Because they posted an old talk by JD Vance this morning. They had nothing to say for years while the GOP trotted out BS accusations against Dems, like “snowflake” and “goomer” and “communist” and “Marxist” and “baby-killer” and “pedophile.” Then they start with the “let’s be kinder and gentler” after the Democrats started calling Trump and Vance “weird” and they started melting down over it. Who’s the snowflake now? It’s as if the RNC gave TED $$ to run thinly veiled campaign ads disguised as content. 🤨
Because it is thinly veiled RNC campaign ads disguised as content. They posted an old segment by JD Vance in the last several hours and stirred up a hornet’s nest. Where was this stuff when TFG was calling people names?
@@Deecember16 How is this a thinly veiled RNC ad? He never talks politics and he doesn't seem like MAGA. He seems pretty level headed really, and I say that as a liberal.
A very timely video, with the UK media and thought leaders stirring up anger amongst their followers against their usual targets, the divisions in our society have never felt wider
I am sorry, but kumbaya is not going fix this. You don't have to hate to effect change, and you don't have to be hateful to be resolute. Work toward common goals with other people, there is power in numbers. Oh.... AND VOTE. hehe
@@brenticious I personally cannot manage love toward that which I disdain/distrust. I see love as being vulnerable and accepting (my definition of kumbaya), and that does not work with some people who need to know there is a cost involved with crossing the lines. I can respect boundaries of the worst of people if they can respect the same with me. I reserve the right of side-eye though.
Most of these comments show that sadly too many people are not willing to even acknowledge the existence of someone that could think differently to them… let alone live alongside them 😢
“ true spirit of liberty is the spirit in which it is not too sure it is right, the spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understand the minds of other men and women”
No. That never happened. I think about what was done to 6 year old Ruby Bridges. There were white men and women threatening to kill her for integrating the school their children attended. Think about what happened to the Freedom riders on a Greyhound bus that traveled from the north to a city in the south. The bus was set on fire. The people were nearly killed.
Maybe in really small communities. But it is too much to reference the world here. There are literally states and country wars - the epitome of hate and polarization - almost non-stop for as long as history goes. The right message is: I hope we can do and be better each day at a time.
I actually really like this talk. It's regrettable that he didn't see how he undercut this message with his vicarious umbrage & offense for Jesus in the Olympic games opening ceremony. He helped feed more bias & disinformation in our home state. What's missing from his talk, and follow through in Olympics is how much it's needed for those with political authority to measure their mistakes and appropriately apologize. "I'm sorry. I was wrong. I misrepresented [x] and that's on me. The truth is [y.] As important as it is to disagree better, it is to retract misinformation and repair mistakes. A person's character isn't found in their mistakes like it is in what they are willing to do to correct them. If he has issued a retraction and I've missed it, it is my mistake that I haven't seen it. If he hasn't then I continue to wait for it. That which you're unwilling to defend, explain, or retract simply shouldn't be part of our national or state politics. Imagine how it would change the discourse if politicians were expected to issue retraction & apology whenever they misrepresented their opponent. Or if when misrepresenting their history they had to correct the record.
Being from Utah, I remember the ad. I had a glimmer of hope we would see a middleman, a mediator. Not two people that were more concerned about what their side said, but politicians that we’re willing to meet at the table, meet in the middle. Politicians that could look across lines and ask; What can we do to find and agreeable medium, not a happy medium but, a viewpoint that everyone can agree to while not being truly happy with but, most could get behind… This is what we are lacking, the critic, the middleman has been not just martyred, but silenced. Unfortunately, all I am seeing from politicians and people today is agree with me or you’re on the other side. There is no in between anymore. My family is divided, my friends are divided and there no longer seems to be a middle ground. No grounds for conversation, no grounds for debate or acceptance. Either you agree or you’re now on the other side. This unfortunately is true for all sides equally.
I agree with almost all of this. I think the only point I'd disagree with is that you need to be uncertain about a viewpoint to be humble. I don't think that's true. However, loving and respecting those you disagree with, and being curious about them and open to challenge I absolutely agree with.
A meaningful encounter meaningful life. With cooperate and gratefulness. Success Understanding between parties. Stay focus less worry. Taste and feel life instead of data overehelming and mental disturbed. Understand, feel others just like you understand yourselves with love.
