Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

🚨 DSA Runs as Democrats While Calling Democrats “Enemies” Some people don’t realize how common it is for DSA members to talk about Democrats with outright contempt, even while planning to run on the Democratic ballot line. Christopher Winston (BRG IYKYK) is stating an internal baseline here. “The Democrats...

16,937 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

🚨 Hasan Piker and Chris Rabb Lay Out the DSA Playbook for Using the Democratic Ballot Line Against the Party This clip is a clean look at the socialist left’s bizarre frenemy relationship with the Democratic Party. Hasan opens by attacking Democrats directly. They “don’t love you,” “don’t care about you,” and “don’t care about your interests.” But he does not tell people to leave the party. He tells them the Democratic primary is the battlefield because it “determines the trajectory of the Democratic Party.” Then Chris Rabb picks up the thread. Rabb says he “identif[ies] as a democratic socialist,” but is “running as a Democrat because the system creates this narrowness.” In other words, the Democratic label is not the identity. It is the vehicle. Rabb makes that even clearer moments later. He says Democrats may share the same label “in this moment,” but “we are very different.” Then he tells voters, “You don’t have to love the Democratic Party to vote for me. I do not care because I’m not here for the party. I’m here for the people.” The result is a strange but increasingly effective hostile partnership. The DSA needs the Democratic ballot line because third-party politics is a dead end. The Democratic Party keeps absorbing candidates who openly reject it. And over time, that one-way arrangement lets the socialist left take more ground inside the party while still pretending to be outsiders. But what do Democrats actually get out of this arrangement?

Stu Smith

266,177 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

.Logan on our latest piece in Human Progress about what unifies the enemies of civilization: What unifies all of the enemies of civilization is that they all slow down the growth of knowledge. Now, you ask, how can we take advantage of this fact, namely that all of the enemies of civilization share in common this feature that they curb the growth of knowledge? This fact tells us that we can, if we so choose and if we make the right decisions, outpace them in the growth of knowledge. So, one strategy to defeat the enemies of civilization is basically to outpace them in this great war of memes and growing wealth and knowledge, such that eventually, the memes that comprise the enemies of civilization, as well as the wealth that the enemies of civilization control, is an ever smaller fraction of the total meme pool and wealth that civilization has to offer. So, this is what success would look like if we think about outpacing them. But there's also the strategy of replacing the memes that comprise the enemies of civilization with better ideas. This is just a fancy way of saying we could also persuade people. So that would be a kind of inside-out approach, rather than the out-pacing, which is kind of from the outside in. And of course, we can walk and chew gum at the same time. We can continue to build and outpace the enemies of civilization while persuading people that the relevant ideas that curb the growth of knowledge are mistaken. And by the way, just to make the conversation a little less abstract, the enemies of civilization that we wrote about in our piece, which is an excerpt of the script we wrote for your upcoming documentary, those enemies are socialism, environmentalism, scientism, relativism, dogmatism, and doomerism. And I don't think I ever told you this, Arjun, but what I like about the list we came up with is that understanding the inner workings of each of these enemies of civilization, that is to say, understanding the how and why of how each enemy of civilization curbs the growth of knowledge, gives unique insights into the nature of progress and epistemology. This clip was recorded and made using Airchat.

Arjun Khemani

23,825 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

A revealing exchange with Christian nationalist William Wolfe 🇺🇸 on whether Christianity involves loving one's enemies: Matthew Kaemingk: Center of the Christian faith — loving your enemies. Who is your enemy, and how are you called to love them? Finish us off with that. Wolfe: That’s not the center of the Christian faith. The center of the Christian faith is repenting and believing in Jesus. Matthew, I’m not going to accept your framing there. It is not the center of the Christian faith. Not even close. Christ actually defeated his enemies and he’s going to put them all under his feet. So it’s like, I’m sorry, I can’t accept that. So you want to try that question again? Kaemingk: No, I think that’s a great way to end. Wolfe: Well, no, I mean, that doesn’t mean we don’t love our enemies. I’m not going to accept the—I think that’s actually quite a liberal vision of Christianity, that the center of it is loving our enemies, when we worship and serve a risen, resurrected, and reigning Christ who’s going to return with a sword to put all of his enemies under his feet, the ones who do not repent and believe. Kaemingk: I still think we should love our enemies. William Wolfe: Absolutely. But I will say this: loving your enemies is not a public policy prescription, right? I’ve said this before, you’re not a very good Christian if you don’t help somebody broken down on the side of the road because you think they’re an illegal immigrant. You, of course, you should help them, right? Like, that’s not how we should be carrying ourselves. But we can also still enforce our immigration laws, and I see no contradiction between the two.

Shadi Hamid

107,475 görüntüleme • 3 gün önce