Jews in UK about 2000 years. Jews did not gang rape, did not live on welfare, did not try to change the local religion, did not commit terrorism. ❤️🇮🇱❤️
Wrong. Plenty of terrorist actions occurred leading up to and beyond the founding of Israel by Zionist groups. We can argue on the context of those massacres. It is certainly more of a grey issue than people give it credit for. But they did happen and that's a fact.
@@CarlosSanchez-dv1ew you are wrong.there is a religion that advocates for violent,for death ☠️ not for living,and on on and on,you know the radical Islam.
Murray is a living legend. Love the way he pierces Dillahunty’s noble yet relatively naive personal views. Dillahunty is a smart guy, but his views appear to be shaped by very personal experiences. I find the Murray’s and Petersons of the world have a very broad knowledge and breadth of experience. They consider so much more than just their own personal experiences. It’s the difference between caring for yourself and that of caring for broader society that I feel the Murrays and Petersons of the world do.
The world cannot have one government when we are not all on the same page. It would be nice, but not all cultures are inclusive, and a lot of them are aggressively self serving. Like Islam.
These guys are always risking their reputations / highly intellectual thinkers, not afraid to debate anyone - so for anyone to comment negatively in petty manners, seems brazen behind the cloak of the social media. Be bolder, say something decent…or rather be quiet as they attempt to express observations, concern and solutions.
Is Matt incredibly sheltered? The culture that the West has managed to establish is incredibly special and unique. Most other cultures, at this point in time, are vastly inferior and trying to mash them into ours is only going to diminish ours. Matt doesn't seem to grasp that many if not most other cultures are backwards and/or pathological and he seems to ignore just how tightly these people want to hang on to their broken culture.
"The cultures with birthrates above replacement levels are pathological" If you say so, moosey. Let's see how that works out for you. In the future they'll have exhibits of extinct animals and one of them will be the skeleton wearing a fedora called "the western man".
It's nice to see intelligent debates like this where people aren't screaming at each other or proclaiming their devotion to a leader or demeaning each other. We are all just human beings. Sadly there seems to be a group of people for whom their particular politician can do no wrong. I called them the slurpers. When their favorite politician walks up on stage drops his drawers cops a squat and let's lose, they are there on their hands and knees slurping it up.
Im living my life with respect to everyone untill they dont show the same and Im not religeous.....what is so difficult to understand that you dont treat other people in a way you wouldnt want to be treated. You dont need a godly figure to get that.
@SonnyDelosSantos-y6m in the new testament , Matt. 5 Verses 38 to 48 38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[a] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.
Peterson is bad at explaining ONE thing in particuliar, which is his actual view on what God is. After watching him closely for a few years since he became prominent in the socio-cultural discussions of the current times, I've realized what he actually means. Bear with me for a moment. The way I understand Peterson is that he understands that God isn't real in the sense of what we can interact with (Reality). However, the IDEA of God is not only real, but it's useful. Here's how: If one presupposes God (conceptually) in their reasoning, it leads to good outcomes. Because God is the ultimate, most powerful and all-encompassing, un-falsifiable concept we can conceive that equates to the ultimate ideal. Jesus being the "avatar" or mythological character that embodies a set of presuppositions on how to be a good person that will conceive good children. Who will go on to create a good society, all agreeing to this ultimate ideal. With a good society that are all on the same side, it allows the maximization of growth, minimizing suffering and hardships, the culture thriving and innovating, further creating the framework for humans to flourish. Example of "sacred" religious concepts derived from this religious ideology (a religion is basically an ideology/worldview): - Marriage - 1 man, 1 woman, for the purpose of procreation and teaching good values and ethics (moral alignment) to the next generation who will go on to build and improve civilization, contributing to a society thriving with increased security, cooperation, trust and loyalty. Marriage means Duty, Commitment and Shared goals, withing the society's currently accepted norms. This is also good psychologically for the society, or else (as Peterson has correctly observed) you end up with a hierarchy of men, where (with feminism, and now online dating) women now all perceive themselves as higher on the sexual marketplace because of their skewed judgement based on their access to "sexual partners" of various positions on the sexual marketplace hierarchy. Leading an ever growing number of men at the bottom, with no access to reproduction and therefore no sense of duty, purpose and their role in society. These are the people that can easily become extremists and go against the society, hurting it. Perterson understands this too, which he wants God to remain, even though he knows full well it's a concept and not reality.
The argument you present in support of Peterson regarding feminism is equivalent to the Islamic justification of the Burka... 'men are awful and have no self control, so society has to restrict the freedom of women so men are not bad'... you and Peterson need to put the blame where it belongs and blame the $#!++y men and hold them accountable...
Well he is an idiot. Johnathon Schell proposed it back at the peak of strategic defense initiative in the eighties. He wrote a book about it The abolition. Of course it isnt the answer even if it were possible. National Governments dont work because of the lack of good will among people. International goverments would increase this by many orders of magnitude.
@@weeg743 Well they literally had the British Union of Fascists and National Socialists right up until they were all locked up for being a secret fifth column during the war.
