Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
As I told you in private, I meant to let this thread die given that the Orthodox seemed to prefer that. But since it lives on I will say something.
Sounds awful. But I would want to know the context - when he said it, how old he was. 17-year olds can say incredibly stupid things, for example. But if you’re 35 and still saying them, that’s bad.
I think the thing that ought to be stressed is that everyone who is overall right is still wrong about something, and those who are overall wrong are right about something, and it would behoove all of us to practice making those distinctions. If we were to really address the issues our enemies or opponents who we hope to turn into allies are actually right about, they might become more sympathetic to listening to the things WE are right about. Tucker Carlson, for example, is right about some things, horribly mistaken on a few, partially blind on a couple, and a little crazy about one or two. He and Ben Shapiro denounce one another now, but it is not hard to challenge some ideas of each. Andrew Klavan is very right about a significant number of things and quite wrong on a few. And so on. Fuentes is doubtless absolutely right on a few things, whatever other stupidities he may still hold. The question is, who can name them even while criticizing the bad?
It was a joke. I've been wrong before, but I don't think President Fuentes will be sending troops to take our young daughters and our 90 y.o. grandmothers off to the gulag. However, he does makes a (arguably) serious point in the middle of the joke.
In general terms, I agree with what the speaker is saying at that point. The backlash is a result of going too far and trying to somehow make reparations for the historical evils of our own past, as if we could, as if we were God – that’s the whole problem of pretending to be able to somehow make historical reparations. You can’t do it, but you can make the people that you are trying to force to bow down in front of everybody else resentful and angry. I suppose Fuentes comes from that. Attempting to enact reverse racism in a futile attempt to artificially create racial equality through government action just resurrects the old racism that had been dying on its own. Affirmative action is a failure, Black Lives Matter is a failure, and they all wind up achieving the opposite of Dr. Martin Luther King’s dream, which is a good dream, whatever criticism you might raise of the man. these people with good intentions and bad ideas are bringing back the very judgment ( that they supposedly oppose) of people based on the color of their skin rather than on the content of their character. Good intentions - they know not what they do, but they pave the road to a well-known and undesirable place. I think we can sympathize with those aspects of where Fuentes is coming from, while we still have to condemn bad positions and attitudes that are not a joke.
This is a good point. On the other hand, the issue with someone like Fuentes is not really about him being wrong. It is about him being bad/evil. I think that is the distinction that the opponents of Fuentes would make.
Yes, I have watched that video in the past and I take Benjamin's point. For me one of the underlying issues here is the way that language means different things to different groups of people. Fuentes' odd (and some would argue perverse) sense of humor is often taken out of context, and on the internet it is very hard to prevent one's opponents from viewing content that they do not have the ability to interpret correctly. Before the internet Fuentes and his friends would simply speak differently in private than in public. Fuentes still does that as best he can, but it's hard now that everything is technically public.
Well it is a joke and it isn't. That's another part of the problem. There is a very serious problem with the hyper-feminization of our culture, and Fuentes' "joke" is based on that reality. The problem here is that when Fuentes makes jokes like this and they are highlighted by the left, it makes it much harder to get people to understand the serious problem underlying the hyperbolic joke. It can be counterproductive when viewed from the lens of actually addressing the problems of hyper-feminization. This was one of the points that Tucker made to Fuentes.
Yep.
Sorry I forgot about this post. Well I think that's the point - that everything is highlighted by the left, and Fuentes and his ilk are tired of them doing that, and just don't care. What's the harm in admiring Hitler if they already say you do?
Let's separate the rhetoric from the meaning.
Specifically he said "All women have to be imprisoned". The people who disagree on the later point aren't going to hear argument anyway. People on the fence, or who haven't thought about it at all, are probably more likely to wonder what he's talking about, and listen.
Do you remember when Anita Dunn, in a public speech under the Obama administration, for an inane reason, said Mao was one of her favorite political philosophers? And she was dead serious. And Obama defended her comments. There is no wild-eyed person of the left they will not defend. For over half a century, conservatives (what have they conserved?) have not been arguing that ethnic pride is "not necessarily bad". That's on them, and causes Nick.
I think his stretching of the Window is entirely healthy and long overdue.
