' himself, though you can feel that he is groping towards it in this sketch. That is, his deep love of the similarities, quixotic behaviors and peculiarities of being 'human'.
The Smother's Bothers themselves were anti-establishment, causing the show to be cancelled in 1969.
Curiously, in thirty to forty years time, all this looks so innocent.
same hair he always had, he just wore it on the inside!
artfay69 6 hours ago
Carlin in his pre-hippie days...still funny tho.
vdoman 23 hours ago
Little racist for Carlin...but times were different then I suppose.
slapbassgood 2 days ago
It's the Smothers Brothers! How can you ppl not know who they are? Oh right, I'm old.
teufeldritch 4 days ago
the guy on the right looks like the trollollo guy with a mustache. and the setting would fit, too.
dailydols 4 days ago
In this video, george has sucked in his eternal beard to give the appearance of youth.
Ebrainiac1 5 days ago
Russel Crowe :))
ovylord 5 days ago
Wait, George Carlin was once young?
UncleErnie71 5 days ago 3
Comment removed
UncleErnie71 5 days ago
Thank you, George, for doing what you thought was good, not what others thought was right. God that been the most boring and bland minutes of Carlin i've seen to date
LudwigNyman 6 days ago
The blond guy, presenting , is so F'dup ... GEZZ HIGH AS A PLAINE
inimigopublico2010 6 days ago
is the intro shot the same place as the trolololol video?
bajer111 1 week ago
wow he was handsome
w3stwood 1 week ago
love this guy lol
winkledorf17 1 week ago
he sounds and looks like he couldve been an great news anchor at first..then he just fuckin transforms character
HarleysaurusRex 2 weeks ago 7
@HarleysaurusRex
Or perhaps a hippy dippy weatherman? I f you don't get the reference look up hippy dippy weatherman.
BenjaminWirtz 4 days ago
Is it me or does he look like Russel Crowe here?
mavericknoone 2 weeks ago 5
he looks soooo different
yolo22 2 weeks ago
He was adorable when he was younger in my opinion.
oliviaisgod 2 weeks ago
looks like the isreal flag
PETETHEMEAT42 3 weeks ago
ha the white hair smothers is hammered
PETETHEMEAT42 3 weeks ago
"Raindance, weather permitting" is freaking hilarious and brilliant pointing out the irony of such an event should it get rained out :)
lilbromarky1 3 weeks ago
His face changed but not his voice.
intimidator001 3 weeks ago 4
He looks a little like Russel Crowe
Byron10301 3 weeks ago
.....what?
zzatzzsga 1 month ago 25
Ididn't recognize him!
damirowski1 1 month ago 52
Short comment.
LIFEIZCRAP14 1 month ago 5
lip synching comedy?
TVKalmes 2 months ago
Haha, beardless wonder!
RaisuliLordoftheRiff 2 months ago
Well, it's the native americans' fault for not inventing gunpowder and bulletproof vests. That's just the way it goes and I can't open a casino.
htiberian 2 months ago
@htiberian You couldn't find your way into a casino.
shabido1 2 months ago
It's amazing how much racism and bigotry has come since those days. Even someone as progressive as Carlin was, was quite the racist in the 60's as were so many. It shows just how far we have come, yet we have so far to go until racism and bigotry are eliminated.
frame199 3 months ago
@frame199
Racism is just one form of hate, and hate will never completely disappear - it's part of human nature. That being said, I think racism can disappear... once we all become the same color and follow one culture. Even then, as human beings we naturally have differences (like personalities), and thus we'll find other things to discriminate against. And then there will be hate just like racism, but under a different name.
cougher989 2 months ago
look my friend,
first of all its not a question about whos blood is more dear.
of course you cant weigh who suffered more.
that being said - the Holocaust was a worldwide tragedy that whole people lost tens of millions to the nazi murdrers and not just the jewish people.
so if you look at it from a world prospective - yes its a more critical event in human losses than the terrible tragedy that happened tohe american indians in that respect.