For a second I thought Dillahunty was saying Robert Spencer was a white nationalist and then I realized he said Richard Spencer. I was very confused for a second cause I've never heard Robert Spencer say anything that would make me think he's a white nationalist
The difference between the adulation and cult-like posturing towards Hitch and Peterson are significant, not least because Hitch ridiculed them and distanced himself from such nonsense, whereas Peterson has cultivated and embraced such adulation and revels in his cult-like status. When asked if he thought he was a "messenger from god" he took several minutes to consider... before hesitantly saying maybe not. He seriously entertained the idea knowing that some of his followers would claim he is.
I find it a strange critique to hear people say that Peterson has cult-like admirers - and not only that - but he embraces and revels in such a God-like status. Absolute nonsense! It's clearly a fallacy -- and you're assumptions are wrong on multiple levels, not most of all because of the contradiction in claiming Jordan has a god complex and his fans worship him -- while also accusing them of practicing religion itself. They can't both happen at the same time.
@@GirlRicho Clearly you have never been to a mega-church or heard about Pat Robertson, Joel Osteen, or Kenneth Copeland. Pastors with a cult-like status, a cult-like following and also "practicing religion". Cults and religion are indistinguishable in many respects.
@@SmallWetIsland Yes I know how Evangelists can be. Jim Jones is another classic example. But the same could be said for any doctor of philosophy with students or a dedicated following. Leaders and speakers with influence who draw a crowd - all fit into that same box. It's okay to have different philosophies in life. How do you draw a distinction? Peterson thinks deeply about all his responses - I'd be more concerned if he didn't hesitate with an answer to that type of question. A messenger from God would be an angel, and JP has never considered himself an angel. Whether he's delivering God's message is a completely different question and in a lot of ways he has.
@@GirlRicho The distinction is, as I said if you accept the adulation, if you modify your philosophy or are enamoured of your follower's praise. Peterson ticks all those boxes. you are correct many entertainers sportsmen and singers have followers. some arguably have cult-like status for a few fans. Peterson acquired his fame and fortune not on his academic standing or his lectures. but on (Bill C-16) his rise to fame was on the back of right-wing support and on a political stance. He supports Trump he is affiliated with the DailyWire. He is an atheist who refuses to clearly say so for fear of alienating a large part of his Christian fundamentalist base. His lectures are saturated with religious meanderings. Many of his fans are in effect "followers" and like you, they think he is doing "God's work". Everything screams cult leader. BTW Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, Paul the Apostle, Peter the Apostle, John the Apostle, Saint Francis of Assisi, Mother Teresa and Martin Luther. were all considered to be messengers from god. Not an angel among them.
No I don't think JP is doing God's work. It's not even close to what I believe. Your whole complaint is based on 'what other people think' but you don't know what those 'other people think' because A) you're not a mind reader and B) you haven't bothered to understand their position. Which makes your whole argument a fallacy. So you think JP believes in atheism? I don't know if I agree with that. It takes a lot of effort to believe in atheism, it's a belief system like any other but atheism leads to nihilism and genocide. Plus it provides no answers on morality and life. It's not sustainable.
They are still discussing secular humanism as a big idea? There are plenty of moral systems that don't rest upon any religious dogma that have been explored, debated, refined over the past 2,5 years...sorry, millenia. In fact, all major moral systems discussed in Philosophy are secular. Even a lot of contemporary variants. So, as long as these guys aren't going to treat these ideas seriously, I can't think of them as anything more than entertainers.
As long as at least one of them is holding onto christianity for dear life, secular humanism still looks like a big idea. As you said, this idea is more than 2500 years old and the funniest thing is that it comes from the foundation of this western civilization they seem to like so much. That is the mental disconnect a western person experiences when they choose Jerusalem over Athens as C.Hitchens famously said.
@@thedeviousgreek1540That's because the greeks themselves chose Christ as the answer to their doubts. Plato talked about the Good; Christ was seen as good incarnate. I'm not Christian, by the way. But the difference still persists, philosophy being aimed by intellectuals, and christianity pervading much more capillarly.
@@raphaelreichmannrolim25 The Greeks didnt choose christ, they were forcely converted or they were killed. Their temples were destroyed, their schools were closed, their books were burnt and their teachers were hunted for more than 1000 years. Plato talked about many things including god, as did many many others, but he definitively didnt talk about yahweh or a jewish messianic figure. Platonism is indeed way more sophisticated than that. You can see this clearly in Paul's own account of what happened when he visited Athens or you can search the edicts of Justinian or Theodosius to understand how a population of philosophers was forced to follow a lesser cult. Christianity spread among slaves,women and children despite what the forged history of the church falsely promotes.
@@thedeviousgreek1540 I didn't know that, but I imagine how it went after centuries of destroying others temples all over Asia. Socrates, as the philosophers, didn't represent greek tradition. This can be seen not only by the treatment Socrates had, but directly from the legends of the original philosopher himself, Pythagoras: mysteries about him travelling to the East always surface, and he is the reason for the monotheistic cult of the unit monad. Indeed, that's why there were, even before Christ, discussions on whether Plato was influenced by Moses. And indeed, Christianity's success was precisely because It established a major dialogue between judaism and Greek thought. Or Rome, as It had no Spirit and had to take the Greek one. But even If it's message wasn't meant for the philosophers, It addressed their language; and I don't think it means lack of sophistication. When talking to children, one must be clear and simple: to achieve that, some sophistication is needed. Indeed the symbolic synthesis achieved in the story of Christ has no competition among Greek philosophy, I think, even If I myself prefer very much to read the works of Euclid.
@@raphaelreichmannrolim25 First of all, the panhellenic empire of Alexander promoted syncretism in the religious front, just like the Romans did after him. The perfect example is Egypt, where the hellenic pantheon fused with the egyptian. The strategy of religious subjugation that the abrahamic religions used in their empires doesnt represent every empire. Paganism as a religion can fuse with other types of paganism very well but monotheism by definition cannot. The Greeks historically have a very deep connection with the east going back to 2000 BCE with Minoans and Egyptians. After that you got the Myceneans and the Hittites, the Phoenicians and famously the Persians. After Alexander we can add the Indians as well. So, when we read of travels to the east, or influenced by the east in greek antiquity, it doesnt mean judeans, usually its Egypt or Babylon. It would make sense to note that the cult of Moses wasnt the pinnacle of religious or philosophical thought at any point before being forced by christianity. Pythagoras was not the first or only monist, although he is the most famous. The monad as an idea came even before Pythagoras with the pre-Socratic school of thought. The oldest monotheistic religion, thousands of years before Moses and the judaic faith was Zoroastrianism and again before Moses there was Akhenaten who tried to impose monotheism in Egypt. I would assume that those who discussed if Plato was influenced by Moses were hellenistic jews who tried for centuries to combine their bronze age mythology with greek philosophy, which later became christianity and can be considered a form of neoplatonism. The difference between these ideas though, is that one is purely religious coming usually from revelation while the other is coming from logic and philosophical thought. Interesting to note that the Greeks never in their history had a holy book. Usually people think of ancient greek paganism in the form represented by Homer and Hesiod but this view was almost already antiquated in the time of Plato. Socrates was killed in 399 BCE, and was part of a school of philosophical thought that eventually changed the view of religion in the greek world. The common view before Socrates was that every society has their gods and they were to be respected as they are in fact greek gods just with a different name. This worldview was created because of greek trade and the establishment of colonies all over the mediterranean, which resulted into relationships with a whole host of cultures and therefore the need to understand them. -In opposition to that view, we got the judaic or better yet babylonian view of gods beating each other as nations who had different beliefs went to war.- Along with the pre socratic school, who viewed god as non intevening and unknowable, the greek worldview starts to change. The gods arent the cause of everything anymore, they arent the basis of morality and they dont have the answers to our problems rather, man should turn to science in order to understand the world and leave the superstitions behind him. This whole journey culminated with Epicurus and was embraced by the Romans. When the dialogue between judaism and greek thought happened, the western world lost a lot of its progress in order to accomodate superstition and dogma into philosophy. The major part that got lost was the understanding of the divine and freedom of thought. Christianity embraced the known god as opposed to the unknown god and dogmatic thought instead of free thought. Superstition also came back strong as a means of coping with problems and understanding the world, in place of philosophy, medicine and science. The biggest wound on the western Spirit though, was the insistence of the early church fathers to destroy the greek worldview of understanding religion allegorically and their systemic push of literal understanding, a wound that hasnt fully healed to this day. I agree with your undestanding of simplification of philosophy for the masses, just as Nietzche said, christianity is platonism for the masses. But the way this simplification happened and the reason why it happened was far from optimal and left a lot to be desired.
@zenga55 - Despicable! The dictionary meaning of which is - extremely nasty, cruel and evil..! What has Murray physically done or said, that sits in those definitions? Words used to describe modern era despots like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Jong Il, Franco, Mussolini, Duvalier, Pol Pot and Ceausescu, Murray is hardly in this category. If his on the ground informed opinion places him there, then those intolerant and unable to take debate without rancour are also in this category, including you. This is why, without compromise, this ideologically driven, tribal and religious conflict will never end.
I have seen a decapitated baby after the Israelis bombed the Rafah refugee camp. He has seen it too, but Douglass Murray does not consider Palestinians to be human beings, so I suppose that he is not lying.
Slight difference between what a bomb does (in war) and what an individual does going into a civilian festival and neighbourhood (not in war)? If you can't see the difference in the actions of those two human behaviours, then I don't know what to tell you.
@@EvilMonk20 There is no difference whatever between what a bomb does (in a refugee camp) or what it does on a military target - it kills people. What you meant to say is that a decapitated baby from an Israely (US manufactured) bomb should not be given the same emotional value or moral consideration as to an innocent Israeli killed in October 7. If you cannot see the sheer hypocrisy, malevolence and racism in Douglas Murray, then I do not know what to tell you.
@@claudiusii2863 Nope, pressing a button from an aircraft is definitely different to physically walking in and deliberately acting out these things in person. These actions are morally different, regardless of whether the result is better or worse, or indeed the same.
Sort of like Jordan Peterson way to many put him on a pedestal,he is right about nutrition,consumer s are poisoning themselves with goods in grocery stores
Can you imagine the level of force and violence that would inevitably result from the attempt to establish a one world government or leader? Come on. Why would he even make a statement like that? He ought to know better.
What is ironic or contradictory about that? Is his problem with God that God doesn't exist, nit that he doesn't want a God to exist? Also are you assuming Christian God? And didn't he say an organization not an individual? You sound like someone scared to lose their imaginary friend, not like someone actually bringing something to the conversation. Grow up, and learn to converse like an adult, not like a brain rot husk.
@@zapkvr difference is he may want a world with "a god" as the ruler but acknowledges that something like that is just imagination and is irrelevant in reality. So no, I don't think that makes him a hypocrite at all.
