If you're going to argue corruption will lead to the breakdown of social systems and the values they perpetuate, you should do so in a manner that does not allow yourself to be easily labeled as a tin hat character. It's not that there aren't valid points, but that you have to tone it down a bit, and start explaining the basics first, before you unload on someone. Clearly, if you tell someone something that contradicts their idea of normal, there will always be strong opposition, though, regardless of how right or wrong you are. For example, instead of just saying the current system perpetuates slavery, explain why feel so, subtly. IE, I would start by saying that it is my personal belief that basic necessities, such as food, water, etc... should not be managed through money (in many cases, you will likely have to explain the two basic functions of money: a debt ledger, and a resource management system, and find evidence to argue why these are bad, probably in that why collecting other's debt is likely unhealthy and derived from insecurities in power and the drive for dominance, as well as the fact that resources could be much more efficiently managed by a system that doesn't require companies to incite consumption in order to survive, or other arguments centered there). Then you have to propose a solution. That's up to you. Your arguments, however, are a waste of time and will not influence someone if you don't give at least some basic idea of a solution. I personally subscribe to the ideas proposed by the venus project, but each idea is potentially a large debate you have to struggle with first before you can start to find it agreeable. Same with anyone you are arguing with, but that should be expected, it goes against the values and beliefs most of us are raised with. Also, I didn't really watch the video, but you'll still want to avoid the imagery here, things like anonymous videos are going to be quickly disregarded. Try to avoid such symbols.