Sadly, I have personally had him treat me with hate. He spoke kindly but I felt judged and labeled incorrectly. I have tried and tried to meet with him to talk about caucus, convention, and the effect on me of him using “disagree better” towards the group I was a part of. Great speaker but when asking for him to listen to me, I am too little to fit in to his schedule. Not even a response has come saying he received my letter.
Violence Sahih Muslim (IFA) Chapter: 33 - Jihad and its Regulations Section 1: It is permissible to attack those non-believers who have received the invitation to Islam without prior notice. Hadith 4370: Yahya ibn Yahya Tamimi (may Allah have mercy on him) narrated … from Ibn Awn (may Allah have mercy on him) who said: I wrote to Nafi’ (may Allah have mercy on him) asking whether it was necessary to invite non-believers to Islam before engaging in battle. He replied to me that this was a rule in the early days of Islam. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) launched an attack on Banu Mustaliq while they were unprepared, unaware of it. Their animals were being watered at the time. He killed their combatants (adult males) and captured the rest (women and children). And on that day, he acquired (Yahya says, I think he said) Juwayriya, or definitely the daughter of Harith (Juwayriya bint al-Harith). The narrator said that Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated this Hadith to me, and he was part of that military force. Hadith Status: Sahih (Authentic) Narrator: Ibn ’Awn (may Allah have mercy on him)
Yes. You engage those that disagree with you, leading with respect, an open mind, and looking for common ground before differences. YOU make the effort to bridge the gap. Accept the risk that comes with lowering your guard to have a conversation. It’s all in there.
@@iamerikka9774 He starts to give some tips at 7:17 if you're interested. I think the tips he gives are ultimately about putting things in our life that change our own mindset. Our media is filled with so much hate or frustration with the hate... and it's rubbing off on us. Once we start putting more uplifting things in our life, we start interacting in more uplifting ways.
@@careneh33 If that is your forgone conclusion, it wouldn't make much sense for you to engage in conversation with them. But - most people think they have a good reason for believing something. But they might not ever think about what that is. By asking them to go deeper in their reasoning ("Can you tell me more?"), you let them articulate their thoughts - and necessarily their reasons. Not only is this respectful, while examining the "why's" they might run into the flaws in their reasoning or discover strengths/supports/proofs. Discourse is powerful. Of course, if they are completely unhinged the system will break down. And it takes two to tango. Lots of people have no idea that "tango" exists, little alone what the steps look like. I think we should help sane people practice discourse. Somebody needs to take the first step. The give and take of discourse, freedom of speech are fundamental to democracy, to community, indeed to a healthy society.
Worthwhile sentiments all. However, it was disappointing that he dismisses the idea that he, as a politician and governor of Utah, is in any way responsible for improving politics. As a Republican one party state, toxicity between the parties isn’t the problem. The toxic rhetoric lies within the Republican Party. His party. Disagreeing better still requires disagreement in the face of partisan toxicity, especially when it’s coming from within your political tribe. Why place the burden of change on the electorate as you turn a blind eye to the problem among your political peers. You have chosen to endorse Trump in the 2024 election knowing what a threat he poses. Practice what you preach. The call is coming from inside the house.
I wonder if TED posted the old J.D. Vance video yesterday, knowing that it would cause division, so they could attempt to make a point with this one. That's an interesting strategy.
I unsubscribed yesterday but came back to check if TED posted anything akin to "we saw your comments, we apologize" or at least an explanation. Seeing this video (whose core message is good, though it doesn't touch on the nuances that many minorities feel like the other side wants them dead) I do wonder if they were baiting everyone to comment hate yesterday. Which is kinda funny because the comments were brimming with very calm "Not cool, TED" messages and barely any hate expressed against Vance. 🤔
I would ask what you thought was not awesome in this message, in the spirit of the speaker's message? I have a laundry list of things I detest about Reagan's policies and what he brought about, but the quote was on the mark.
@@jadedmonk7001 I don't think we at the end at all, but there is definitely a horrendous amount of damage we need to heal. It won't get fixed by throwing up our hands, VOTE.
@@Ribberflavenous its not about the politics, its about being "mid" content instead of what it once used to be: awe-inspiring. They're basically telling us water is wet.
Unfortunately, I live and work surrounded by people far further right than me and spending time with them just reminds me of how nuts they are. I also don't consider "moderation" a virtue at all. Consider how ridiculous the statements of "We should only breathe a moderate amount" or "It is important to have a moderate amount of rape" are. In general, you should either have A LOT of something or as little as possible. Not to mention, I have no desire to respect people who have demonstrated their desire to ruin or even END lives. And I hear this stuff from THEIR OWN MOUTHS, in person, not just from the news.
I was just thinking...how do you tolerate people who think you are an abomination of nature? How do you help them respect transpeople? Gender diversity, human rights, etc. while disagreeing with them?
On an intellectual level i agree with this, even believe in it and want to practice it. But this feels way to theoretical and not nearly practical enough. For example, how do you get "respectful disagreement" between two people when one of them believes that it is a sin and murder to have an abortion, and believes that they need to do everything they can to protect innocent life and the other believes passionately that they have a right to do whatever they like with their body and that if someone tries to take away their right to choose aboriton they are taking away their civil rights? There is no middle ground there.
No. But there can be listening. And trying to understand the why’s behind their view. And parting with an agreement to still be, respectfully, in disagreement. The problem happens when we attempt to force our opinion on others’ action, expecting that THEY change because we are RIGHT. That’s when a friendly (even impassioned) debated turns into a brawl. We can’t change others’ opinions. It is a fact. But THEY/WE can change our own opinions if we decide to do so after understanding our own opinions better through thoughtful conversations. Why is this so hard to grasp? Because we let our emotions get the upper hand. We jump to thoughts of “I’m threatened”, “they are judging me” and it’s a downward spiral from there. Learn and teach others how to converse respectfully. It’s takes calm and self control. We should learn this as children.
Because we can agree and disagree at the same time? That's a very shallow take to assume that since two people starkly disagree they cannot share some middle ground on what they agree on. There are levels of depth to disagreements and issues and if you dig deep enough and are not talking to a psychopath then you will find basic things that you agree on.
Well, you can start by agreeing that you agree we should value life and human dignity. You could respectfully ask each other questions and engage in answering them honestly. To some, expecting a woman to remain a hostage to a very difficult pregnancy and to deny her the autonomy to avoid what could be years of economic stress is cruel. To others, the killing of any human life, however physically undeveloped, is immoral. You may be unlikely to end up agreeing, but you may understand each other better.
@LisaGelhaus this lady pretty much proved my point by disagreeing with me and in doing so called me shallow, then said that anyone who holds a firm belief that is different than hers is a psychopath. See everyone wants to have "respectful disagreement" until it's something they disagree with.
I unsubscribed yesterday, but came back to check if they posted anything akin to "we saw your comments, we apologize" or at least an explanation. Seeing this video (whose core message is good, though it doesn't touch on the nuances that many minorities feel like the other side wants them dead) I do wonder if they were baiting everyone to comment hate yesterday. Which is kinda funny because the comments were brimming with very calm "Not cool, TED" messages and barely any hate expressed against Vance. 🤔
That is a tough one, how do we reach people if we eject them out of our lives, and yet if they are toxic, how can we allow our lives to be poisoned by them? I personally think this is an education issue, exacerbated by propaganda sources masquerading as news. Since most of these are cable/internet sources, they are beyond the reach of most standards enforcement. Do we need new laws regulating programs that claim to be news and clear labeling that something is editorial comment? Who regulates that censorship? Should journalists be licensed as lawyers and doctors are, so that they have something to lose by reporting false information? I am not sure which would be worse, the crazies in front of a camera or a state run agency determining what can be said.
God loves you and cares for you so that this message reaches you. God is the one who created this large universe and controls it completely. The greatest loss a person loses in this life is that he lives without knowing God who created him and knowing the Messenger of Muhammad, the last of the messengers, and the Islamic religion, the last of the heavenly religions. Great intelligence, before you believe in something or not, is to read it, study it, and understand it well, and after that you have the choice to believe in it or not to believe in it. I advise you to do this now, before you no longer have time to do so. Life is very short. It is just a test, just a passage to eternal life. Great advice to those who... Understands
@user-ew8xj5pg7y I respect your right for religious views. But in any of the Abrahamic faiths, those who do not believe in God shall be punished. Wether on this earth or in afterlife. So if we reject your Gods message we shall suffer as we ignore his greatest gift.
The one who not only exemplified, by personal example, the highest principles of human unity and love, is the same one who delivered the most famous speech in history, is the one whom he over looked in his delivery: The Sermon on the Mount delivered by Jesus Christ. It has been said that when world leaders learn to abide by what Jesus taught in that speech they would have not only resolved the issues between one another They will have solved all the problems that plague mankind. World leaders? Sadly- that is not going to happen. In this presentation he even warned us, not to look at the example of politicians. I will give him credit for at least trying.
psychprofile AI fixes this. sagree respectfully, avoid hate.
