"Tolerance.
It's a word we hear a lot these days.
So, let's define it."
Dave Rubin, the human embodiment of the "so much for the tolerant left!" meme did another
video about tolerance for Prager U, and oh boi, it's as terrible as you imagine.
Fortunately, that's my kink.
So please daddy, fill me up with your logic and reason.
"Tolerance is "the ability to live with people whose opinions and behavior you don't
agree with."
That's essentially how Oxford defines it, how Merriam-Webster defines it, and how we,
as a society, have always defined it."
So far, so true!
A little vague though don't you think?
The dictionary definition rarely provides the full picture of a subject.
Take the definition of Feminism for instance, it doesn't tell you much about all the nuances
and viewpoints within the movement or who's actually living up to them.
Usually people like my sweet Sugardave are the first to point out how flawed dictionary
definitions can be, so as the classical liberal I obviously am I'm prone to stay a little
bit skeptical.
Not because this definition is entirely wrong, but because it doesn't take into account where
things can get a little bit messy, especially when showing tolerance for something that's
in direct conflict with tolerance for someone else's existence.
Take the paradox of tolerance for example, as defined by annoying german SJW philosopher
Karl Popper in his book "The Open Society and It's Enemies" which goes as follows: "Unlimited
tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance.
If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared
to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will
be destroyed, and tolerance with them"
Popper did not imply that intolerant philosophies should always be suppressed, but that we should
counter them by rational arguments, call them out on their viewpoints and keep them in check
with public opinion, as long as that's a possibility.
You could even say that Popper was a free-speech advocate in that regard!
However, he also saw danger in the intolerant not being prepared to meet us on the level
of rational arguments but begin to denounce all arguments and that they may even forbid
their followers to listen to rational arguments but instead, teach them to answer with violence
and trouble at which point we should claim the right to suppress them.
All things considered Popper came to the following conclusion: "We should therefore claim, in
the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.
We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law,
and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way
as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the
slave trade, as criminal."
So, the bottom line of Karl Poppers philosophy is that we should stay cautious about reaching
a point where suppressing the intolerant is our only option, And that every citizen - in
the name of tolerance - has the duty to oppose intolerant viewpoints wherever they occur.
So who is this cultural marxist communist PopperCuck?
Well, my dutiful little marauders of truth reason and logic, he was a giant liberal.
Actually, he was so much of a liberal that the members of the Frankfurt School openly
criticised him over the course of a year long dispute between the critical rationalists
and the Frankfurt School.
You know, the evil Frankfurt School of Critical Theory.
The inventors of frankensteins soy boi and cultural marxism, the monsters threatening
the foundation of western civilisation!
"You might be for the death penalty, and your cousin might be against it.
You might be against a $15 minimum wage, and your coworker might be for it.
Your dad might have voted for Trump, your mom might have voted for Clinton, and your
brother may not have voted at all.
Whatever differences we have, tolerating others' opinions is a prerequisite to a functioning
and free society."
Okay, first of all: Could someone explain me why they would choose a cashier at a fast
food restaurant as an example for someone being against minimum wage?!
It doesn't add up, does it?
Except you have some unusual kink that makes you wanna suffer financially so much, that
you need three jobs to maintain a living!
Unfortunately I haven't heard of such a kink before and believe me, I'm totally down for
a lot of filthy, filthy shit.
Apart from that: What even is your point, Dave?
There is no big movement of tolerant leftists advocating for taking away the rights or inciting
violence against people just because they are for capital punishment, or against minimum
wage or because they voted for a specific party.
HELL!
Searching for it I could find exactly one story that originated on americas probably
most-reliable news source infowars.com written by 'Is soy turning men into pussies" BrainForce
Plus-Salesman Paul Joseph Watson.
Unfortunately for Dave, that story turned out to be wrong and the incident - while happened
- stemmed from a traffic altercation and the victim himself said although he voted for
Trump there is no way the perpetrators could have known that.
Shitty that happened?
ABSOLUTELY!
But it's hardly evidence for a mass phenomenon or even an intolerant left or
consensus within leftists circles.
So, DaveyBoy.
Could it be that you try to blur the lines between tolerance and freedom of consequences?
Could it be that you don't advocate for someone being tolerated but for someone's views and
opinions being left completely unchallenged, like you do on your show?
You don't have to give me an answer, because further into the video you'll prove yourself
that the assumption I make here is actually correct.
"America itself was built on a foundation of tolerance.
The Declaration of Independence guarantees us life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
But there's an implicit contract there: To have your life, your liberty, and your
pursuit of happiness, you have to be tolerant of somebody else's life, their liberty,
and their pursuit of happiness."