tamirgolan1 3 months ago
any idiot who actually can say that anything was worse then the holocaust is a complete moron and should learn hustory
tamirgolan1 3 months ago
@tamirgolan1 learn 'hustory'? Despite how it makes you feel, there have been human events more horrific and murderous than the holocaust.
shabido1 3 months ago
George joked about everyone and everything and meant no harm by it it was just comedy and heavy sarcasm.
ravenquirk 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh my goodness look how young and gorgeous he was! its neat to see actors when they are young, i am young myselkf so i always saw George n his older years, so seeing my favorites in their youth is really special. Thank you Youtube for having all of these neat old clips.
cuervamujer 3 months ago
Oh my goodness look how young and gorgeous he was! its neat to see actors when they are young, i am young myselkf so i always say George n his older years, so seeing my favorites in their youth is really special. Thank you Youtube for having all of these neat old clips.
cuervamujer 3 months ago
Holy shit....his HAIR!!!!
winkledorf17 4 months ago
I like Carlin, but the massacre and conquest of Native Americans was a worse tragedy than the holocaust. That's what people so conveniently forgot.
shabido1 4 months ago 6
@shabido1 I take your point, but I don't think that all mentions of Native Americans must necessarily be accompanied by a discussion of their massacre.
directedition 4 months ago 16
@directedition Not any mention, but when you make light of it, certainly.
shabido1 4 months ago
@shabido1 more people died in the holocaust?
diegoricepogo 4 months ago
@diegoricepogo
You aren't saying more people died in the holocaust are you!? Are freaking insane? I don't know how logic wouldn't tell you otherwise, but it's 2011, you can type pretty much any question you can think of in a rectangular bar and find out.
Native American conquest= 50-100+ million
Holocaust= 10-17 million
Are you kidding me? Do you know what it involved? Extinction of races.
shabido1 4 months ago
@shabido1 Guessing your native american and im pretty sure we didnt gas 50 million indians. chill
diegoricepogo 4 months ago
@diegoricepogo LOL. I am not. I am very white, but gassing people isn't the only way to kill them. No, we killed them with plagues and guns, look it up. I think when you die you should put chill on your tombstone. It's very fitting.
shabido1 4 months ago
@shabido1 OK i get it, so we screwed over the native americans and took their land. regardless this is a George Carlin video do you think he gave a fuck.NO. its funny and thats all that its supposed to be. If your that hurt and ruined from it then dont watch George Carlin videos and sign up for the peace cor or something. have a nice day:)
diegoricepogo 4 months ago
@diegoricepogo OK I'll do that, because obviously you're a caring, understanding, and logical human. You're not driven simply by your desires at all. You also probably do not understand sarcasm, so I can write this and make us both feel better. That will solve everything. Ignorance is bliss. I'll bet Carlin would agree with me, and you can say it's 'his' video and it's comedy, that doesn't put it into comment restraints last time I checked. I know where you're coming from though.
shabido1 4 months ago
@diegoricepogo OK I'll do that, because obviously you're a caring, understanding, and logical human. You're not driven simply by your desires at all. You also probably do not understand sarcasm, so I can write this and make us both feel better. That will solve everything. Ignorance is bliss. I'll bet Carlin would agree with me, and you can say it's 'his' video and it's comedy, that doesn't put it into comment restraints last time I checked. I know where you're coming from though.
shabido1 4 months ago
@shabido1 WTF dude do you seriasly compare less then 2 milion ppl to the 6 milin ladys kids and babis killd in the colucost! im jewish and proud and you have no right disrespecting the holocust
tamirgolan1 3 months ago
@tamirgolan1 Well since I didn't lie about numbers and provided a source that I stated from, yes I do consider European conquest of the Americas to be far worse than the holocaust. You are Jewish and it makes you sad to think about it. It is more than understandable that it would. The holocaust was a terrible trajedy. But, objectively there are way more facts and variables in the events than you consider. They are both ugly and dispicable scars of our humanity.
shabido1 3 months ago
@shabido1 Any genocide is equal bad!
petiteAlicious 3 months ago
Comment removed
shabido1 3 months ago
That simply isn't true. It is like saying all murder is equally bad. The problem is one person can be murdered, or 100 people can be murdered. If we lived in a world with hundreds of millions of Native Americans, my comments would be praised constantly, but since we live in a world with hundreds of millions of Jews everybody hates them. I get it, everything is relative.
shabido1 3 months ago
@shabido1
Oh fuckin christ, just shut the hell up, you womanly block of frozen diarrhea.
geitepung 2 months ago
@geitepung What are you so defensive about? Are you a pussy, Jewish, or both?