Reading through these comments I can't seem to understand why anyone would think this speech is anything other than positive.. strong message!
Because they posted an old talk by JD Vance this morning. They had nothing to say for years while the GOP trotted out BS accusations against Dems, like “snowflake” and “goomer” and “communist” and “Marxist” and “baby-killer” and “pedophile.” Then they start with the “let’s be kinder and gentler” after the Democrats started calling Trump and Vance “weird” and they started melting down over it. Who’s the snowflake now? It’s as if the RNC gave TED $$ to run thinly veiled campaign ads disguised as content. 🤨
Because it is thinly veiled RNC campaign ads disguised as content. They posted an old segment by JD Vance in the last several hours and stirred up a hornet’s nest. Where was this stuff when TFG was calling people names?
@@Deecember16 How is this a thinly veiled RNC ad? He never talks politics and he doesn't seem like MAGA. He seems pretty level headed really, and I say that as a liberal.
He is a charlatan who speaks like Barack Obama. He will give flowery words and do opposite policies that destroy the community.
A very timely video, with the UK media and thought leaders stirring up anger amongst their followers against their usual targets, the divisions in our society have never felt wider
For sure
Not hate . We need love to warm the world.
I am sorry, but kumbaya is not going fix this. You don't have to hate to effect change, and you don't have to be hateful to be resolute. Work toward common goals with other people, there is power in numbers. Oh.... AND VOTE. hehe
@@Ribberflavenous Love doesn't always mean kumbaya, sometimes it means opposing someone who's putting forward hate.
@@brenticious I personally cannot manage love toward that which I disdain/distrust. I see love as being vulnerable and accepting (my definition of kumbaya), and that does not work with some people who need to know there is a cost involved with crossing the lines. I can respect boundaries of the worst of people if they can respect the same with me. I reserve the right of side-eye though.
I just want to comment on how liberating it was to see this video in a time like this
Most of these comments show that sadly too many people are not willing to even acknowledge the existence of someone that could think differently to them… let alone live alongside them 😢
Excellent message!!!
“ true spirit of liberty is the spirit in which it is not too sure it is right, the spirit of liberty is the spirit which seeks to understand the minds of other men and women”
Simply put empathy…
As we always have, humans crave unity and not division.
Practice what you preach.
hlw
Did you hear about arlington cemetary?
There was a time this world responded in decency!!!
No. That never happened. I think about what was done to 6 year old Ruby Bridges. There were white men and women threatening to kill her for integrating the school their children attended. Think about what happened to the Freedom riders on a Greyhound bus that traveled from the north to a city in the south. The bus was set on fire. The people were nearly killed.
Maybe in really small communities. But it is too much to reference the world here. There are literally states and country wars - the epitome of hate and polarization - almost non-stop for as long as history goes. The right message is: I hope we can do and be better each day at a time.
Thats what the old lady they shoved over at arlington cemetary said.
I actually really like this talk. It's regrettable that he didn't see how he undercut this message with his vicarious umbrage & offense for Jesus in the Olympic games opening ceremony. He helped feed more bias & disinformation in our home state.
What's missing from his talk, and follow through in Olympics is how much it's needed for those with political authority to measure their mistakes and appropriately apologize. "I'm sorry. I was wrong. I misrepresented [x] and that's on me. The truth is [y.] As important as it is to disagree better, it is to retract misinformation and repair mistakes. A person's character isn't found in their mistakes like it is in what they are willing to do to correct them.
If he has issued a retraction and I've missed it, it is my mistake that I haven't seen it. If he hasn't then I continue to wait for it. That which you're unwilling to defend, explain, or retract simply shouldn't be part of our national or state politics. Imagine how it would change the discourse if politicians were expected to issue retraction & apology whenever they misrepresented their opponent. Or if when misrepresenting their history they had to correct the record.
Being from Utah, I remember the ad. I had a glimmer of hope we would see a middleman, a mediator. Not two people that were more concerned about what their side said, but politicians that we’re willing to meet at the table, meet in the middle. Politicians that could look across lines and ask; What can we do to find and agreeable medium, not a happy medium but, a viewpoint that everyone can agree to while not being truly happy with but, most could get behind… This is what we are lacking, the critic, the middleman has been not just martyred, but silenced. Unfortunately, all I am seeing from politicians and people today is agree with me or you’re on the other side. There is no in between anymore. My family is divided, my friends are divided and there no longer seems to be a middle ground. No grounds for conversation, no grounds for debate or acceptance. Either you agree or you’re now on the other side. This unfortunately is true for all sides equally.
