Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

Collins: And you had called many times ceasefire. Now, repeatedly since October 7th, and there is a ceasefire in place now. Mamdani: Yes. And what I'm saying is that I want it to last. And I think that the praise comes when it is delivered. And there's a lot...

311,976 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

Should Christian Nationalism and Catholic Integralism be taken seriously? Ben Sasse answers. “‘Should they be taken seriously?’ I mean, ultimately I think no — but I want to be humble about how and why we get there.” “Can people who are skeptical of a lot of Enlightenment assumptions be reasonable in making those cases? Of course. I'm pretty sympathetic to a lot of what the Enlightenment offered us in response to many of the things that had just come before. But that doesn't mean that the Enlightenment is at all a foretaste of heaven.” “I think there is a temptation right now to have an over-realized eschatology where people want to find a city that has foundations. ‘Right now, dang it, I'm ready to build it and I want it to be better and I want it now. And I want to smash the people who are in the way of it’ is tonally the way a lot of these folks talk.” “But philosophically, having a debate is one thing and claiming that they're doing practical politics is quite another. So I think it is important, without us, you know, trying to answer a lot of these questions, to at least acknowledge there are Catholic claims about integralism that a lot of Protestants seem to pine for and lust after without working through — what would that really mean?” “I just look at a lot of the debates of the last two months about women's suffrage and I just kind of want to shake my head and say, ‘Man, this is a weirdo online phenomenon.’ There is no chance on earth that any of these folks who are advancing some sub-varieties of Christian nationalism are actually thinking there's math by which they're going to end women's suffrage. And yet they talk like it. Because online, it seems really provocative to say things like that. And I don't really know what it's worth to linger on some of these silly online debates.” Watch: Listen:

Sola Media

39,130 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

I have a friend who doesn't read anything published in the past 50 years, and the more I think about it, the more I think he's onto something. The reason is that time is the best filter we have for quality. People are bad at judging quality in the moment but very good at getting rid of junk over time. — — "History is not very good at capturing all that is great in art. It is not good at that. There are many great symphonies that have been lost permanently, there are many great painters that died unknown and their paintings are gone, there's novels that have been written that no one will ever read. So history is not good at capturing all this great art. But history is very good at discarding all that is mediocre. And the amount of time that that takes, it's something like 50 years. So over the course of 50 years, what will happen is a lot of stuff that was prominent will be re-filtered and re-filtered and re-filtered, and you'll end up with a smaller group of things which have survived that test of time. So if you think about it right now, if you go back and look at the bestseller lists for 1974, 1973, there's a lot of that that would have been highly regarded at the time, which people do not read anymore for a variety of reasons, and there's some that has survived, and that's a very telling distinction. So in a world where I'm turning 60 this year, you have a limited amount of time, all four of us have active lives, we want to make sure that if we're going to sit down, we're going to read carefully, we're going to meet and we're going to discuss it in detail, we want to make sure that the work is rewarding. And the best way to ensure that is by drawing from the past." amor towles

David Perell

86,765 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

.Erik Voorhees: It’s actually good, from the Trojan horse perspective, that Bitcoin was traceable enough for traditional institutions to tolerate it. “When Bitcoin came out, everyone called it private, thought of it as private. It was referred to as anonymous in every news story. And in some ways, it is very private and very anonymous. But the truth is that it’s also extremely trackable and traceable. It is not private in reality. And the question is, should it have been from the start? And at first I thought, yes, it should have been more private. And that was a mistake in its design. However, I think if Bitcoin had been anonymous truly from the start, like a Zcash or a Monero, it would have had such antagonism from the state. I don’t know that the state could have snuffed it out, but they would have tried much harder. And I think it’s actually good, from the Trojan horse metaphor perspective, that it was traceable enough that the traditional institutions could tolerate it. They’ve never liked it, but they could at least tolerate it because there is some traceability. And that has allowed Bitcoin to grow. And I think in its shadow, that other crypto assets are actually anonymous is very healthy. The strength of cryptocurrency as a concept in society, I think, is served best when Bitcoin itself is not perfectly private, but other assets are. That is a very difficult thing, I think, for the state to combat. And that decentralization of attributes is really, really crucial. So, yeah, I’m very glad that there are other coins that are private. I want there to be more of them, and I want them to be more popular. And I think it’s okay that Bitcoin itself is not.”

Arjun Khemani

23,056 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten