yeah, so the candace owens show is apparently in london and douglas murray is the person interviewed.. they cover a range of topics that are current and connected to murray's new book (the madness of crowds: gender, race and identity).. i've not got his new book but it seems to be good.
owens and murray both make good points and it's a joy to listen to them together.. enjoy .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4o9yqrby9q.
The word "dangerous" was used how many times? - maybe because history teaches us what happens when identity politics are embraced and enforced. You end up with piles and piles of dead bodies.
See - the Nazis, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, etc. etc.
Identity politics never ends well.
yeah, so the candace owens show is apparently in london and douglas murray is the person interviewed.. they cover a range of topics that are current and connected to murray's new book (the madness of crowds: gender, race and identity).. i've not got his new book but it seems to be good.
owens and murray both make good points and it's a joy to listen to them together.. enjoy .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4o9yqrby9q.
Owens at the end simply asserted that when trying to improve the "goodness" of the world you have no other path but corruption and dishonesty, "there is no other way" she insisted - I'll have to listen to the conversation again but I thought Owens suggested that when people pursue 'goodness' then they're more likely than those who pursue 'truth' to fall into corruption and dishonesty.
I lost count how many times they suggested "no one else" was talking about this or that topic - they may be wrong in this claim, although very few people are successfully talking about this or that topic without feeling consequences. - see what happened to Heather Heying and her husband, for example.
The promise of "freedom" and liberation by abandoning "liberalism" and "leftism" said with born-againerlike eyes - nothing 'born-again' about that conversation at all. Born-againer-like eyes? I don't think so.
This probably in their minds justifies their impugning ulterior motives and envisioning power grabbing conspiracies by "Marxists" - well, Marxists have multiplied in universities all over the US, Canada and the UK. I can see why some people speak of a 'power grab'.
These are about the only thing that has actually changed since the 90's - quite a bit has changed since the 90s. Life on campus has changed, with deranged outrage over all manner of perceived and real social transgressions, students demanding and getting safe spaces, etc.
yeah, so the candace owens show is apparently in london and douglas murray is the person interviewed.. they cover a range of topics that are current and connected to murray's new book (the madness of crowds: gender, race and identity).. i've not got his new book but it seems to be good.
owens and murray both make good points and it's a joy to listen to them together.. enjoy .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4o9yqrby9q.
One particular point was the following from Murray: go to Google Images and type in 'black couples' and note the results.
Now type in 'white couples' and note the search results.
Do the same, replacing the adjective with gay/homosexual ... and finally heterosexual or straight.
Interesting ...
yeah, so the candace owens show is apparently in london and douglas murray is the person interviewed.. they cover a range of topics that are current and connected to murray's new book (the madness of crowds: gender, race and identity).. i've not got his new book but it seems to be good.
owens and murray both make good points and it's a joy to listen to them together.. enjoy .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4o9yqrby9q.
Yeah, so The Candace Owens Show is apparently in London and Douglas Murray is the person interviewed.
They cover a range of topics that are current and connected to Murray's new book (The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity).
I've not got his new book but it seems to be good. Owens and Murray both make good points and it's a joy to listen to them together.
Enjoy ...
apparently someone put this short message on posters and it's driving people mad because they don't know how they are supposed to react to it.. do you agree or disagree?
is it insulting women, islam, both or neither?.
it's a clever sign and really shows up the cognitive dissonance of the lefts identity politics.. https://johnmarksays.com/blog/2019/9/24/islam-is-right-about-women-the-best-meme-of-2019.
Islam IS wrong about women - one thing, it's good that cheeky messages can start conversations.
Is Islam wrong about women?
Well, Islam says that men and women are different, and that biological sex exists and that there are only two biological sexes. This is in line with all the scientific data: there are two biological sexes (male and female); the two sexes are bimodal, i.e. Homo sapiens exhibits sexual dimorphism. Men and women are different, on average, on many things: height, upper body strength, percentage and distribution of body fat, gametes (which are binary - there are only eggs and sperm), and - as the Scandinavian countries are discovering to their horror - behaviour.