I agree with almost all of this. I think the only point I'd disagree with is that you need to be uncertain about a viewpoint to be humble. I don't think that's true. However, loving and respecting those you disagree with, and being curious about them and open to challenge I absolutely agree with.
Holy Moly... He just solved hatred 😮
Yes we all need this spirit of liberty. In my country all I can see is divisiveness in party campaigns or tv shows discrediting opponents!
A meaningful encounter meaningful life. With cooperate and gratefulness. Success Understanding between parties. Stay focus less worry. Taste and feel life instead of data overehelming and mental disturbed. Understand, feel others just like you understand yourselves with love.
Sadly, I have personally had him treat me with hate. He spoke kindly but I felt judged and labeled incorrectly. I have tried and tried to meet with him to talk about caucus, convention, and the effect on me of him using “disagree better” towards the group I was a part of. Great speaker but when asking for him to listen to me, I am too little to fit in to his schedule. Not even a response has come saying he received my letter.
I disagree, respectfully.
I disagree disrespectfully, hatefully even
😅😅😅
😂😂
Please enable subtitles in more languages!! Would love to share this with my German friends
Whata refreshing idea.
Wonderful!
He forgot to close with "in the name of Jesus Christ, amen"
Hillarious!
Calm down, cheddar...it's all good, just sounded like a talk to me at the time :)
GOOD FOR YOU BOTH
Love this!
Imagine Modi and Rahul Gandhi like this
Great comparison.
Violence
Sahih Muslim (IFA)
Chapter: 33 - Jihad and its Regulations
Section 1: It is permissible to attack those non-believers who have received the invitation to Islam without prior notice.
Hadith 4370: Yahya ibn Yahya Tamimi (may Allah have mercy on him) narrated … from Ibn Awn (may Allah have mercy on him) who said: I wrote to Nafi’ (may Allah have mercy on him) asking whether it was necessary to invite non-believers to Islam before engaging in battle. He replied to me that this was a rule in the early days of Islam. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) launched an attack on Banu Mustaliq while they were unprepared, unaware of it. Their animals were being watered at the time. He killed their combatants (adult males) and captured the rest (women and children). And on that day, he acquired (Yahya says, I think he said) Juwayriya, or definitely the daughter of Harith (Juwayriya bint al-Harith). The narrator said that Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated this Hadith to me, and he was part of that military force.
Hadith Status: Sahih (Authentic)
Narrator: Ibn ’Awn (may Allah have mercy on him)
Did we learn anything about the "how" in the "how to disagree with respect"?
Yes. You engage those that disagree with you, leading with respect, an open mind, and looking for common ground before differences. YOU make the effort to bridge the gap. Accept the risk that comes with lowering your guard to have a conversation.
It’s all in there.
@@iamerikka9774 He starts to give some tips at 7:17 if you're interested. I think the tips he gives are ultimately about putting things in our life that change our own mindset. Our media is filled with so much hate or frustration with the hate... and it's rubbing off on us. Once we start putting more uplifting things in our life, we start interacting in more uplifting ways.
There was some how: he suggests engaging with people by asking them “tell me more about why you think that way”
@@LisaGelhaus sure, looks like the most obvious thing ever to do. But how do you do this if you are convinced your opponent is nuts?
@@careneh33 If that is your forgone conclusion, it wouldn't make much sense for you to engage in conversation with them.
But - most people think they have a good reason for believing something. But they might not ever think about what that is. By asking them to go deeper in their reasoning ("Can you tell me more?"), you let them articulate their thoughts - and necessarily their reasons. Not only is this respectful, while examining the "why's" they might run into the flaws in their reasoning or discover strengths/supports/proofs. Discourse is powerful.
Of course, if they are completely unhinged the system will break down.
And it takes two to tango. Lots of people have no idea that "tango" exists, little alone what the steps look like. I think we should help sane people practice discourse. Somebody needs to take the first step.
The give and take of discourse, freedom of speech are fundamental to democracy, to community, indeed to a healthy society.