You've got icy feces on the brain, and that says a lot, but try thinking of more than your next meal.
shabido1 2 months ago
@shabido1
Bad comeback attempt is bad. I might be defensive, but you're the pretentious pussy that's goin oooh no he's making indian joookes, oh meeeeeeee, our ancestors were eeeeeevil. Shut up shut up shut UUUUUP!
geitepung 2 months ago
@geitepung Bad grammar is bad. They were evil Sherlock. And maybe you're Spanish, or English, but those aren't my ancestors. This is you, "Oh I don't care bout anything dog. Screw anything that doesn't have to do with me. Now let me get back to sucking my daddy off. Shit dog shoot, yo yo."
shabido1 2 months ago
@shabido1
Another shit comeback, really? I don't give a fuck how evil they were, my whole point is how irrelevant it is to what he's saying. Literally zero people here gives a shit about how the indians had their tents burned and their women raped, GOOD! That means the majority here is smart enough to filter what comes outta this guys mouth as jokes that arent related to it and not a queue for chicks like you(that's just me assuming you're a woman from the way you talk) to play the semi victim
geitepung 2 months ago
@geitepung Wow you're brilliant. No you're not. Did you even read your own post?
geitepung: 'I don't care about killing and raping. GOOD! You just have to filter what I say on your own. It's not like I meant that first bit. There's never truth to what I say. I'm a blathering butt pirate who drinks grog from my grandpa's corn hole. OK, there's some truth.'
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1
Seriously though, you need to work on those comebacks. The whole daddy incest thing is so 2006.
geitepung 2 months ago
@geitepung I didn't read your first comment, but your second one tells me that I'm getting to you. Now get back to working on your tractor or burning an anarchy symbol on your arm.
shabido1 2 months ago
@shabido1
Getting to me? Is that really what you were trying to do? Son, if you're gonna "get to me", you better start insulting me in bigger and better proportions cause this little thing we're having here is playful at most. Your one dimensional insults may not sound like it in your head as you're writing them, but on virtual paper they come across very sterile. I didn't lie when I said you're too retro with your insults. Good luck "getting to me" btw ^^
geitepung 2 months ago
@shabido1 don't forget that they also massacred whites. lack of genetic immunity to "old world" disease and lack of massive, specialized, "civilized", organized armies led to their defeat in the long run. but there were plenty of indians who were masters of torture, and lovers of warfare and power. many scalped and literally ate the hearts of the people they defeated, and whites did not teach them how to do that. because they did not need to be taught how to be humans. try "crow creek massacre"
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 also, see if you can get a copy of Thomas Abler's paper "Iroquois Cannibalism: Fact not Fiction". I am not trying to give whites a free pass in any way, but i wouldn't be so quick to portray indians as only innocent victims. I think people point to the barbaric acts of the whites and romanticize the "virtuous indian", simply because the whites won the conflict. But the defeated were equally as human, and equally as ruthless and cruel, in like proportion to their white counterparts.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea But no matter how they acted, it's completely unrelated. It was for all intensive purposes their land. If pilgrims really came there with no guns and said, 'we want to be friends forever. Not take your land, but just get to know you.' It's still there fault for continuing to come! They invaded their land without pretense. And of course, they did come with guns (far superior killing devices to arrows), and they were not there to make buddies and not take land.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 "they" were not one group, and they took land from one-another, and killed one another exactly as the whites did to them. for example, we throw iroquois and algonquins into the same category "native american", but they hated each other and fought with each other and took land from each other in exactly the same way as the french and the germans, the chinese and the mongols, the greeks and the persians. and their languages weren't even remotely related.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 i'm not giving whites a pass. whites took and culturally expanded into land that was not theirs. but that land was not in an edenic state of static peace. native americans are and were essentially no different from any other human group, and their most complex civilizations were as rapacious and excessively violent as any other. look at the aztecs or the inca. i'm by not saying it's right what the whites did to the sioux, any more than it's right what the aztecs did to the tlaxcala.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 i think whites are viewed as the worst of the worst, because they are the most recently dominant group in a lot of places around the world. but i imagine you might have a similar opinion about iroquois if you were an algonquin in 1400 AD whose relatives had been literally torn limb from limb by iroquois warriors, had their balls cut off and stuffed in their mouths and burned to death slowly, their villages burned, their women kidnapped and raped, and their territory occupied.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea Yes I sure do feel the same way towards other groups. All humans have it in them to be selfish tools who just take what they think they want. So, yes the raping pillaging Natives were horrible too. But wiping out entire groups of humans is a different story. A bigger scale= a worse crime. And the scale is enormous in comparison.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 the myth that we are taught today in liberal academic education, is that white people are inherently more violent and unjust than any other group. but it makes no sense. every group of humans has exceptionally violent, cruel individuals as well as peaceful ones, and every single human group on earth has a history of warfare, merging, splitting and change in territory. to say otherwise is a political tool for the present. i'm not saying it's a great thing. we are not a great species.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea That is simply a degrading gross generalization. If it were true, we'd all be dead by now I promise you. Humans can be evil, we can be good, we can live in fear, we can progress and change. We aren't a horrible, or a great species. We 'can' be either or anything in the middle. You can't lump all human action together. In terms of this, Europeans 'exceptional violence' trumped the rest of the world at that time 10 fold.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 and may i remind you that the natives were more than happy to throw away their bows and trade for superior european guns, more than happy to use those guns on their pre-existing enemies, and more than happy to ally themselves with certain groups of whites in order to fulfill their own historical agendas of war against their "fellow" native americans. they were no foolish innocents, just trying to "make buddies" with the whites. they were just as shrewd, and just as cunning.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea Yes, many natives were barbaric murderers too. No doubt about that. I also never said they wanted to make buddies. You completely missed, glossed over, or forgot my point. Murdering each other is horrible enough your right. I'm just stating that invasion coupled with even more murder is worse.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 invasion coupled with murder is shitty. i'm with you there. my point is that native american tribes were murdering and invading each other's territory long before europeans joined the theater of war in north america. every piece of land that the whites stole from the various native american nations had been fought over and changed hands many times before. whites were not the first "invaders" in NA. they just happened to win because of the historical chance of disease and technology.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 let me say again, i am not saying that whites were wonderful people who did wonderful things to native americans. what i am saying is that they were not the first people in north america to take land away from people of different ethnic groups. i find it is sort of dehumanizing of native americans to pretend that they had no concept of territory or had never invaded one another's land. historical, anthropological and archaeological evidence do not justify that portrayal.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 it seems to me that to your mind it was okay for pre-columbian Iroquoian speaking people (for example) to wage war upon and drive out Algonquin speaking people in what is now new york state, and to occupy their land for their own agriculture and hunting, which is most likely what happened, though the lack of written history makes it difficult to know precisely. but it was not okay for whites to do essentially the same thing to the iroquois. i say neither one is "okay", but it happened
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 we are all descended from this kind of shit. if you're white, you're probably descended from celts, romans, germans, pre-indo-european people, etc., all of whom hated each other's guts at various points in history, and warred with each other and took over each other's land for thousands of years. it is the same story anywhere you go in the world. we are an exceptionally violent species. we should stop looking for pure, innocent cultures, because, the sad fact is, they do not exist.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 i think if we want to be peaceful as a culture and civilization and move forward, we have to recognize that, although what our ancestors did was genocidal and incredibly unjust, they did it to people who were people, just like us, who would have done the same to us if they had had our disease immunity and technological development. to say we are exceptionally evil as a culture is to become unreasonably self-loathing, and it dehumanizes ourselves and our enemies from the past.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea Well I won't lie, I am proud that I am not Spanish, English or French. My ancestors didn't have anything to do with this conquest. But even if they did, 'people are just people' still doesn't fly in this context. It is not a given that everybody/culture takes whatever they can at every chance. We all have the same human traits, but depending on our environment, those traits change/form differently. All societies are far from being created equally.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 and what would you propose to do with someone like me, who is part english, part french, part welsh, part irish, and has a small amount of algonquin blood, and in all likelihood some hushed-up african blood? my ancestors are both the victims and the perpetrators. if you want to fully give back wales to the welsh, or ireland to the ancient gaels, rhode island to the wampanoag, who do you give it to? how much of me would you hate? which part of me should i hate or blame?
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 we think of the irish, for example, as one of the victims, because of recent history, but they themselves pushed out, killed, or culturally dominated the people who were living in ireland before the indo-european expansion. the germanic ancestors of the english were invaded by and persecuted by the romans. the perpetrators become the victims, and no one is not descended from "perpetrators". maybe you can wash your hands of the most recent struggle, but you are still human.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea America is not that any of those cultures/societies from the 14/1500s that I mentioned either. I never said we are or were. To say give a pass to a culture/society because you think they're all the same is what dehumanizes. You can fairly say that Ghengis Khan and the Mongols from whatever era that was were far worse than the eskimos of well, just about anytime.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 dude, the inuit fought and killed each other plenty. i'm not denying that there have been periods of peace in history, but you would be pretty f-ing hard-pressed to find a person who has no blood or genocide on their ancestral hands. the irony is that it is an excellent excuse for war to pretend that you don't.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 where on earth did you get the idea that eskimos never waged war with one another? the fact that their populations were not as dense?
a small group of people annihiliating another small group of people is still a genocide. you can't have nazi germany genocidal statistics when you don't have 6 million people available to be massacred.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 let me say once again, i am not giving anybody a free pass. but, neither am i going to condemn anybody over anybody else, or pretend that there are groups of people on earth who have always been victims and never been oppressors. we're all pretty condemnable, whether we want to admit it or not. it's overly optimistic to think human violence can end forever, but a temporary state of peace can only be sustained when people recognize that everyone has a violent, brutal human heritage.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea If you aren't willing to see relatively, than you'll keep missing my point no matter how many times I make it. Relative to other cultures at points in history, some cultures are far less aggressive, more peaceful, less violent among each other, etc.
If I had some emotionally charged comments about this that gave the wrong impression I apologize, but...
Take that idea or leave it, but I'm telling you I objectively see relativity as truth and important.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 it's certainly all relative. i think the main point to keep in mind is that it is all cultural rather than genetic. because of the horrific behavior of my anglo ancestors, i live in an age and a culture where it is perfectly acceptable to talk about my demographic as though people who look like me were in some way racially exceptional in violence and greed and expansionism. as a result, i tend to be sensitive to bogus racialized ideas of peaceful, kind, non-expansionist "non-whites"
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 i'm certainly not saying that my ancestors weren't violent, greedy, genocidal, expansionist assholes. but they sure as shit weren't the first, and i doubt they will be the last. and when seen from a culturally detached viewpoint, cultural peculiarities, skin color, nose shape, etc. aside, their behavior was the same as that of any so-called "higher", money-based civilization. and these civilizations arise from tribal and hunter-gatherer groups in which such behavior is also present.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 also not saying that there aren't cultural groups that espouse and practice peace. but i would argue that they are, unfortunately, very rare, and often as not they are fabricated for the purpose of present politics, to establish a false mask of innocence, perpetuating a form of the noble savage myth.