But I also get what you're saying - Islam is wrong on how it views and treats women. Women's testimony being half that of men's is discriminatory bullshit and must be called out as such. Stoning women to death for adultery is Shari3a and therefore part of Islam and must be called the barbaric, religious, depraved bullshit that it undoubtedly is.
All the lily-white Western 'activists' won't touch Islam with a barge pole, though.
Because these activists are basically anti-Western, anti-capitalist loons. Islamists are their fellow travellers on the way to smashing capitalism. Sorry to be cynical, but that's it, in a nutshell.
apparently someone put this short message on posters and it's driving people mad because they don't know how they are supposed to react to it.. do you agree or disagree?
is it insulting women, islam, both or neither?.
it's a clever sign and really shows up the cognitive dissonance of the lefts identity politics.. https://johnmarksays.com/blog/2019/9/24/islam-is-right-about-women-the-best-meme-of-2019.
"Islam" is a broad spectrum of sects and personal identities - but it's based on one holy book, The Quran, one person's example above all others (Muhammad's) and one body of law, Shari3a.
Just like Judaism can't be reduced to one set of standards and beliefs - sorry, this is nonsense. Judaism has one standard and one set of beliefs.
Are there any Jewish religious sects who think eating bacon is allowed for religious Jews?
Any Jewish religious sects whose members don't worship Yahweh, but instead worship other gods, such as Vishnu, Thor, etc.?
apparently someone put this short message on posters and it's driving people mad because they don't know how they are supposed to react to it.. do you agree or disagree?
is it insulting women, islam, both or neither?.
it's a clever sign and really shows up the cognitive dissonance of the lefts identity politics.. https://johnmarksays.com/blog/2019/9/24/islam-is-right-about-women-the-best-meme-of-2019.
The genius of this is that it's ambiguous.
People don't know how to take it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r6EbBGTiw0
I loved seeing the burka-clad woman saying 'everyone's allowed an opinion and I respect it', as if she doesn't necessarily agree with 'Islam is right about women' XD
Trolling the left is often very good fun.
Long may it continue.
question, are you open to and enjoy doing critical research ?.
as a trades person with little education other than being a high school vocational graduate in machine shop tech.
1980 and now a small business owner i find proper research to be essential.
...in the end, and deep down... all extremists are about the Group. - of course.
I disagree with Hitchens, here.
Mao, Stalin and others weren't acting on some kind of religious impulse, IMO.
Atheism is simply a lack of belief in God. That's it. It's not a set of values for societies to live by or for governments to implement.
Mao massacred 60 million of his own citizens neither in the name of religion nor in the name of atheism. He massacred those people in the name of his political ideology.
We should blame religion when religious regimes kill people in the name of their religion.
We can't blame religion when secular regimes kill people. This is what Hitchens appears to be doing and I disagree with him.
Of course, we also can't blame atheism when secular regimes kill people, either.
question, are you open to and enjoy doing critical research ?.
as a trades person with little education other than being a high school vocational graduate in machine shop tech.
1980 and now a small business owner i find proper research to be essential.
Christopher Hitchens: 'Did millions die because of 20th century atheism?' - no, I don't think so.
Millions died in the 20th century because of communism. Communist regimes were secular.
Those millions of people weren't killed in the name of atheism, but in the name of socialism and communism.
As Hitch reminded audiences many times and schooled religious devotees about is obvious in history books around the world ... the people that did the bidding of these evil leaders were religious, they weren't secular - this seems like an oversimplification that I don't necessarily agree with.
The truth is that secular regimes killed over 100 million people in the 20th century.
there was a time we could laugh about mindless silly things.
someone using an ethnic accent, making fun of their own race, making fun of someone’s intelligent, etc.
we could laugh without feeling constantly offended , upset or disturbed.
See how the media try to cover for him?
'Justin Trudeau's brownface scandal is bad. But voting him out isn't the solution'
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/20/justin-trudeau-brownface-scandal
^^^ Hahahahaha .... f**k me! XD
