This priest comes off as highly arrogant and smug. I could only watch half of it. 

He opens by saying the contention comes mostly from SVs to bolster their claim that the V2 papal claimants are not legitimate.

It has nothing to do with the fact that they did actually changed the Rites?

If anything, it's the other way around.  R&R hold that the V2 popes are legitimate, so based on that some of them feel that they must uphold the validity of the NO Sacramental Rites.  That's the argument made by Michael Davies, for instance.  Now, SSPX didn't always hold so strongly that they were valid, but neo-SSPX also had additional motivation to downplay doubts about the NO Rites, the political implications of their new cozy relationship with Rome.

Is this because many of these priests are "cradle Trads" now and there's a certain formation (or programming) they receive through SSPX?

This could be as there are plenty of new priests who attended SSPX schools before going into seminary, but there are also a lot who were born and raised NO before finding tradition - I think these latter are the ones more sympathetic or tolerant of the NO overall.

I suspect this man has been taught in the same way and hasn't even honestly read what Cekada and others say, and if he did, he did a very poor job in communicating that to the listeners.

Yes, it comes across as simply regurgitating various talking points, and it doesn't sound like an honest analysis went into the question.  By way of contrast, I saw Father Chazal actually looking into the question himself, looking at sources, and making his own conclusions ... rather than just parroting something back.

Yes, I detect a similar attitude to that of Father Paul Robinson, one that is more and more common among the newer generation of SSPX priests.  This kind of demeanor was not prevalent among SSPX priests from a couple decades ago.  I've also noticed that many of them have similar personalities also, whereas the prior generations had priests with their own very distinct personalities.  Is this because many of these priests are "cradle Trads" now and there's a certain formation (or programming) they receive through SSPX?

I think you are on to something there. Many of the younger SSPX priests are “cradle Trads” and have never really been in the trenches or war. That goes for many of the faithful who blindly follow whatever Father says because he’s a priest and can never be wrong. While these people may be well-intentioned, they are sowing all sorts of confusion and misleading many of the faithful. Compare that with those who have been through the Novus ordo grinder for decades; the difference is palpable. Their BS is finely tuned.

I've also noticed that many of them have similar personalities also, whereas the prior generations had priests with their own very distinct personalities.  Is this because many of these priests are "cradle Trads" now and there's a certain formation (or programming) they receive through SSPX?

Isn't being a "cradle Trad" the ideal though? I don't quite see the problem since this is what we want in order to have a proper Catholic culture, yes?

Isn't being a "cradle Trad" the ideal though? I don't quite see the problem since this is what we want in order to have a proper Catholic culture, yes?

Well, it's not a problem PER SE, but there seems to be a phenomenon of cookie-cutter priests that have the same personality (or lack thereof) and seem to have been programmed, where they don't appear to think independently but merely regurgitate the neo-SSPX talking points.  And I do think that your perspective on the world changes if you're a "cradle Trad" vs. having lived through the NO and the Conciliar revolution.  For them, they find the SSPX Trad life "normal" but then aren't as keenly aware of the AB-normality of the NO.  I've mentioned this before that when you see the SSPX building enormously expensive seminaries and churches, it speaks to a different mentality where the current situation is viewed as the "new normal" ... almost as if it's not aberrant and without the expectation that God will fix it, vs. the notion that this situation will continue on indefinitely.  Prior generations of Trads were (more or less) content with having Masses in tiny little run-down churches or conference rooms at hotels, etc.  For them, the expectation was that this is temporary, and that when God restores the Church, all of the amazing Catholic buildings will be restored to Catholic use.  We have nearly every larger city in the US with many churches that couldn't be duplicated today even for the millions of dollars that SSPX is spending at St. Mary's.  Every diocese has a seminary, so there would be no need to a huge centralized national seminary, etc.