He always does though because he loves the sound of his own voice. He honestly thinks he sits amongst the great minds of our times. But then I suppose when you purposely surround yourself with idiots all day long, you're going to come out as the intelligent one
The Eastern church is older than the Roman church so its obviously closer to the truth. The roman church was a political idea first and only marginally concerned with the purpose of life
… by the very evidence of the creation……it’s complexity… and the fact we have the Bible … written over centuries, with prophecy having come to pass …and the fact it is Gods word … powerful and life changing!
SO WHO DO I GO WITH BEFORE THE CAT WAS ABUSESED OUTA HIS HOME WHILE PPL KEPT HAVING THEIR LIFE GO ON IN FRONT OF ME LAFFING WHEN I WROT ETHE TRUMPS CAMPAING WHAT IRRIATED MYH MOM NOW IMRENEDED AGAIN HWO THIS GUY FUCKS AROUND I GO OTU FORNT HES STLAKING ME HYELLING FO ROTHERS TO HELP HNIM
Does it involve invading a neighboring population and butchering and massacring innocents, then kidnapping over 200 people for hostages? Pretty sure the ROE says "Eff em up."
Full discussion here: ruclips.net/video/uCny7t5NrCg/видео.htmlsi=6vwX6Nz1q1DwRdvh
!
Jews in UK about 2000 years.
Jews did not gang rape, did not live on welfare, did not try to change the local religion, did not commit terrorism. ❤️🇮🇱❤️
Who was Harvey Weinstein? How you call him?
Wrong. Plenty of terrorist actions occurred leading up to and beyond the founding of Israel by Zionist groups. We can argue on the context of those massacres. It is certainly more of a grey issue than people give it credit for. But they did happen and that's a fact.
@@Hal-hq8fxyou've got your eye on the ball. But for an entirely different sport. Calm and sit down
I concur. Not all cultures are equal, jews have clearly improved the uk
@@Hal-hq8fx harvey weinstein was an individual, not a group of people from the same ethno cultural background and religion commiting the same offense
Douglas is a great speaker and he have a great mind. We need people like this today.
Douglas is outstanding in every regard.
Douglas Murray is a magnificent man,he delicately himself to the worst problems that all the world 🌍 afraid of. thank Britain 🇬🇧 to Douglas Murray
There is no truth for any religion ...if there was then why could not god make it all clearer
@@CarlosSanchez-dv1ew you are wrong.there is a religion that advocates for violent,for death ☠️ not for living,and on on and on,you know the radical Islam.
In English please
He’s a racist!
and doesn't afraid of anything
Douglas you are an absolute treasure and thank you also for taking the extra word and speaking up on behalf of Dr. Jordan Peterson❤
The ongoing defence of the West against Islamism is very important.
We have our hands full already with White Christian Supremacy.
💯all Abrahamic cults, should be discouraged, if we hope to move on, from the bronze age.
LOVE MURRAY ❤❤❤❤
Thank goodness for Murray’s valuable contribution!
Murray is a Zionist propagandist. He has no problem lying.
❤Douglas the best we have today god bless him for telling the true of what is happening in this world now
We love you Murray ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
+1000 points to Douglas for using the phrase "duff up" 😄
Murray is a living legend. Love the way he pierces Dillahunty’s noble yet relatively naive personal views. Dillahunty is a smart guy, but his views appear to be shaped by very personal experiences. I find the Murray’s and Petersons of the world have a very broad knowledge and breadth of experience. They consider so much more than just their own personal experiences. It’s the difference between caring for yourself and that of caring for broader society that I feel the Murrays and Petersons of the world do.
Then you don’t know Matt Dillahunty at all especially compared to Jordan Peterson
Petersons personal experiences is that if you get on the band waggon you get moor money .
The world cannot have one government when we are not all on the same page. It would be nice, but not all cultures are inclusive, and a lot of them are aggressively self serving. Like Islam.
Not now but hopefully in the future.
ALL religions are a self replicating self interested organism trying to find a monopoly on the habitat of the human mind
Why exacly was "heads" censored?
These guys are always risking their reputations / highly intellectual thinkers, not afraid to debate anyone - so for anyone to comment negatively in petty manners, seems brazen behind the cloak of the social media. Be bolder, say something decent…or rather be quiet as they attempt to express observations, concern and solutions.
No YOU SHUT UP
Screw you.
Is Matt incredibly sheltered?
The culture that the West has managed to establish is incredibly special and unique.
Most other cultures, at this point in time, are vastly inferior and trying to mash them into ours is only going to diminish ours.
Matt doesn't seem to grasp that many if not most other cultures are backwards and/or pathological and he seems to ignore just how tightly these people want to hang on to their broken culture.
Utter drivel. The "west" took longer to abolish slavery than did the East.
Where does Matt ignore just how backwards some people and their cultural beliefs are?
"The cultures with birthrates above replacement levels are pathological" If you say so, moosey. Let's see how that works out for you. In the future they'll have exhibits of extinct animals and one of them will be the skeleton wearing a fedora called "the western man".
@@MaisieDaisyUpsadaisytrans ideology
@@jen7662He is pro LGBTQI+. That is human rights and compassion.
It's nice to see intelligent debates like this where people aren't screaming at each other or proclaiming their devotion to a leader or demeaning each other. We are all just human beings. Sadly there seems to be a group of people for whom their particular politician can do no wrong. I called them the slurpers. When their favorite politician walks up on stage drops his drawers cops a squat and let's lose, they are there on their hands and knees slurping it up.
Chopping off heads, blowing off heads, what's the difference really?
Im living my life with respect to everyone untill they dont show the same and Im not religeous.....what is so difficult to understand that you dont treat other people in a way you wouldnt want to be treated. You dont need a godly figure to get that.
One main issue is related to how do you solve conflicts, i.e. eye for an eye vs turn the other cheek.
explain the turn the other cheek part, does it mean pacifism???
@SonnyDelosSantos-y6m in the new testament , Matt. 5 Verses 38 to 48
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[a] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.
Please mention how OLD these videos are in the title or description
It does say how long ago it was uploaded
@@leahben-israel2380 It was uploaded recently. The video is much older than that. I think the publisher is trying to make it look new.
Very pertinent now though...
@@sulljoh1 Could be. I can only go by what is given in the info section, since I am also new to these videos.
Murray is 99% right and has always been .
These are the same Palestinians who danced in the streets when America was attacked
I have a video of very different people dancing. People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
@@maggiefitzgerald1276 Where can I find it?
How is that possible when most Palestinians at the point were not even born until after 9/11?
Peterson is bad at explaining ONE thing in particuliar, which is his actual view on what God is. After watching him closely for a few years since he became prominent in the socio-cultural discussions of the current times, I've realized what he actually means.
Bear with me for a moment. The way I understand Peterson is that he understands that God isn't real in the sense of what we can interact with (Reality). However, the IDEA of God is not only real, but it's useful. Here's how: If one presupposes God (conceptually) in their reasoning, it leads to good outcomes. Because God is the ultimate, most powerful and all-encompassing, un-falsifiable concept we can conceive that equates to the ultimate ideal. Jesus being the "avatar" or mythological character that embodies a set of presuppositions on how to be a good person that will conceive good children. Who will go on to create a good society, all agreeing to this ultimate ideal. With a good society that are all on the same side, it allows the maximization of growth, minimizing suffering and hardships, the culture thriving and innovating, further creating the framework for humans to flourish.
Example of "sacred" religious concepts derived from this religious ideology (a religion is basically an ideology/worldview):
- Marriage - 1 man, 1 woman, for the purpose of procreation and teaching good values and ethics (moral alignment) to the next generation who will go on to build and improve civilization, contributing to a society thriving with increased security, cooperation, trust and loyalty. Marriage means Duty, Commitment and Shared goals, withing the society's currently accepted norms. This is also good psychologically for the society, or else (as Peterson has correctly observed) you end up with a hierarchy of men, where (with feminism, and now online dating) women now all perceive themselves as higher on the sexual marketplace because of their skewed judgement based on their access to "sexual partners" of various positions on the sexual marketplace hierarchy. Leading an ever growing number of men at the bottom, with no access to reproduction and therefore no sense of duty, purpose and their role in society. These are the people that can easily become extremists and go against the society, hurting it.
Perterson understands this too, which he wants God to remain, even though he knows full well it's a concept and not reality.
The argument you present in support of Peterson regarding feminism is equivalent to the Islamic justification of the Burka... 'men are awful and have no self control, so society has to restrict the freedom of women so men are not bad'... you and Peterson need to put the blame where it belongs and blame the $#!++y men and hold them accountable...
Matt proposing a one world government. Hmmm.... where have I heard that before?
Well he is an idiot. Johnathon Schell proposed it back at the peak of strategic defense initiative in the eighties. He wrote a book about it The abolition. Of course it isnt the answer even if it were possible. National Governments dont work because of the lack of good will among people. International goverments would increase this by many orders of magnitude.
Stat Trek
Star Trek
@@northernlight8857 Yeah, science fiction. Just like the belief in atheism.
"belief in atheism" what a wildly ignorant phrase.
The prophetic Led Zeppelin wrote a song about it.
You know it's about vikings, right?
When Murray says they never had nazis in his country, he's either unaware of Oswald Mosley and his crew, or he's feigning ignorance.
His country had the DUP, close enough
@@weeg743 Well they literally had the British Union of Fascists and National Socialists right up until they were all locked up for being a secret fifth column during the war.
He meant being occupied and ruled by nazis like other countries in Europe.
Oswald was not a Nazi tho. He was a British Fascist which is itself different from Italian Fascism.
And this is what happens when everyone uses the term Nazi to describe people.
Oswald wasn't a Nazi. If Oswald was a Nazi then so was Mussolini
Hmmm. Doesn't the elevation of JP into cult leader/messianic leader underscore the hunger for God?
For a second I thought Dillahunty was saying Robert Spencer was a white nationalist and then I realized he said Richard Spencer. I was very confused for a second cause I've never heard Robert Spencer say anything that would make me think he's a white nationalist
Well, Matt clearly didn’t mistakenly accuse someone of being a white supremacist. Richard Spencer is a very open and vocal white supremacist.
They’re are chopping off the heads of something else🤔
Like what?
😂
Watch the children in Gaza. Have a look at their heads.
Nothing wrong with Stefan Molenux . He is just a vilified philosopher that spends most of his time speaking with people who had a horrible childhood.
The difference between the adulation and cult-like posturing towards Hitch and Peterson are significant, not least because Hitch ridiculed them and distanced himself from such nonsense, whereas Peterson has cultivated and embraced such adulation and revels in his cult-like status. When asked if he thought he was a "messenger from god" he took several minutes to consider... before hesitantly saying maybe not. He seriously entertained the idea knowing that some of his followers would claim he is.
I find it a strange critique to hear people say that Peterson has cult-like admirers - and not only that - but he embraces and revels in such a God-like status. Absolute nonsense! It's clearly a fallacy -- and you're assumptions are wrong on multiple levels, not most of all because of the contradiction in claiming Jordan has a god complex and his fans worship him -- while also accusing them of practicing religion itself. They can't both happen at the same time.
@@GirlRicho Clearly you have never been to a mega-church or heard about
Pat Robertson, Joel Osteen, or Kenneth Copeland. Pastors with a cult-like status, a cult-like following and also "practicing religion". Cults and religion are indistinguishable in many respects.
@@SmallWetIsland Yes I know how Evangelists can be. Jim Jones is another classic example. But the same could be said for any doctor of philosophy with students or a dedicated following. Leaders and speakers with influence who draw a crowd - all fit into that same box. It's okay to have different philosophies in life. How do you draw a distinction? Peterson thinks deeply about all his responses - I'd be more concerned if he didn't hesitate with an answer to that type of question. A messenger from God would be an angel, and JP has never considered himself an angel. Whether he's delivering God's message is a completely different question and in a lot of ways he has.
@@GirlRicho The distinction is, as I said if you accept the adulation, if you modify your philosophy or are enamoured of your follower's praise. Peterson ticks all those boxes. you are correct many entertainers sportsmen and singers have followers. some arguably have cult-like status for a few fans. Peterson acquired his fame and fortune not on his academic standing or his lectures. but on (Bill C-16) his rise to fame was on the back of right-wing support and on a political stance. He supports Trump he is affiliated with the DailyWire. He is an atheist who refuses to clearly say so for fear of alienating a large part of his Christian fundamentalist base. His lectures are saturated with religious meanderings. Many of his fans are in effect "followers" and like you, they think he is doing "God's work". Everything screams cult leader. BTW Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, Paul the Apostle, Peter the Apostle, John the Apostle, Saint Francis of Assisi, Mother Teresa and Martin Luther. were all considered to be messengers from god. Not an angel among them.
No I don't think JP is doing God's work. It's not even close to what I believe. Your whole complaint is based on 'what other people think' but you don't know what those 'other people think' because A) you're not a mind reader and B) you haven't bothered to understand their position. Which makes your whole argument a fallacy.
So you think JP believes in atheism? I don't know if I agree with that. It takes a lot of effort to believe in atheism, it's a belief system like any other but atheism leads to nihilism and genocide. Plus it provides no answers on morality and life. It's not sustainable.
They are still discussing secular humanism as a big idea? There are plenty of moral systems that don't rest upon any religious dogma that have been explored, debated, refined over the past 2,5 years...sorry, millenia.
In fact, all major moral systems discussed in Philosophy are secular. Even a lot of contemporary variants. So, as long as these guys aren't going to treat these ideas seriously, I can't think of them as anything more than entertainers.
As long as at least one of them is holding onto christianity for dear life, secular humanism still looks like a big idea. As you said, this idea is more than 2500 years old and the funniest thing is that it comes from the foundation of this western civilization they seem to like so much. That is the mental disconnect a western person experiences when they choose Jerusalem over Athens as C.Hitchens famously said.
@@thedeviousgreek1540That's because the greeks themselves chose Christ as the answer to their doubts. Plato talked about the Good; Christ was seen as good incarnate. I'm not Christian, by the way. But the difference still persists, philosophy being aimed by intellectuals, and christianity pervading much more capillarly.
@@raphaelreichmannrolim25 The Greeks didnt choose christ, they were forcely converted or they were killed. Their temples were destroyed, their schools were closed, their books were burnt and their teachers were hunted for more than 1000 years. Plato talked about many things including god, as did many many others, but he definitively didnt talk about yahweh or a jewish messianic figure. Platonism is indeed way more sophisticated than that. You can see this clearly in Paul's own account of what happened when he visited Athens or you can search the edicts of Justinian or Theodosius to understand how a population of philosophers was forced to follow a lesser cult. Christianity spread among slaves,women and children despite what the forged history of the church falsely promotes.
@@thedeviousgreek1540 I didn't know that, but I imagine how it went after centuries of destroying others temples all over Asia. Socrates, as the philosophers, didn't represent greek tradition. This can be seen not only by the treatment Socrates had, but directly from the legends of the original philosopher himself, Pythagoras: mysteries about him travelling to the East always surface, and he is the reason for the monotheistic cult of the unit monad. Indeed, that's why there were, even before Christ, discussions on whether Plato was influenced by Moses. And indeed, Christianity's success was precisely because It established a major dialogue between judaism and Greek thought. Or Rome, as It had no Spirit and had to take the Greek one. But even If it's message wasn't meant for the philosophers, It addressed their language; and I don't think it means lack of sophistication. When talking to children, one must be clear and simple: to achieve that, some sophistication is needed. Indeed the symbolic synthesis achieved in the story of Christ has no competition among Greek philosophy, I think, even If I myself prefer very much to read the works of Euclid.
@@raphaelreichmannrolim25 First of all, the panhellenic empire of Alexander promoted syncretism in the religious front, just like the Romans did after him. The perfect example is Egypt, where the hellenic pantheon fused with the egyptian. The strategy of religious subjugation that the abrahamic religions used in their empires doesnt represent every empire. Paganism as a religion can fuse with other types of paganism very well but monotheism by definition cannot.
The Greeks historically have a very deep connection with the east going back to 2000 BCE with Minoans and Egyptians. After that you got the Myceneans and the Hittites, the Phoenicians and famously the Persians. After Alexander we can add the Indians as well. So, when we read of travels to the east, or influenced by the east in greek antiquity, it doesnt mean judeans, usually its Egypt or Babylon. It would make sense to note that the cult of Moses wasnt the pinnacle of religious or philosophical thought at any point before being forced by christianity.
Pythagoras was not the first or only monist, although he is the most famous. The monad as an idea came even before Pythagoras with the pre-Socratic school of thought. The oldest monotheistic religion, thousands of years before Moses and the judaic faith was Zoroastrianism and again before Moses there was Akhenaten who tried to impose monotheism in Egypt. I would assume that those who discussed if Plato was influenced by Moses were hellenistic jews who tried for centuries to combine their bronze age mythology with greek philosophy, which later became christianity and can be considered a form of neoplatonism. The difference between these ideas though, is that one is purely religious coming usually from revelation while the other is coming from logic and philosophical thought. Interesting to note that the Greeks never in their history had a holy book. Usually people think of ancient greek paganism in the form represented by Homer and Hesiod but this view was almost already antiquated in the time of Plato.
Socrates was killed in 399 BCE, and was part of a school of philosophical thought that eventually changed the view of religion in the greek world. The common view before Socrates was that every society has their gods and they were to be respected as they are in fact greek gods just with a different name. This worldview was created because of greek trade and the establishment of colonies all over the mediterranean, which resulted into relationships with a whole host of cultures and therefore the need to understand them. -In opposition to that view, we got the judaic or better yet babylonian view of gods beating each other as nations who had different beliefs went to war.- Along with the pre socratic school, who viewed god as non intevening and unknowable, the greek worldview starts to change. The gods arent the cause of everything anymore, they arent the basis of morality and they dont have the answers to our problems rather, man should turn to science in order to understand the world and leave the superstitions behind him. This whole journey culminated with Epicurus and was embraced by the Romans.
When the dialogue between judaism and greek thought happened, the western world lost a lot of its progress in order to accomodate superstition and dogma into philosophy. The major part that got lost was the understanding of the divine and freedom of thought. Christianity embraced the known god as opposed to the unknown god and dogmatic thought instead of free thought. Superstition also came back strong as a means of coping with problems and understanding the world, in place of philosophy, medicine and science. The biggest wound on the western Spirit though, was the insistence of the early church fathers to destroy the greek worldview of understanding religion allegorically and their systemic push of literal understanding, a wound that hasnt fully healed to this day.
I agree with your undestanding of simplification of philosophy for the masses, just as Nietzche said, christianity is platonism for the masses. But the way this simplification happened and the reason why it happened was far from optimal and left a lot to be desired.
I hate when ppl have long drawn out questions. Stop talking and ask your effing question. No one cares to hear you. They're there for the speaker.
are you saying Jews, Muslims and Christians do not leave in peace in Israel?..maybe you have some amnesia about the term dhimes.
@zenga55 - Despicable! The dictionary meaning of which is - extremely nasty, cruel and evil..! What has Murray physically done or said, that sits in those definitions? Words used to describe modern era despots like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Jong Il, Franco, Mussolini, Duvalier, Pol Pot and Ceausescu, Murray is hardly in this category. If his on the ground informed opinion places him there, then those intolerant and unable to take debate without rancour are also in this category, including you. This is why, without compromise, this ideologically driven, tribal and religious conflict will never end.
I have seen a decapitated baby after the Israelis bombed the Rafah refugee camp. He has seen it too, but Douglass Murray does not consider Palestinians to be human beings, so I suppose that he is not lying.
Slight difference between what a bomb does (in war) and what an individual does going into a civilian festival and neighbourhood (not in war)?
If you can't see the difference in the actions of those two human behaviours, then I don't know what to tell you.
@@EvilMonk20 There is no difference whatever between what a bomb does (in a refugee camp) or what it does on a military target - it kills people. What you meant to say is that a decapitated baby from an Israely (US manufactured) bomb should not be given the same emotional value or moral consideration as to an innocent Israeli killed in October 7. If you cannot see the sheer hypocrisy, malevolence and racism in Douglas Murray, then I do not know what to tell you.
@@claudiusii2863 Nope, pressing a button from an aircraft is definitely different to physically walking in and deliberately acting out these things in person. These actions are morally different, regardless of whether the result is better or worse, or indeed the same.
@@EvilMonk20 I rest my case by simply relying on your response.
@claudiusii2863 Who started the war, remember?
There ARE IQ differences.
There is no country called ‘Yugoslavia’ …the name is a Former Yugoslavia, which was a dungeon for my people !
Be careful with who you put on a pedestal. I have to question some of things said here. Murrays views are highly questionable.
You say pedestal but you're inferring platform.
😂😂😂 why cuz you dont agree lol chuckles
Sort of like Jordan Peterson way to many put him on a pedestal,he is right about nutrition,consumer s are poisoning themselves with goods in grocery stores
Douglass is taking on top notch demons
One world? Very naive.
Dilahunty is not smart
Love that this has a "translate to english" tag for me, since what you said doesn't make sense.
Absolutely no sense whatsoever
Can you imagine the level of force and violence that would inevitably result from the attempt to establish a one world government or leader? Come on. Why would he even make a statement like that? He ought to know better.
Ironic that matt dillahunty wants the world to be run by one supreme ruler aka a god
Not irony at all. He is a hypocrite.
What is ironic or contradictory about that? Is his problem with God that God doesn't exist, nit that he doesn't want a God to exist? Also are you assuming Christian God? And didn't he say an organization not an individual? You sound like someone scared to lose their imaginary friend, not like someone actually bringing something to the conversation. Grow up, and learn to converse like an adult, not like a brain rot husk.
@@zapkvr difference is he may want a world with "a god" as the ruler but acknowledges that something like that is just imagination and is irrelevant in reality. So no, I don't think that makes him a hypocrite at all.
@@Samuel-tq9jxabsolutely he didn’t mean “the world run by a cowardly Christian goD “that would be silly
"checks and balances" did not age well considering the new supreme court ruling 1 man 1 vote and immunity from crime as long as its official
No they didnt
USA ALL THE WAY!!!!
❤️🇮🇱💙🇨🇦❤️🇬🇧💙❤️🇮🇱🇺🇸💙❤️
Israelis executed pregnant Palestinians
Right before Dillahunty went off the deep end. Good times...
Right before Murray began advocating for the mutilation of newborn babies genitals
He is a dope
He always does though because he loves the sound of his own voice.
He honestly thinks he sits amongst the great minds of our times.
But then I suppose when you purposely surround yourself with idiots all day long, you're going to come out as the intelligent one
How has he gone off the deep end? And are you promoting the shallows when it comes to growth.
Jordan is the force for good! Full stop! He helped me and millions around the world to be a better man!
He is a force for bad thinking because he has a horrible epistemology.
@@northernlight8857 not to the millions he has helped!
You must be doing pretty good so keep up with your way of learning
@@romanlyubovny5453it’s good to learn but BE sure it’s true,religion fools people all the time,fools except religion all the time
I wonder what Dillahunty thinks about Murray's current views on Trans people and his defence of Israel's war crimes in Gaza?
😂😂😂 'warcrimes'
@@satiricgames2129 YES! WAR CRIMES! As established by the International criminal Court
@@satiricgames2129I mean, are they not war crimes? They’re not really going out of their way in the slightest to avoid civilian deaths.
Delusional Douglas
The Eastern church is older than the Roman church so its obviously closer to the truth. The roman church was a political idea first and only marginally concerned with the purpose of life
The truth is we have no good evidence for a god.
… by the very evidence of the creation……it’s complexity… and the fact we have the Bible … written over centuries, with prophecy having come to pass …and the fact it is Gods word … powerful and life changing!
Murray sucks
SO WHO DO I GO WITH
BEFORE THE CAT WAS ABUSESED OUTA HIS HOME
WHILE PPL KEPT HAVING THEIR LIFE GO ON IN FRONT OF ME LAFFING
WHEN I WROT ETHE TRUMPS CAMPAING
WHAT IRRIATED MYH MOM
NOW IMRENEDED AGAIN
HWO THIS GUY FUCKS AROUND
I GO OTU FORNT
HES STLAKING ME
HYELLING FO ROTHERS TO HELP HNIM
Seems like this person is uneducated or just can’t spell
they are chopping off something else
THE JEWS BEFORE 2000 TOLD ME TO KEEP REPRITNG THIS
Eh?
😂😂😂😂 the jews as in the monolithic jew 😂😂😂😂 fk of abdul ya rascist cnt
😂😂😂😂 the jews as in the monolithic jew 😂😂😂😂 fk of abdul ya rascist cnt
Douglas Murray is overrated. He is not particularly outstanding in any regard. I wonder how he manages to find himself on debate stages.
You just hate jews bro lol
He is allowed because he turns the reality of racial replacement of Europeans with the fiction of an "Islamic replacement".
He's a gay conservative and doesn't understand the leopard will eat his face too.
Hahaha you’re delusional
And yet Murray still is coming from a country that is fighting a religious cult doing damage in UK.
The method of killing is not really relevant, IDF indulges in procedural techniques of maiming, killing and depopulating.
lol rubbish. If the idf wanted to get rid of the Arabs in Gaza they easily could without world condemnation nor knowledge. But they dont
Procedural? That is supposed to mean anything? Its an army, they arent supposed to hand out candies to na zis
@@dogbert52 We have RoE and international law in the 21st century, you should read about it sometime.
Does it involve invading a neighboring population and butchering and massacring innocents, then kidnapping over 200 people for hostages? Pretty sure the ROE says "Eff em up."
@@konosmgrAren't beheadings illegal in international law?
What lazy emotionally charged answers. Exactly what I would expect from a second rate writer.
Example please
We’re 40 babies
The victims
Heads chopped off
Did this happen
No, it was a lie.
@user-wj6dt5bq3w but it keeps getting repeated
@@michvroom8784 ditto
Sorry
Wrong yes it did happen.
Islamic Muslims practice Teqyya, lies for the protection and advancement of the Arab agenda.
Free Palestine