There you said it yourself: Tolerance is not a gift, but something you have to earn by
the most basic act of showing tolerance yourself and not.. you known incite violence or taking
away the rights someone needs to pursue their life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.
In other words: The intolerant cannot be tolerated if you wanna maintain a tolerant society.
Because in the very moment you give them a pass to act on their intolerance, they become
a threat to those a tolerant society promised to protect.
Please keep DaveyBoy's words in mind, because they'll become more and more important from
this point going forward.
"This contract, though, seems to be breaking down.
If you listen to the mainstream media, only one side is living up to this deal: the left.
The right, according to the media, is intolerant of everyone...except those darned white, heterosexual,
Christian males.
There's only one problem.
It's just not true."
Are you suggesting that mainstream media has a leftist bias?
That's kinda hilarious considering that most leftist media outlets are self-funded underdogs.
And even if we would consider liberal media outlets to be leftist, they still get outperformed
by conservative media companies all the time.
For fucks sake, fucking Fox News has been the most-watched TV news network in the US
for 197 months straight and counting.
The same fuckin' Fox News where my sweet SugarDave repeatedly gladly appeared as a guest on.
And that's just the tip of the iceberg.
Rupert Murdoch's News Corp who runs Fox News, also owns The Wall Street Journal, New York
Post, The Sun, The Times, Sky News, countless subsidies of the Fox Broadcasting Company
and a hell lot more.
thats not to say that mainstream media has a right wing bias either, the only bias
a media company has is getting more viewers.
Media companies under capitalism sorely aim for getting more viewers.
Therefore it's no surprise that reactionary content outperforms everything else, 'cause
nothing gains more viewers than scandals, drama and fear-mongering.
People like Dave Rubin like to think of themselves as lonely renegades fighting against the establishment,
not realising they already became part of the establishment long ago.
"Incredibly, the left isn't even tolerant of the very people they say they're tolerant
of!
If you're gay, or black, or an immigrant, and you're not in lockstep with current
leftist orthodoxy, you know exactly what I'm talking about."
Dave!
I can't believe your cheap attempt to guilt trip me with your identity politics!
Be ashamed of yourself, how could my pure heart fall for an SJW
like you!
You know true Classical Liberals like me, take this as the sign that while the left stands
up for their right not to be discriminated against on the grounds of identity, they don't
let those people go completely uncriticised and unchecked on their beliefs.
Isn't that what you originally wanted?
Or do you only want it for people you disagree with?
Also..
Did anyone else notice how Daveyboy is trying to make the whole political left as one big
hivemind that all share the same ideas and values?
Yet, we have constant fights between Anarchists and Communists, Social Liberals and Democratic
Socialists, TERFs and Queerfeminists, Violent Protesters and Peaceful Protesters.
GOD DAMMIT!
The Left disagrees on almost everything and that's what makes it so hard to unite the
whole movement.
The myth of some unified leftist dogma doesn't hold up and is really just delusional.
"If you believe we should judge people on the content of their character and not the
color of their skin, the left calls you "racist."
If you believe that America is a nation of immigrants, but that our country should also
protect its borders, the left calls you a "xenophobe."
If you believe that men and women are equal but fundamentally different, the left calls
you "sexist.""
I don't think blunt name-calling without any substantial arguments is productive either
and we can surely have a debate about that.
But maybe..
Your argument would be a lot stronger if you wouldn't resort into pointless name-calling
yourself all the god damn time.
I mean.. sure!
Who doesn't remember the infamous Adorno quote in Dialectics of Enlightenment where he said:
"You should only call your kids by they/them pronouns to prepare them for their fight against
those darned white, heterosexual, Christian males and there oh so precious western civilisation."
I read it every day before I go to bed and maybe..
I cry a little, because it's so affecting.
Oh, also you have kind of a double standard there, don't you?
Maybe if you wanna frame the left as intolerant name-callers based on unsubstantial examples,
make sure you don't call them out on judging people by their character rather than their
identity right before that.
Could may make you seem a little foolish.
"Here's the thing: those who only tolerate people they agree with or like…aren't
actually tolerant."
Good Point!
And that's why I oppose the views of a conservative disabled trans Women of Colour with the same
arguments and methods I'd use against any other conservative, without their identity
being a point of debate.
Their being doesn't nullify their views and actions, nor does it grant them a pass to
stay completely unchallenged.
Self-proclaimed leftists who suddenly start acting racist, sexist, homo- or transphobic
towards people they disagree with definitely do exist, but usually they get hella lot of
backlash from others leftists.
Something that I don't see really often in conservative or far-right bubbles.