Worthwhile sentiments all. However, it was disappointing that he dismisses the idea that he, as a politician and governor of Utah, is in any way responsible for improving politics. As a Republican one party state, toxicity between the parties isn’t the problem. The toxic rhetoric lies within the Republican Party. His party. Disagreeing better still requires disagreement in the face of partisan toxicity, especially when it’s coming from within your political tribe. Why place the burden of change on the electorate as you turn a blind eye to the problem among your political peers. You have chosen to endorse Trump in the 2024 election knowing what a threat he poses. Practice what you preach. The call is coming from inside the house.
Thanks, but no thanks. Politicians on TED talks, blowing their own horn. Nope.
To be fair, unless you're a wild animal, or FLDS, Utah is pretty Vanilla...
I wonder if TED posted the old J.D. Vance video yesterday, knowing that it would cause division, so they could attempt to make a point with this one. That's an interesting strategy.
I unsubscribed yesterday but came back to check if TED posted anything akin to "we saw your comments, we apologize" or at least an explanation.
Seeing this video (whose core message is good, though it doesn't touch on the nuances that many minorities feel like the other side wants them dead) I do wonder if they were baiting everyone to comment hate yesterday.
Which is kinda funny because the comments were brimming with very calm "Not cool, TED" messages and barely any hate expressed against Vance. 🤔
Remember when TED Talks used to be awesome ?
Pepperidge farm remembers
I would ask what you thought was not awesome in this message, in the spirit of the speaker's message? I have a laundry list of things I detest about Reagan's policies and what he brought about, but the quote was on the mark.
@@RibberflavenousIndeed. Reaganomics sounded the beginning of the end for our country.
@@jadedmonk7001 I don't think we at the end at all, but there is definitely a horrendous amount of damage we need to heal. It won't get fixed by throwing up our hands, VOTE.
@@Ribberflavenous its not about the politics, its about being "mid" content instead of what it once used to be: awe-inspiring. They're basically telling us water is wet.
@@AlexandruG09 I understand what you are saying but they can't all me the sermon on the mount either. Be well good sir.
Unfortunately, I live and work surrounded by people far further right than me and spending time with them just reminds me of how nuts they are. I also don't consider "moderation" a virtue at all. Consider how ridiculous the statements of "We should only breathe a moderate amount" or "It is important to have a moderate amount of rape" are. In general, you should either have A LOT of something or as little as possible.
Not to mention, I have no desire to respect people who have demonstrated their desire to ruin or even END lives. And I hear this stuff from THEIR OWN MOUTHS, in person, not just from the news.
I was just thinking...how do you tolerate people who think you are an abomination of nature? How do you help them respect transpeople? Gender diversity, human rights, etc. while disagreeing with them?
On an intellectual level i agree with this, even believe in it and want to practice it. But this feels way to theoretical and not nearly practical enough. For example, how do you get "respectful disagreement" between two people when one of them believes that it is a sin and murder to have an abortion, and believes that they need to do everything they can to protect innocent life and the other believes passionately that they have a right to do whatever they like with their body and that if someone tries to take away their right to choose aboriton they are taking away their civil rights? There is no middle ground there.
No. But there can be listening. And trying to understand the why’s behind their view. And parting with an agreement to still be, respectfully, in disagreement. The problem happens when we attempt to force our opinion on others’ action, expecting that THEY change because we are RIGHT. That’s when a friendly (even impassioned) debated turns into a brawl.
We can’t change others’ opinions. It is a fact. But THEY/WE can change our own opinions if we decide to do so after understanding our own opinions better through thoughtful conversations.
Why is this so hard to grasp? Because we let our emotions get the upper hand. We jump to thoughts of “I’m threatened”, “they are judging me” and it’s a downward spiral from there.
Learn and teach others how to converse respectfully. It’s takes calm and self control. We should learn this as children.
Because we can agree and disagree at the same time? That's a very shallow take to assume that since two people starkly disagree they cannot share some middle ground on what they agree on. There are levels of depth to disagreements and issues and if you dig deep enough and are not talking to a psychopath then you will find basic things that you agree on.
That's a very good point, @@TheBian-ck9tz (but you might want to take the judgement out of your language if you want to find that middle ground ;-)
Well, you can start by agreeing that you agree we should value life and human dignity. You could respectfully ask each other questions and engage in answering them honestly.
To some, expecting a woman to remain a hostage to a very difficult pregnancy and to deny her the autonomy to avoid what could be years of economic stress is cruel.