There's an interesting paper: A Bioarchaeological Perspective on the History of Violence, for free if you google it.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 if you can access jstor, try the 1993 paper "The Osteology and Archaeology of the Crow Creek Massacre". mass graves of over 400 people, corpse mutilation, mass-murdered women and children, the works, well before the arrival of columbus. any idea of native american warfare as being purely low-casualty and ceremonial in nature is a bunch of bullshit (although it certainly existed)
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 well, i should say it is genetic in a broader sense, inasmuch as genetically we are all humans, and a fundamental aspect of our behavior as a species is the tendency toward violence. it happens everywhere on earth, regardless of culture, though there may be long cultural stretches of peace.
there is no such thing as a cultural group of humans that has not known the feeling of hatred and the desire to annihilate other humans. i think that is, unfortunately, part of what makes us human.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea Of course you're right that it's part of our humanity to be violent and greedy, but it isn't the only part, and external influence has a bigger role than you give it. We don't have be violent. We don't have to act subconsciously. I do not know enough about all the thousands of cultures that ever existed to point to the least violent, but there is more too it than just the interior. The exterior greatly influences the interior.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 we don't have to be violent, agreed, and it seems we are becoming less and less violent.
my concern is mainly with the accuracy of history. in hindsight it is very easy to blame the white man for everything, but the white man did not "invent" smallpox and other old world diseases, which was by far the main driver of european success in colonizing the new world, and many tribes were just as violent and expansionist as whites, if not more so, but this is thrown in the dustbin of history.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 certainly there is the famous use of smallpox blankets. but you can be damn sure that if they tables were turned in terms of immunity, that some native chief or other would have done the same shit to the whites.
it's a tragic history, and not a pleasant one to think about at all, with a lot of bad luck of historical chance for the indian tribes, and a shit-ton of violence, deception, and massacres of innocents and not-so-innocents carried out by the many factions involved.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 europeans would certainly not have won out without the medley of agriculture, disease, domestic animals and technological development that they brought with them. but you would have to blame some guy in china for inventing gun powder, some pig centuries ago in europe for transmitting the pox to humans, some ancient middle eastern tribe for domesticating that pig's ancestors, etc. etc.
to say white people were morally inferior as a racial trait, as many do, is to ignore the context.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea Well I blamed specific cultures that just happened to be white. Not all white cultures with plenty of guns jumped on that band wagon. I clearly am not saying it's because they are white. I said numerous times it is human, but also cultural.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 alright, fair enough. but if we consider the english, for example, probably most of them were not thinking about having a fun genocide when they got on the boat. they were probably thinking "i gotta find a place where i can be free to live", and they arrived in a place that was torn by pre-existing war and decimated by european plagues, where they were welcomed by certain tribes and hated by others.
you could blame the king of england for being a maniac, but not the average colonist.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@shabido1 if you raise a white person as a chippewa or an iroquois, as did happen on occasion, you get a chippewa or an iroquois with white skin and facial features, and vice versa.
i'm not about to apologize for being of english descent, nor am i about to be overly proud of it, because it's all the same wherever you go. we get lost in the superficial details and forget the underlying 99.9999%, genetically programmed similarity between all humans
i think that is the root of our violent behavior
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea I think that number there is a gross miscalculation chief. If it were as simple as virtually 100% instinctive humanity, you wouldn't have some people who think a bearded druid carpenter is coming to save them, and others who devote their life to productive innovations for benefiting humanity for example. Our free will and thought play a much bigger role than 0.00001% I like to think.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 i wish it were that simple. that's my point. we are delusional. if we weren't so friggin delusional, we would be more able to clearly see that we are all pretty much the same, and we wouldn't concoct insane religions and devise gang-like racial categories which lead to horrific violence.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea No, I'm with you, you are right about our instinctive humanity. It guides a whole lot of us to do some off-the-wall, bat-shit crazy stuff, and not even realize it. We all are very similar, whether we let ourselves act instinctively or consciously. We're on the same page there, but those instincts and conscious mentality, are greatly affected by our surroundings. It's the whole chicken and egg thing kinda, We create our environment and it creates us.
shabido1 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea I guess it depends on where we start. If we use those conscious, thought out parts of our humanity to create our environment, than it in turn keeps that momentum. If we start by creating an environment/society with our selfishness and hate, than it keeps that momentum.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 part of the 99.9999% i was referring to involves the creation of othering cultural categories.
the irony is that that basic tendency to think of other cultures as inscrutable foreigners is a trait that can be found in all human cultures, amongst all human individuals at some point in their lives, which only shows that all cultures and individuals are fundamentally similar.
it's up to the individual to transcend the cultural mask and the fear of the other, to see what is universal.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea True, but it doesn't mean actions should get glossed over or justified because we are all human after all.
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 indeed not.
but by the same token, an entire culture can't be essentialized by the actions of a portion of its members.
i'm sure there were iroquois opposed to cannibalism, english opposed to praying towns, germans opposed to nazism, etc. etc.
but sometimes you have no option but to be involved. if you were an english colonist or pequot indian in southern new england during the pequot war, it didn't matter if you were a pacifist, you were put on a side whether you liked it or not.
juglanscinerea 1 month ago
@juglanscinerea True to a point, but as you stated most people have no idea what's really going on in their culture or reality at all, so if all this comes down to is who gets the wrong influences because we're all running around mindlessly, then we have to examine not only our instinctive nature but those influences (leaders, governments, trends, etc) as well
shabido1 1 month ago
@shabido1 people forgot about it, because the native americans dont run hollywood. =) and you are completely right.
bijan1982 1 month ago
@bijan1982 Yeah! Someone not arguing with me about this post. Really you're the first one. I got a lot of slack for my comments here.
Thank you and I'm glad there is someone else who can see it that way.
shabido1 1 month ago
man he's so fucking different than the blackwearing bearded man running around the stage.
DeathnoteBB 4 months ago
Jesus, its George Carlin but in a different body! :S
pricture 5 months ago
This is the first time I've seen him without a beard.
supersmash43 5 months ago
Russell Crowe
dupencja 5 months ago
Wow George was kinda cute!!
fashnmama 6 months ago
no one here obviously remembers the smothers brothers.
doggieman1961 6 months ago
@doggieman1961 Sad isn't it? The were easily the most important agents of social change on television in their day, and now they are hardly remembered.
directedition 6 months ago
@directedition Not everyone, ever, is remembered either.
DeathnoteBB 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@directedition That's probably because almost half a century has passed by.
GPazosL 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@doggieman1961 I do. And I remember when he yelled "Fire!" when he fell into the chocolate. By the way, Hiawatha was a shin kicker.
Vote4RonPaulLiberty 4 months ago
is the dude on the right gay!?
1) arm around other dude
2) creepy stare to other guy
3) he has a "I wanna fuck ya" face
idunnoimjustbored 6 months ago
@idunnoimjustbored Well, they're brothers. So probably, yeah.
directedition 6 months ago 10
i love that his voice hadnt changed a bit since he was that age to about 70
clmanzo123 6 months ago
That guy introducing Carlin looked HIGH as hell!
mindstormsabrewin 7 months ago
holy shit he looks like an anchor man
DirtyMikeballin 7 months ago
George hated to do this, he said he would never watch anything from the Carson show.
TheKenTerry 8 months ago
@TheKenTerry What he really hated was the wasn't aware how edgy he would was allowed to be on the Smothers Brothers Show. He said that had he known more about the show before appearing on it, he would have done an entirely different and very controversial skit. But he would have been far from the first to do so on their show.
directedition 8 months ago
@directedition
No, I agree. He hated playing nice, although this one was rather funny.
TheKenTerry 8 months ago
only his voice is recognizable lol
MultiXotas 8 months ago
As tame as this is, the liberal p.c crowd would have shit thier pants over this material..
Xcorgi 8 months ago
Holy shit i had never seen him so young!
aoregon2 8 months ago
He went from a typical white man trying to fit in to a man of truth with the courage to voice his own opinion unmarred by the expectations of his own society. I have even more respect for him now...blessings
alleycatjones 8 months ago
Jeeezus the audio is way out of synch. But it's still hilarious.
felixq78 8 months ago
It is amazing how time changes people. He went from such a nice young guy to an "Old Fuck!" haha
MFPalubaJr 9 months ago 5
I almost can't recognize him.
AsifIcarebear3 9 months ago
WHAT A DOUCHE BAG,EAT SHIT PALED PIG FACE !!
ED000111 9 months ago
@ED000111
Lol. Yousa trollin.
Nobody hates Carlin...no one. Ever. *dead stare* -_-
AndrewDeLong 8 months ago 3
Comment removed
newfiecodjigger 9 months ago
Limping ox disliked this video.
starwarsfreakgeek 10 months ago 5
they're mad stoned
mikecappa 10 months ago
Holy crap, look at how young he is.
PenguinInc 10 months ago
when was this?
Z1986 10 months ago
So Russel Crowe used to be a comedian!
lip333 10 months ago 2
I'm a native and I fucking LOVE THIS.
Nagneto 11 months ago 5
1 person is limping ox
fafayt 11 months ago 2
kinda looks like russel crow, don;t he?
WildChildkaA 11 months ago
this is softporn in comparison to his later materials
MsMojomaster 1 year ago 14
@MsMojomaster Not prompting any drug related talk, but he said in one of his interviews that LSD helped change his perspective. Maybe that has something to do with his later stuff being so thought-provoking.
muraliavarma 3 months ago
looks like russle crow's little brother
pedinoway2 1 year ago
he got better looking as he aged. haha. which is weird
LongshotLinds13 1 year ago
holy shit he's so young!
LongshotLinds13 1 year ago
holy shit, hes just a young lad in this video
ShinobiKisune 1 year ago
The skit is about sergeants while the title says, "indian lieutenants". Does the submitter not know the difference???
mdlovin1 1 year ago
1:20 its a white flavor flav.
DoNotBeHighandMighty 1 year ago
men almost always look better with beards and longer hair, especially white men, otherwise they get kinda piggish
1goddesstruth 1 year ago
@1goddesstruth your a dumb flat chested goth bitch aint you..thats disgusting
CGJUGO80 1 year ago
I was just born when he did this skit, never seen it before. He was and always will be my favorite comedian. The subjects he ranted about were always about controversial views, but he had a great way of twisting it into somthing we could all laugh at. Bet he was a great guy to sit and chat with... the world lost a great person.
gramboliciousness 1 year ago
:O OMG
iamacookie6 1 year ago
Willie Nelson did the same phase change... corporate to hippie. Worked well for both.
MrTorgrimson 1 year ago
this is still good and he is pretty good looking as well lol
TruthThanks 1 year ago
he actually looks umm nice haha. not like him
speranzayaya 1 year ago
Watch his mouth and the words and c if u notice any thing
osu5inarow 1 year ago
@osu5inarow
The sound is out of sync with the video...
furrytommy 1 year ago
new book on carlin. "seven deadly words" by james sullivan. just released.
flyingfishsurf 1 year ago
carlin was smoking weed since he was a teenager on the streets of new york. it was the coke & booze that really tore him apart physically. i think it was the lsd that opened his unique perspective as wide as it could go. he continued to smoke weed occasionally untll he died. he also indulged in fine wines until the end. 1972 was arrested for "7 words routine" in milwaukee. friends cleaned out his dressing room 5 minutes before the police searched it. could have been much worse for him.
flyingfishsurf 1 year ago 2
@flyingfishsurf That's serisouly fucked up about the 72' routine.
Jornev 1 year ago
Fascinating stuff. Within three years Carlin would have 'discovered' himself, though you can feel that he is groping towards it in this sketch. That is, his deep love of the similarities, quixotic behaviors and peculiarities of being 'human'.
The Smother's Bothers themselves were anti-establishment, causing the show to be cancelled in 1969.
Curiously, in thirty to forty years time, all this looks so innocent.
OneWorldHistory 1 year ago 4
this is around 1969.
MsSparkleShoes 1 year ago
When George Carlin started to experiment with drugs, his appearance changed and his comedy material become more profound.
DrInfidel 1 year ago
pretty cool except the title says lieutenants when Carlin said sergeants
17GreenLantern 1 year ago
I probably saw this, but have no memory of Carlin before he grew his hair and beard...
davan7 1 year ago
Wolf, Howling W. LOL
hocobo 1 year ago
the guys in the suits have voices similar to George's
130166wsjr 1 year ago