But I don't think that's what my sweet SugarDave is going for.
In this video Dave is arguing from an anti-free speech perspective.
He doesn't want conservatives and the far-right to be subjected to opposing views and opinions - or in
other words: he demands the whole world to be a safe space for conservatives - something
that he frequently presents on his own show up to the point where even his own fans make
fun of him.
Why is it
always the right that's complaining so much about a little backlash, thinking it's unfair
to disagree with them on anything?
You really come across like entitled crybabies.
Apart from severe cases of harassment and some strawmans, I rarely see leftists complain
that the right doesn't agree with them, we literally expect them to not agree with us.
If you take part in political discussions, people will always express their disagreements.
That's how free speech works.
"So, who is tolerant?
Is it the organizers of the Women's March, who had to apologize for the "hurt and confusion"
they caused when they invited a man—leftist icon Bernie Sanders—to speak at their convention?
Is it the Antifa thugs, who caused UC Berkeley to spend $600,000 on security when mainstream
conservative Ben Shapiro showed up to give a talk?
Or is it democratic congresswoman Maxine Waters, who scolded Kanye West for "talking out
of turn" when he dared suggest that blacks should think for themselves?"
Damn, Dave!
You really hate free speech, don't you?
Even the most minor disagreements sound like the demise of an open and tolerant
society to you.
You're worse than those so-called "antifa thugs".
So let's take a look into these cases.
The Women's Convention that Sanders was set to speak at united women from pretty moderate
liberals all the way to the far-left.
Those women, of course, have some disagreements.
Some believe it sends confusing signals if a man opens up the first womens convention
in 40 years meant to elevate women of color.
Others were annoyed that he endorsed an anti-abortion candidate in Omaha and others blamed him for
Clintons defeat in the 2016 presidential election.
Whether you agree with them or not, they seem like reasonable concerns a womens convention
should at least listen to and take care of in some way.
Those antifa thugs who appeared when Ben Shapiro spoke at UC Berkeley?
They don't even exist.
It's true that they spend an estimated $600,000 dollars on security, but according to Margo
Bennett of the UC Berkeley police: "For the most part it was an orderly event, attended
by respectful, orderly people.
The crowd in the street was loud, but not violent."
Why do you hate free-speech so much, Dave?
You're even denouncing peaceful protesters who use one of their most fundamental rights
to express their opinion?
You've got some really authoritarian tendencies there, it's disgusting.
Back to the topic: Maxime Waters scolded Kanye West for suggesting Black People should think
for themselves?
How horrible!
Unless..
That's not the real context.
All Waters was saying is: "We don't think that he actually means to do harm, but we're
not sure he really understands the impact of what he's saying, at the time that he's
saying it and how that weighs on, particularly the African American community - and for young
people in general, and I think maybe he should think twice about politics and maybe not have
so much to say."
That's hardly scolding, but mild criticism while still admiring his influence.
Waters also said: "Kanye West is a very creative young man who has presented some of the most
revolutionary material in the African-American community, but we also think that sometimes
Kanye West talks out of turn and perhaps sometimes he needs some assistance in helping him to
formulate some of his thoughts."
Of course conservative media picked on that "talks out of turn" line because it's perfect
to cause a scandal, but in context she's yet again admiring his influence, while performing
mild criticism and suggesting that he sometimes has problems to express his thoughts in a
clear way.
There you've got it!
Three examples of people using their most fundamental rights to express their opinions.
That somehow upset Dave because apparently it was the wrong people using their free speech
and he's a little crybaby who can't stand opposing points.
"These aren't isolated examples.
I'm guessing that you—person watching this right now—have silenced yourself because
you don't want to suffer the wrath of the outrage mob."
I criticise things on the left and within my own community a lot more recently.
I received some respectful disagreements and debates, but the only people really getting
hugely upset and angry about me used to be reactionaries and "classical liberals", but
I already expected that so I won't complain.
But still, I understand that there are some people who wanna engage in a respectful debate
and understand other people's perspective and that there are people who always react
in anger and bad faith, no matter how hard you try.
But that's hardly a problem on the left, but in political debates of any kind.
You might receive it more from the left, while I receive it more from conservatives and the
far-right.
"So, let me ask the question again: Who is tolerant?
Well, here's the surprise: It's actually those "scary" right-wingers that the media
and the universities demonize every day."
You're so full of shit, Dave.
Even if you just experience the slightest bit of disagreement, you chuck yourself on
the floor like a toddler crying about how these evil leftists hurt your precious broflake
feelings.
You're the conservative equivalent to one of those "cringy, angry SJW" people like you
like to nutpick so much.