To others, the killing of any human life, however physically undeveloped, is immoral.
You may be unlikely to end up agreeing, but you may understand each other better.
@LisaGelhaus this lady pretty much proved my point by disagreeing with me and in doing so called me shallow, then said that anyone who holds a firm belief that is different than hers is a psychopath. See everyone wants to have "respectful disagreement" until it's something they disagree with.
Hope will always win.
❤wonderful common sense
So, what ? Just because you can disagree with respect, you think you're better than me, Huh ?!?! *Shouted in angry druken slurred speech 🤣
I unsubscribed yesterday, but came back to check if they posted anything akin to "we saw your comments, we apologize" or at least an explanation.
Seeing this video (whose core message is good, though it doesn't touch on the nuances that many minorities feel like the other side wants them dead) I do wonder if they were baiting everyone to comment hate yesterday.
Which is kinda funny because the comments were brimming with very calm "Not cool, TED" messages and barely any hate expressed against Vance. 🤔
Did they post something from Vance? I couldn't find anything like that in their RUclips profile.
I like the topic and the quotes of this Ted Talk, as Keith Lee would say, I’m not the target audience. 😴
Bravo 👏🏽❤️
What’s the point, TED ?! Just ranting on and on abt his political campaign & thoughts or really something too deep to figure out?
Derp.
Sorry but there is no way I can bring myself to respect fraud.
No popular vote?
That was too much Ronald Reagan praising for me. I expect better speaker vetting from TED.
TED talk by a politician, nahhhhhh
absurd
Exactly. Hatred is the meaning of life.
Putin & Medvedev
Fecit -- they agreed to swap jobs evrry four years...
We need love and not hate, but without Russians…..
Respect? Sure I'm for that.
But I'm not for anger, hatred and stupidity - you know MAGA.
No one like that sits at my table.
That is a tough one, how do we reach people if we eject them out of our lives, and yet if they are toxic, how can we allow our lives to be poisoned by them? I personally think this is an education issue, exacerbated by propaganda sources masquerading as news. Since most of these are cable/internet sources, they are beyond the reach of most standards enforcement. Do we need new laws regulating programs that claim to be news and clear labeling that something is editorial comment? Who regulates that censorship? Should journalists be licensed as lawyers and doctors are, so that they have something to lose by reporting false information? I am not sure which would be worse, the crazies in front of a camera or a state run agency determining what can be said.
Cade os brasileiros 🇧🇷
applausi
Nosebleed atong english ani 🤣🤣🤣
Happy to be here first 😂
Lisp
🙏✨💜
😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣
すこい
He serves trump.
Lord this was boring.....Wow...what a waste of a Ted Talk
Nah… I want them to know I hate them too
7:48 Utah conservatives finnally realising the meaning of the phrase "ignorance is bliss" and audience applouds 😂😂 what a joke this society has become
God loves you and cares for you so that this message reaches you. God is the one who created this large universe and controls it completely. The greatest loss a person loses in this life is that he lives without knowing God who created him and knowing the Messenger of Muhammad, the last of the messengers, and the Islamic religion, the last of the heavenly religions. Great intelligence, before you believe in something or not, is to read it, study it, and understand it well, and after that you have the choice to believe in it or not to believe in it. I advise you to do this now, before you no longer have time to do so. Life is very short. It is just a test, just a passage to eternal life. Great advice to those who... Understands
I respectfully disagree with your hatefilled violent ideology.
@@JoeyP946 Where is the hatred in that!
For transparency, most religions are hateful and violent.
@user-ew8xj5pg7y I respect your right for religious views. But in any of the Abrahamic faiths, those who do not believe in God shall be punished. Wether on this earth or in afterlife.
So if we reject your Gods message we shall suffer as we ignore his greatest gift.
@@joshuathomas3309 the greatest gift of being a slave in a divine dictatorship.
wooptiedoo
The one who not only exemplified, by personal example, the highest principles of human unity and love,
is the same one who
delivered the most famous speech in history,
is the one whom he over looked in his delivery:
The Sermon on the Mount
delivered by Jesus Christ.
It has been said
that when world leaders learn to abide by what Jesus taught in that speech
they would have not only resolved the issues between one another
They will have solved all the problems that plague mankind.
World leaders?
Sadly- that is not going to happen.
In this presentation he even warned us, not to look at the example of politicians.
I will give him credit for at least trying.
Time to love Trump
No, We should love Ivanka. 😊😊