Who's tolerant, you wanna know?
Probably the people fighting for liberty and freedom for all, even if that
becomes an uncomfortable position to hold.
Being a spineless coward who caters for the feelings of reactionaries not to be hurt doesn't
take as much courage from you.
"The left, sadly, has become utterly intolerant of anyone with whom they disagree.
Why?
Because they believe that they know how you should live and how you should think.
Any deviation, any non-conformity, is dangerous to that goal."
You do realize that the left isn't saying conform or die.
That's actually the far-right.
The left is all about accepting and embracing deviation from the norm.
The left is pretty much united in the belief that the only limit to your own freedom of
expression should be the point at which you would inflict other peoples freedom.
- Expect Tankies.
They might disagree.
But no one likes Tankies anyway.
"Believe it or not, the right, these days, actually welcomes diversity of thought.
I can tell you that in the last few years of my political evolution, I've consistently
found conservatives to be tolerant and open-minded."
Why do you think they're so nice to you, Dave?
You're constantly soft-balling them while you never ask any critical questions, you
set them up with strawman questions and you constantly sit there affirming them in agreement.
You're a useful idiot to them who sets them up with a huge audience.
And you don't just platform mildly conservative voices.
You also hosted Alt-Right figures like Paul Joseph Watson, Stefan Molyneux, Mike Cernovich
and Milo Yiannopoulos who you - ironically - described as a new political center.
If that's centrist, I don't wanna know what the new right looks like.
Completely out of context, here's alt-right posterboy Richard Spencers stance on free
speech.
Also while you state that you hate Identity Politics, you're fast to uncritically platform
members of the Identitarian Movement like Lauren Southern and Tommy Robinson.
So far-right identity politics are okay with you, I guess?
Don't get me wrong!
I definitely do think the left need to be a lot more open for liberals and also engage
with moderate conservatives.
It doesn't hurt to hear a few more perspectives, get the full picture and see
if my views hold up to it.
But I draw a clear line when it comes to fascists.
Fascists don't look for debate.
They look for publicity.
They are well aware that a call for genocide wouldn't be well-received in todays society,
so they will use your platform to spread their codewords and conspiracy theories in order
to shift the political climate until their ideas become more acceptable.
Someone who's not trained in decoding fascists, will most certainly always fail in opposing them.
- And that, kids: Is why we never debate with fascists.
The Koch Brothers and I assume - at least a fair percentage - of your patreon supporters
don't pay you because you're a good journalist.
You're awful at your job.
The only reason they hold you is because you're useful for their agenda.
On another note: #FundLeftistCreators - Those Soros checks always come in way too late!
"Don't take my word for it, though.
Test it out for yourself.
Go talk to some.
They do exist, and they do things like watch movies, travel, and eat ethnic food—you
know, regular people things."
You don't trust conservatives pretty much when the only way for you to make them seem
more human is a cheap appeal to emotion, hm?
C'mon!
They might be full of shit, but even they can present themselves a lot better than this.
"The right, much more than the left, believes in the notion of "live and let live."
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the true definition of tolerance."
I'm Dave Rubin of The Rubin Report for Prager University
That's only true if you're a spineless coward who's unwilling to defend a tolerant and open
society against it's enemies.
I don't like everything Karl Popper stood for as well - he had this typical notion of
liberal positivism - but I can respect him because at least he stood up for something.
You on other hand let yourself drown in political apathy only caring about who's bringing in
the most dollars.
There's nothing liberal or tolerant about you, you're just a reactionary conservative
in disguise.
Thank you for watching this video!
And thanks to my patrons who's support makes videos like this possible.
If you wanna see more content like this in the future please consider becoming a patreon
supporter or contribute through a one-time donation as well.
Don't forget to subscribe to this channel and I'll see you next time!
For more infomation >> Iowa awaits disaster declaration for flooding - Duration: 0:25. 
For more infomation >> Great success for Apple, but a reason for caution for most investors: Hoenig - Duration: 6:49. 
For more infomation >> Mining for Emerald - Duration: 2:32. 
For more infomation >> Live from the Town Center for Back to School Shopping - Duration: 1:53. 
For more infomation >> Hatsune Miku - This Fucked-Up Wonderful World Exists For Me [rus sub] - Duration: 4:24. 
For more infomation >> Benefit planned for teen who lost entire family in tragic Utah crash - Duration: 0:39. 
For more infomation >> Yoga Clip For FB - Duration: 0:35. 
For more infomation >> Maxine Busted For 'Illegal Dealings' Cries Like A Baby After Trump Supporters Get To Her - Duration: 6:28. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét