Advocating for political violence – Destiny debates I, Hypocrite

kind of matters because you're like twisting something in the worst wave this is like finding a 12 year old and you're like saying like well you said that you could have six of the twelve I was like well yeah if they were 18 it's like okay but they're 12 is like okay why scepter 80 like okay but they're 12 like what like why would you go fuck me boys this is gonna be a painful one I could feel it hey what's up buddy oh here he is hey how's it going okay how you doing I'm good thank you let me know on the chat if you guys can hear destiny I am joined by twitch streamer destiny who I asked to be here so we could go over or kill stream comments he made about political violence if you don't know destiny is a twitch streamer he's a far left extremist and far left extreme the probably most famous for sometimes streaming with Hasan piker of The Young Turks wait what no is that is that not your claim to fame no okay what so I'm one of the first streamers to ever professionally stream and I've been here for 10 years and Hasan is a very small part of what I do and any of my actual lefty fans that would hear you describe me as a far left us with hilariously but okay okay well yeah so we're gonna talk about political violence if you don't mind destiny I'm gonna do like a intro like a three to four minute little just my position and why I asked you here and that and then of course you can have your own three to four minutes to respond if that's cool like with a rant and then we can get into just a unstructured back-and-forth yeah go for it cuz I have a couple like objections primary objections I just want to make sure I get them on the table here so I don't get distracted because I'm not a really experienced debater like you so yeah just to let you know where I'm coming from I'm a free speech advocate but I've always felt that there are types of speech which are not protected and the most obvious one is the incitement to violence I do feel like you've crossed that line essentially I don't know if like what you've done we should be considered criminal necessarily but I would be really fine with you getting D platformed at this point based off of the things that you've been saying because I do feel like you've crossed the line and the reason I call you a far left is extremist is because I've never heard anything advocated from somebody with a major platform more extreme than to say that it would be morally justified to kill a Democrat a demographic like the Conservatives in America which is like I don't know thirty percent of America let's say so like that's really extreme like part of the reason I became an anti sjw youtuber is because I really didn't like people going after people's jobs you know I saw people contacting people's employers and trying to get them fired because of political views and I thought that this was really extreme and not something that should be happening in a civilized society where people are supposed to be able to debate it strikes me is just like a profoundly anti-american thing to do to try to ruin somebody's livelihood because you disagree with them politically so I am against people going after jobs and I I do that both ways I wrote a blog post a long time ago about when they got some left-wing girl fired because she said she wanted somebody to shoot Trump and I said that that was wrong for people to go after her job and get her fired and that to be cleared like that might be considered inciting violence but I set a really high bar for what would be considered a credible threat and that actually relates to what you were saying when you responding to the quarterings video when you were asking why are people bringing up this six-month-old clip where you were talking about excising all conservatives I think the reason people are bringing it up is because like I heard that clip a while ago and dominate pesos memed it and I just gave you the benefit of the doubt and thought oh he's being edgy he's being extreme he's he doesn't really mean this when you go on the Ralphs retort though and you say I'm I'm totally cereal I think we should it would be morally righteous to kill conservatives that puts it in a different context where now people can say okay hold on what's going on here so that that's my first objection is that it I just think not only is what you're advocating for not morally justified but it's morally repugnant and it absolutely extreme I can't imagine anybody saying that that's not an extreme position and my second objection which is lesser budge throw it out there is that the way you've argued for this strikes me as incoherent and like lacking in any kind of conviction and I just feel like the more extreme position that you're gonna argue for the more well-founded that belief system should be you should have put if you're gonna advocate for violence you should have put a lot of thought into this you shouldn't just be kind of waffling and saying yeah I guess it's okay I don't know I'm just sort of like like just being incoherent and essentially weak in your conviction on something like that so those are my two arguments and that's my opening statement you can feel free to respond if you like um yeah sure um hold on just writing things down normally we do this with responses but I guess I'll just talk a lot and they we can go back and forth so initially you open with it you're a free speech advocate but you think that some types of speech are protect are not protected like incitement of violence and you think and you feel like these people I think you're saying like these types of people that directly violent that directly call for violence cos people should be deep platform so does this mean you believe that almost every single like alt bright character on like Twitter or YouTube should all be D platform some people like Richard Spencer should have all of their social media accounts removed and everything I'm guessing you don't believe that but I guess we'll get into that when we start talking because I would say that like calling for like an ethnos state or the deportation of people that are of a different skin color sounds like pretty like big advocacy for violence to me you said that you call me a far left experienced because you've never heard of someone advocate for violence like I do I don't know if you would consider like the founding fathers of the United States far left extremists but I mean like political violence is like a big part of our country for a long time I don't think there's anything extremist about anything that I'm saying you know this is I mean the civil rights movements women's suffrage like the revolution other revolution where the civil war like this or the Revolutionary War as well yeah sure like political violence always been kind of like a part of our country's history I don't think it's only been leftist that have advocated for that you do this weird thing when you say that you don't like people going after people's jobs for their political use because it's anti-american but then you also say that you think that I should be do platformed I don't know what to make for that you say that you set like a really high bar for credible threats so you were mad that a girl that said that Trump should be shot was deep platform but then when I say things like I think that political violence can be justified you think that is a credible threat I'm sure we'll talk more about that you mentioned that political violence versus conservatives extreme I agree it would be extreme which is why I don't necessarily advocate for it directly but I mean conservatives do a lot of extreme things as well but I guess we'll get into that when we talk you said in my views are incoherent I understand why you feel that way I know a lot of people do the nuance or the kind of like the line that I walk is I say like I believe that political violence could be justified I personally don't advocate for it though because I don't think would be an effective way of getting anything done I don't think that we should all be out in the street like having a giant fucking bloodbath because we're probably not going to accomplish much in that way but yeah there you go there's my okay what do you want to start okay do you want should we just go through those one by one yeah sure wherever you want to start can you can you fare off the first one yeah sure so the first one you say you're a free speech advocates you that there are some types of speech that are not to be protected such as an incitement to violence which is something that I kind of agree with yeah okay so I guess in order to get to the bottom of this look so there's this kind of like wishy-washy thing you do where you say that it would be morally righteous but that you don't advocate for it huh you don't but you don't think that that's like that morally justifying something is the same thing as advocating for it um just because you might be in the moral right to do something I don't think it's necessarily the most effective way to get something done but somebody could do it and you would support the action um yeah maybe yeah yeah this is what I mean by lacking in conviction well yeah I understand why yeah I understand it's hard you say like I would support the action I mean like what support it how like when I say like yeah you should go out and do that probably not but if they did I'm not gonna sit there and vilify them for it so like we can use like a real-life example right we can look at daca right let's say that you're Hispanic person and you're looking at being deported from the United States and you decide to join like violent rallies or protests because of that I can't sit there I don't feel like I have moral standing to tell that person hey you you can't be violent when they're saying well hey these people are literally trying to kick me out of the fucking country that I'm in I don't think I've got the moral standing to do that now I can say hey I don't think this is the most effective way to get your message across it's probably not going to have like a positive outcome so I mean like so when you ask me do I support them I mean like morally I guess I could support the argument that they would use for it but in terms of like outcomes I wouldn't support the effectiveness of that action all right so this is another kind of funny thing you do where you sort of imply that it's only the people who are targeted by whatever existential threat that have this moral standing to to make the call whereas I would say that anytime violence is morally justified it could be easily just as easily justified on behalf of a third party as it would be by the person who is targeted by the existential threat yeah I wouldn't disagree at all of course I would definitely agree with that yeah okay so then you as a third party do have the standing to say whether or not something is morally justified like for me it's very easy to say no daca recipients do not have the moral justification to go kill conservatives okay but you think that they conservatives have the moral justification to violently remove them from their country right so first of all that's a little bit of a straw man I looked up an NPR poll and it's only like 23 percent of Republicans that are in favor of deporting and and that dreamers and to be clear there's a bit of a distinction between dreamers and daca recipients like daca recipients basically have an extra level of protection on top of the dreamers so presumably it would be less than 23 percent of Republicans who support deporting the daca people so that that's kind of like a fringe minority once you're talking about getting down to like 20 percent of Republicans it's kind of crazy to go out and and start killing people just because they might be part of the 20% that want you deported there's there also seems to be like very little threat of the daka people actually being deported but having said all that like even let's just say for the sake of argument they were going to be deported that it's totally legitimate for them to be deported they don't have the moral authority to go out and kill people because they're being deported from a place where they do not have the right to be okay so well I don't want to like do like a ton of checking on so you so you're saying 23 or 24 percent of Republic's are in favor of deporting daca recipients I see here 83 percent o dreamers okay 83 percent of Republicans thought Trump made the right decision on ending daca okay yeah it's interesting you didn't tell me about 83 percent number but I'm not talking about deporting ending daca is different from deporting kind of I mean if you end daca you're basically getting rid of you're removing the legal protections of these people have to say from their country so somebody like ice would be able to deport somebody that was previously protected by doctor from being deported right yeah you know what daca stands for right it's like deferred action on something or whatever yeah a deferred action for childhood arrivals you know what deferred means right then eventually they would have to go through a process to receive citizenship yes it's there's no guarantee that you get to stay what daca says is you get a reprieve while we try to figure out this morally gray area well we did while we decide what to do we're gonna give you a certain it's a two-year I believe they give you a two-year thing that you then have to renew every two years yep right so when they cancelled daca first of all they're not rescinding any of the daca grants that have been granted they're not saying oh you got granted a two-year reprieve a year ago we're gonna kick you out now everybody's daca protections are honored what they're saying is we're not going to allow you to renew because we've decided that this like theoretically this probably isn't gonna happen but theoretically if it went this far they'd say we've decided that we don't want you here right which is totally legitimate wait whoa okay knowing the fact that this is legitimate I don't know anything you just said changes anything that I've said earlier so you're removing the ability for people to come under the daca protection because you're removing their ability to renew their protection for it right so of your connection if your renewal was coming up in a month that you can only go do that right so I don't know it's like somebody comes here and gets a work visa and then they say we're not gonna renew your work visa you'll start killing people well sure so that's a horrendous miss friend we're not talking about somebody coming in front and getting a work visa we're typically talking about people that were like brought into this country and I've been living here like through no like action of their own like these aren't people that just came over like oh I'm a 27 year old guy and Here I am for my work visa right these are people that have been in the country through what we would say is like they're no fault of their own right yeah I get that and that's why I agree it is a morally gray area and I think that most people probably feel the same as I do which would be to say don't kick these the people who we've already sort of given this like extreme amount of hope to let's let's let them be stay let's let them grandfather in but we're not going to keep doing this we're not going to say we have an open borders loophole that allows people to come into the country illegally well so when you say okay so firstly you say morally gray I don't think there's much moral greyness to somebody who's facing potential deportation or because they have no right to be here right so they're here illegitimately so where do they go afterwards though from from that person back to the country they came from that's that doesn't make sense what you're saying they've lived here it's like some of these people have live here so they're like one or two years old they didn't come from a country like it's not like you're sending them back to like oh yeah okay so do you think that like if a parent drags their kid across the border should that parent be allowed to stay I'm kind of like full libertarian in this issue so I would say yes but I mean so you're essentially open borders yeah of course yeah you just think anybody should be able to come and live in America yeah because I fall in the I'm like a big capitalist so I think that like markets should figure these issues out I don't believe in like some civic nationalism or ethno or whatever borders shit no I don't really care as much I feel like economically most of this should sort of sort yourself out I mean okay well like I guess that explains your position but there are laws there are rules and they're there for a reason whether yeah like daca is one of them right yeah but also democracy allows for Corrections where stuff like that can be rescinded sure so it it's all like a legitimate lawful process to rescind that and to say okay you guys have to go back yeah sure but you don't think that those people that are facing possible deportation can't feel like their lives are under threat that they might have like the moral authority to take extra legal actions you don't think it's impossible to make it feel that way they can feel like their quality of lives are under threat and if they were facing deportation their quality of life would legitimately be under threat but that doesn't mean that they get to go start punching random people who maybe don't support what might possibly happen to them that's just ridiculous what if you were to find out that you were brought here at the age of two and this isn't actually your home country and that people were facing to deport you and they felt like they had to rule of law on their side do you think that you should just suck it up and take it you just have to leave yeah I mean I'd be probably getting like British citizenship for like Irish or Scottish because that's where my background is I'd be cool with that okay I feel like most people wouldn't maybe you're super chill with it but I feel like most people don't like the idea being removed from like the country that they identify with that that's a pretty egregious action of a government to take to remove you from I guess the line that you kind of like born with and identify with but they're not born here most of them were not like one years old I'm sorry not born here but like that you'd like lived here like most at the very least most of your like adolescent and adult life maybe we're out of here when you were like four or five or six I don't know the average age of like a doc a person is but they clearly don't identify as like oh yeah my home might the home state of like Mexico or like my country of like whatever other place you know El Salvador or some shit like oh yeah I'll gladly go back there I remember there when I was four like I mean I think a lot of them do you identify with their heritage but I'm like I'm not gonna get into that argument because it's kind of pointless but let me throw a Nanak or like a hyper what's the word hypothetical you like these hypotheticals right yeah they're good way to make arguments yeah okay I got I got a hypothetical for you let's say that you got this twelve-year-old gay kid right okay and he runs away from home because his parents are like hardcore Christian conservatives who beat him every day trying to beat the gay out of him so now he's homeless and he's got to live on the streets and he starts turning tricks and he meets this guy who spikes him with acid and ecstasy and a bunch of other does a bunch of other things that I won't get into you and then you destiny Steven barnaul third of your name you wake up in your like lavish house in LA and you hear a sound in the basement and you go down there and you see this naked homeless gay kid and he's totally disoriented he's like he doesn't know how he got there what the fuck's going on and you say well look man you got to get out or I'm calling the cops you can't stay here and he says please he says Steven Barnell I can see that you're an honorable man can I can I stay here for two weeks well I try to get my shit together and just figure some stuff out and you're a good guy so you say okay I'll give you two weeks you know and then I want to know it at what point as the two-week deadline approaches does he become morally does it become morally righteous for him to kill you in your sleep with a claw hammer I don't think I would ever accept him initially to stay here for two weeks oh so it's it's it's this Olly Olly oxen-free thing that once you've granted a certain time period then you can't rescind it as long as we never gave daca then it would be okay to kick them out and they wouldn't know I'm so I'm not sixteen years old so I would recognize that there's a difference between like personal responsibility over somebody else's well-being versus having like a state that has dedicated branches of government that deal with that this is like this is the same tier of argument as somebody saying like oh well you're in favor of open borders well then why don't you house 20 immigrants like inside your bedroom because there's a huge difference well it's no it's not though like the state takes on different types of responsively for instance I don't hire like a personal military to go do war with other countries but I pay taxes for a military that's and I'm part of NATO and the UN like that's a totally different thing the state because we pay taxes to a federal government the state has different types of responsibilities that a personal person doesn't their private citizen doesn't have I don't think like a private citizen has a responsibility to give homeless people like money on the street but I do think that as part of our taxes like the federal government should probably have the responsibility of taking care of these people these are two totally in wholly different things so it's okay for the state to take money out of my pocket and give it to people who come here illegitimately breaking the rules but it's not okay for for me to say if somebody sneaks into your house you legitimately you now have some kind of obligation to take care of them correct yes we can I can talk about the differences but if I really need to do I really need to tell you the difference between compelling like a state to do something that is like funded by all taxpayers that has institutions that are that the difference mean that versus like an individual having to make a very large personal do I need to talk about the difference in those two things right but I as a taxpayer sure we have the right to vote against allowing those people to stay of course you do yeah you absolutely have that right of course yeah but but it would be morally righteous for people to kill me um yeah they could they feel yeah your vote is responsibility no what do you do you believe that it would be morally righteous to kill people who vote conservative yes or no really I'm not really I mean I've said this like any time no I don't like I'll be as clear as I can be I think that a lot of people could be morally justified in doing so right I think there's a lot of countries when people go to the polls and they vote for people that do measurable harm to your existence whether it's kicking you out of a country whether it's revoking your health care whether it's voting to bomb the fuck out of a country what you're not a citizen of the country so you don't have a right I'm a citizen the United States so what I'm telling you are you are the docker kids aren't okay but people but I'm saying that other people could could feel justified in taking action see for would you vote so for instance I can citizen could feel justified in taking action against the citizens of a country that do fuck we actually fuck we even believe this in America right now or maybe you don't cuz I don't know if you're fuckin alright or not but a lot of people in America for instance think that it's righteous for Israel to bomb Palestine because Palestinians keep voting in Hamas right how is that's literally the same type of thing like well fuck it we can kill Palestinian citizens all day because they fuckin vote for Hamas that an acts of violence or tries to against Israeli citizens this isn't like a controversial position people just freak out because they're really uncomfortable having to take responsibility for the positions they vote for but yeah if you're voting for things that are gonna do measurable harm or or or disastrous harm to people's lives like kicking them out of a country or like destroying their health care or bombing the fuck out of other countries then I think that yeah there is some responsibility that comes along with your vote you need to be prepared for the other actions of people could take against you yeah okay but here's my problem and why I keep saying that you're willful waffling is that you you keep using these terms like it could be justified and then you give these hypothetical examples or whatever but I'm trying to get to the core of what you personally believe personally I don't think that you should enact violence over stuff like this because society would turn into a fucking shit show he'll be fucking horrible if everybody started killing each other of the streets over this stuff nothing would get done it would it to be honest the people on the Left would probably fucking lose because most I'm Cameron well must be on the right I guess don't shoot either but like I probably we just probably wouldn't be good for society at all probably turn things into a huge shit show but I don't like the fact that people feel like they have no responsibility over what they vote for so I think they should acknowledge that there are people that could take violent actions against them and be wholly justified in doing so because of the types of people that they vote in so you think that it would be morally justified to start a shitshow bloodbath depending on like the type of person you are how you're impacted by certain policies or how you feel yeah I do this is again back to this if you're if you're impacted then yes but that's a distinction that doesn't see no no I shouldn't say impacted this is like it's this is just not a position that I feel like very like like again like I've said a million if I don't have a gave her people going out in the street and like enacting like violent acts again this is my problem is you're advocating the most extreme and I don't advocate it for that's the problem I don't feel strong about it because it's not efficient I advocate no but I don't this is it's yeah so I know this is really Harvey to follow because people like to like clip out these one things that they feel like they can like slaughter man but this is just not a position that I feel very strongly about but my position is not controversial this is a position that has been backed historically for all of human history like it's so hilarious to see like online like Internet warriors like laughing and they'd be like oh wait you think that you can enact violence against people just because of the policies they want of course that's how all of human history is worked it's the history of our own country it's not a controversial position and like the fact that I would say the like yeah it can be justified if you're like oh well you think you should go out and kill everybody right now well no of course not I don't think it would be very good to do that any like oh well you're waffling on your position not waffling on my position I'm just telling you that there are people that could feel fully fuckin justified and have the justifications to enact violence but it's not think it's a good idea right is it morally justified to kill all Muslims in Saudi Arabia who anyone um I don't know I guess if you were part of the people like I mean probably it depends on like what you're looking at I guess right it's like if you have this fucking thing I know that you're used to like spitting out like one or two fucking answers video get your marching orders know some shitty fucking daily storm or blog or something but no I have to think about it I don't know like so if you're asking me like is it morally just try to take action against like a sunni state that funds like Sunni extremism like in the Middle East I don't know there are probably a lot of people that could feel that way if you're somebody like in fucking Yemen or if you side with the people in Yemen that are having their existence fucking destroyed by people that are funded by people that live in Saudi Arabia yeah there are probably people that could feel the way you know even if you're somebody from the United States that identifies with these groups of people were think that yeah sure you probably excited yeah I'm just trying to get to the core of how you feel and what you believe so just ask me and I could tell you the core of how what I feel I believe it's morally justified to kill all Muslim we do you want the call well it could be by some people I'm sure okay sure you because a ton of people use a ton of different moral system but ton of people have a lot of different normative frameworks for what I believe okay sure for me I don't think you should advocate for or enact violence against groups of people unless it is an absolute last alternative because people getting killed over a political conflict is really really really fucking bad and at that point like your institutions have to be destroyed and failing you will have to accept that a whole bunch more violence is going to happen as a result of that and you might not even enact the type of change that you want for instance a lot of political violence leads to turmoil and states that fall into disrepair that end up being taken over by people that are even more extreme right so that's my position my position is you should very very rarely advocate for political violence okay so we agree then fundamentally you've totally walked back I would say what you've been saying on the kill stream and stuff like that you say like what I've been saying like this is a huge talking point so again I implore you to talk to like a fucking historian or something my position is not one that is extreme everybody throughout all of history has an active violence no your your position that you just laid out is not extreme because you said you're against the violence yeah but I haven't what this has been my position always I've never walked this back I think there's like one clip of me I think talking to doctor layman like six months ago more like fuck I fucking hate conservators on a fucking exercise all over my country but like other than that like one clip where I'm like super fucking like heated and me me or whatever I've always followed it up with I don't personally advocate for political battles in every single time you can ask my chai you gonna ask I probably even said it during the fucking kill stream but like yeah I don't sit here and advocate for people to go out and enact political violence no you said is that you would defend the position that it's morally righteous to kill conservatives yeah sure I guess it could I would have to see the exact quote and in regards what I'm talking to I think that there are people that could make those arguments though but I would not advocate for it I know it sounds like really hard for you to grasp like these that it's meaningless there are people who could make any kind of argument like who fucking cares what other hypothetical people might say okay here's a question how do you feel about second Amendment rights do you think the second member is really important something you should know about me as I'm Canadian okay all right sure a lot of conservatives in the United States and I guess maybe around the world they're attacking me over this would have been the same conservative saying that like you have the moral authority to kill people from the federal government that come to your house to try to take your guns as Americans we feel real strong about the Second Amendment and where people were talking about Obama trying to take our guns a lot of your like oh well they could take out over my dead body like I'm gonna stand and fight and like people were totally okay making those arguments now I'm I kind of like the Second Amendment as well just because I enjoy like personally shooting and whatnot and I would probably say like sure if you thought like your guns were under threat of being taken from the federal government and that was like a really important right to you yeah you could probably morally justify you know violent action against the government in that in that state sure but I'm not gonna advocate for it I'm not gonna say oh yeah we should go to fucking war with the government to protect our guns like I don't can you understand the two difference is there between advocating or something versus saying like you could make like a reasonable argument for it or yeah I mean it's kind of meaningless though because you're saying that there's something that's moral but that you're against it it's kind of like a double think well it's not a double thing it's like a it's like a it's like it's a question like meta ethics versus normative others so the difference is that the the framework through which I view everything is a very consequentialist framework so what I do is I look at or what I try to do is what would be like what would produce the best possible outcome for my country the best possible outcome right and if one of those outcomes is ensuring that most people that live here are allowed to remain here and be happy and now I'm looking at like people who are in the daka situation who who are saying like oh well I'm gonna be removed in this country I don't think that in them enacting political violence helps my framework let's do things that make most number people happy because that's gonna lead to a lot of things being fucked up however if you follow the normative ethical theory of day ontology and you feel like an action in and of itself can be justified without looking at the consequences somebody like that would say oh well somebody is coming to kick me out of my country I can enact violence against them you know consequences be damned now even though we could come at this like from different places like I can understand and approve of their argument I just would disagree with it even though it's like morally justified I would disagree that because I look at things from a consequential point of view and somebody else might look at it from a different point of view does that make sense yeah it's a bit weaselly I would say it's a bit like dog whistling I what am i I can't like I can't really fault it because if there is a there's like a technicality that you're kind of hiding behind here which is this whole like it's moral but I don't care okay would it make you better if I said this I in the United States right now I don't think anybody should be enacting widespread political violence does that make you happy if I say that yeah I mean you already said that earlier yeah I have upset at it a number of times outside of this conversation as well but yeah okay okay well let's go back to the Saudi Arabia question because I think this is kind of relevant sure let me ask you this first do you think that Nazis could be considered morally righteous um not really because we're not gonna have like any ethical question that we agree on I would never defend I mean like they could make their argument I would never defend I would never agree with any aspect ever to defend any aspect of it because I don't believe like in racial superiority for instance right so I feel like there's a contradiction now and what you've been saying because you on the kill stream which is why I asked you on here was to talk about the kill stream or the ruffle or whatever you attack soap and called her Nazi for saying that all Muslims should not see yeah and you said that it would be morally ethical for people to commit violence against her as long as she turns 18 first okay I'm pretty sure I explicitly didn't call her a Nazi but okay yeah yeah no yeah okay yeah I don't think I've ever called her Nazi but um okay wait so what's the way basically has nazi-like views and that it would be okay to for people to do political violence against her if she were 18 that's a yes sure that's a really funny way of me saying I don't think it would be okay for people to enact political violence against her but okay yeah you said that it would be morally okay for them to do that if she but she's a teenager so it wouldn't be right if she wasn't okay so this is what I called Nicolas Fuentes and not see if that makes you feel better I think I do think that he is like you gave the stamp of approval well no I don't think so well there's a difference that's like I mean like as a 14 year old who the fuck knows what the fuck they think I don't know if so but like I'm not gonna give like the same level of culpability for beliefs to a 14 year old as it would to somebody legal or in southern Nicholas puentez sure but an 18 year old then it's okay doesn't matter the point that I'm trying to make here kind of matters because you're like twisting something in the worst way like this is like saying like this is like finding a 12 year old and you're like saying like well you said that you could have six of the 12 I was like well yeah if they were 18 it's like okay but they're twelves like okay well I said they're 80 like okay but they're 12 like what like why would you go like I specifically was asked you think it would be okay to enact political violence again so and I said no 13 year old girls I'm claiming that based on soaps beliefs you think that it would be morally okay to beat up an 18 year old girl who had those yeah that was saying things like killed all Muslims and shit yeah for sure yes okay you just said that it could be morally justified to kill all Muslims in Saudi Arabia I'm sorry wait did this include like like like kids and stuff too I'm sorry okay you got me listen you got me you got me hold on if this was a if this was a gotcha then you got me if you meant kill all Muslims in Saudi Arabia and you were including like seven year olds and shit then you've totally got me there okay that is not what I thought that question was asking I thought if you were asking like as a violence against like say civilians or the state of Saudi maybe just I'm talking about the fact that so they make let's use a real-world example they execute gays in Saudi Arabia cough their heads off with a scimitar I believe is the method yeah so based off of that and that would clearly meet the bar that you set for violence as a project so like let's say there was like an extremist like LGBT group that was operating in Saudi Arabia right I think that they could operate with some level of moral justification sure it doesn't have to be an extremist LGBT or sure for somebody the people in the group don't have to be LGBT but people could yeah if people feel like those are things that are worth defending or whatever or those are things that they find morally repugnant then yeah I yeah people could have that justification sure right so it's the the Islamic ideology that leads to that so in the same way that it's conservative ideology that may potentially lead to dhaka kids getting deported and you say therefore we can justify killing all conservatives even though only 23 percent of them support this it could therefore easily be morally justified to kill all Muslims therefore what so said can't be considered Nazism but must be considered morally justifiable but you said Nazis are never morally justified so you have this contradiction okay hold on let me follow let me fall back so first of all Muslims can lead you down like a lot of different paths that don't all end in killing gay people I don't think that being a focus okay conservatism that's my poor sure it could but my point with conservatism ended up being with how you voted right that was the reason why I waited for self to be 18 because that's the point that you vote right and voting can be a way of enacting political violence against groups of people for instance if you go and you vote for somebody that is going to establish policies that are going to cause like groups of people to suffer harm right then to some level you've become culpable of that right I don't know I mean I I'm not I don't know I haven't like considered political violence against Saudi Arabia I would have to dig in I don't think that a conversation about Saudi Arabia has I don't think I don't I don't think I need to talk about Saudi Arabia first of all and I don't I did not call sofa Nazi okay and also I don't know what Saudi Arabia has to do with this discussion I don't think I need a history on every country in the world to have a discussion on political violence well the context is that self– made comments about Muslims yes which i think is bad I don't think you can make blanket statements about all Muslims there like a huge variety of Muslims that have like a huge variety of beliefs I agree I think soph agrees with that as she said but I think the same applies to conservatives except in the United States if you're voting for like one party you're kind of like hardline voting for like a pretty like concise of policies that you're looking at like conservatives all voted on board with for instance defunding the affordable care act like this isn't something that like a lot of conservatives had trouble doing like this is something pretty much everybody voted in favor of well the problem with this argument and the quartering even brought this up in your discussion with him is that you can use the same logic to justify killing Democrats because so both party you got a two-party system you got both parties that can be accused of doing things that are more that are existential threats to somebody therefore you can justify killing so under you've created this moral system where everybody who votes in America could be morally righteously killed sure depending on the cut sound like a good moral system to me that sounds like a really shitty moral system it does sound like a shitty moral system but it's only because we live in North America we don't think about the consequences of our actions and any other fuckin part of the world now after the quarterings cover some two choices to vote for whose fault is that I would say nobody it's the American public in the way that they vote I don't think that crying that you only have a limited there's a reason why we only have a limited number of politicians our vote for one is because that's typically what Americans are interested in now we can blame you know the corporations or something else but at the end of the day we live in a democracy and we vote in the way that we do and that's the web that's the way that things go like people complain that we only had Trump versus Hillary there were a lot more candidates in the primaries that didn't make it through not maybe on the Democrat side but especially in the Republican side and I just think it's really absurd now again to triple quadruple back to my original point I'm not advocating because using my system almost anybody could kill fucking everybody around the fucking world I acknowledge that I just don't like the incredible shortsightedness that an American or a North American would say when they go well I think it's really extreme that you're talking about how we connect political violence anybody meanwhile you've got people in Yemen being fucking obliterated you've got Syria that turned into a fucking failed state you've got all sorts of shit happening in fucking North Africa with fucking Libya all over fucking South America and Mexico because of American policies and then like as soon as an American is told like hey people could fuck you up because of what you do they're like whoa what whoa dude that's extreme man well the foreign policies that we've supported as a country have been fucking over the rest of the entire fucking world like I thought that just that seems like the extreme position to me right I just feel like a system so did you you voted Democrat in the last few elections I assume right yep right so you are morally justifying violence against yourself to some extent yeah look at how hawkish Democrat foreign policy has been yeah for sure no there is no because not enough other Americans feel the same not enough other Americans feel the same way that I feel exactly you don't really have a choice it's not but a majority of America does let's say enact violence against people for something like that that they they have no power over it's way above here's what I'm saying let's say sight sure but what let's say somebody in fucking Yemen got their hands on a nuclear bomb and fucking nuke some part of the United States and it killed me or my family like fuck like that would suck and I would fucking hate for it to happen but a fuck like can I fucking blame them I sure as fuck can't because the policies that my country have supported have led to demonstrable fucking harm and a ton of other people's lives around the world and it's really fucked but like I mean I just don't like the idea that nobody takes responsibility for the decisions that their countries make or the decisions of their votes like lead to I mean I just don't feel like you have any power over that like you're putting way too much accountability on just the average citizen when America who's not out here they have they have no sane like there's no referendum on whether or not we go into Libya you know what I'm saying you can't you can't control these things okay I mean I disagree I think that I think that our foreign policy is a huge reflection of the American Exceptionalist attitude that we've had over at the very least since World War two where we feel like we do have the moral authority to step on any other country in the world as long as we're doing it for American interests and I think that that attitude is hardcore expressed in the way that we vote for people and as hardcore express in the way that we approach other countries around the world and I do think that America there are consequences for the way that you act I mean we've seen it in what's happened to us and things like 9/11 and shit like there are consequences all over the world for American actions and I don't like that voters feel like they share no responsibility in that I think that's a ridiculous position to take so you think that 9/11 is America chickens coming home to roost absolutely of course this isn't even a controversial position I mean like it's absolutely not it is not a controversial position whatsoever oh it is because here's why destinies is do you think that like the Philippines have terrorist attacks because of their foreign policy do you think that Sri Lanka has their churches bombed on Easter because of the Sri Lankan foreign policy I have no fucking idea what you know it's it's no there the session happens because of what you might refer to as weird Islamic bullshit that's what so that's so the whole history of imperialism for the past 300 years has been attributed to Muslims is that I'm not sure how you got I have no idea what you what quantum leap we're making here how we how we just went from American Apparel ISM to weird Islamic bullshit I don't I can yet so connect the dots for me more or oh yeah sure so there is no connection to imperialism that's what I'm saying like Muslims kill people everywhere they are that's what they do every day so why don't we see way more fuckin terrorist attacks around the world if there's almost two billion Muslims what there was a report Muslim Islamic extremism killed like eighty eight thousand people in 2017 compared to how much other types of extremism 88,000 people sounds like a pretty low number given the population is like seven billion plus I mean like how many other types of you know how many other types of Peaks are incredibly high number if you compare it to other forms of extremism yeah what other saw how much extremists you like like like all writers or or conservatives or just extremists by comparison okay I got let me I don't have the numbers because you just said 88,000 so for Islamic extremism because there's I saw a report on that but for you to say that that's high you must know like the approximate numbers of the other I know that's fine hold on so I'm not trying to like get you on a number now I'm just I'm really cure it is entirely possible that that number is far higher than other numbers I'm just I'm really curious what the numbers are for like religious violence in other parts of the world versus like Islamic violence right yeah it's it's high like I've seen charts that show the percentage and stuff like that and it's way way high like it's not even comparable like we're talking like hundreds of times hundreds of times higher for Islamic extremism I don't like I'm surprised that this is a contentious well because it also depends on like how you define like Islamic extremism as well right so like for instance like would you say that killings by Isis in Iraq and Syria does that count as Islamic extremism or are these military factions okay so Isis which considered itself or was trying to make itself a state right the Islamic state of is whatever at eleven in a river right ISIL is women so it so Isis that tried to create themselves as like an Islamic state and then was killing people and what it considered like justified military action that's considered a form of Islamic extremism what about like when America drone strikes people or kill civilians as part of bombings does this count as Christian extremism or not so no first of all because you're talking about like anti-terrorist measures that a country at war is doing versus wait so the people that we kill in Yemen the civilians would kill in Yemen with drone strikes is considered anti-terrorist measures I don't think we're intentionally killing civilians in Yemen are we I mean it it might not be intentional but we still do I mean what about when Israel intentionally like blows up schools and hospitals and shit because they say Hamas is hiding their destiny is when Muslims come and commit terror in Europe or America or wherever they don't say that they're doing it because of foreign policies I mean well that's exactly why we got 9/11 we realize that that was exactly why generally speaking they say that they want to kill kafar because that's what Allah wills you know I'm saying like they're doing it for religious reasons okay my understanding is that a lot of these times justification is given based on like specific I mean like I'm more familiar with like the 9/11 attacks but like bin Laden wrote pretty extensively for why he felt like he was justified in doing so and all of his fought was like he literally wrote like a list of reasons for shit that the United States had done specific actions they'd done and I'm pretty sure Isis did similarly fuck I want to feel like in that because I used to watch those fucking Isis videos where they would specifically talk about like things that the United States had done and this is why we're doing this and this is why we're killing this person and this is why we're doing this like people I don't know like it's very weird that like when you start to dig into like the history of the Middle East you just don't find all of these groups of people like oh we're just doing this because of religious reasons like generally it's because of massive geopolitical divides generally it's because of massive like favoritism shown by the government towards certain minority groups and not other groups right like if you look at the bathroom party in Iraq on the way that they treated Sunni minorities in Iraq like none of this was just like Oh Sunni extremism is here in Iraq because oh well they're just religiously motivated it's more like oh well it's been an oppressed group of people for a long period of time that are being funded by other people in other parts of the world and is this huge geopolitical thing it's not like Allah told me to do this thing lol I'm a Muslim and I hate everybody like it's usually a lot more complicated than that we're probably getting out of my depth and like way beyond the scope of the discussion sure here's something that like if you if you look up any conflict in the Middle East you never to take my word for it if you look up any conflict in the Middle East I so this is for me my history is garbage I'll admit that but I never found an instance where it's like oh this group in Syria is trying to kill Assad because Allah told them to usually these things have a lot of history behind them and a lot of geopolitical shit going on in conjunction with everything else it's very I've never seen anything what's just like oh Allah commanded us and here we are yeah I'm not equipped to have a real serious geopolitical discussion here that's not what I signed up for but I like I will just say does not the Crusades and like the moblins likes taking Constantinople you don't think there's really I agree let's not do the history thing okay cuz all of this is like gonna be really complicated in terms of like who started what and what went where like yeah we're not gonna walk all the way back to the Crusades here's like a hypothetical question I bring up okay let's say that you took a muslim-majority nation and let's say that they went to war with another with another country and let's say that their leader their head of state said I went when I was thinking about whether or not I should go to war with this country I read the I read the Quran and Allah spoke to me and said that I should go to war with this country would you consider that like a form of like Islamic extremism that these are like religiously motivated Wars yeah one hunt you really would you'd think so I know where this is going someone said that that God told them to go to war yeah well I mean like Bush literally said that right yeah well that's stupid okay well I mean Trump said the same thing to right when he Trump was running for the campaign he said the two most important books were his book in the Bible so I mean like saying that the Bible is important to you is not the same as saying God told me to bomb this country okay well Bush said that about going to war with Iraq I don't know if Trump has made a similar thing about praying to God before bombing other countries but I mean it's crazy how much leniency we give to Christians but then anytime Allah is mentioned for a Muslim it's like oh well that's definitely Islamic extremism this is why I said I wonder what counts as like Islamic extremists killings if a lot of this is like more due to like local conflict or something you know like when Turkish people kill like PKK Kurdish people in their country does that count as Islamic extremism or when Syrians are funded by our CIA to try to dethrone Assad and fucking serious Islamic extremism like I don't know I get that that's really complicated shit yeah I see I already know what you're gonna say but I'll just throw this out there anyways is that I think a lot of people voted for Trump because they were under the impression that he was going to scale back foreign intervention and stuff like that there's no Trump that said we were going to bomb that oh bomb and we're gonna kill terrorists families okay yeah I mean I think contradictory statements they're essentially like I know a lot of people said that I know a lot of people were pissed off when he sent those missile strikes against Syria because they wanted to get out of all of that and they thought Trump was going to get them out of all that I think there's a difference between like drone strikes and essentially war against a country this is probably the distinction that people are making but I guess let that's all I'm trying to say is like a lot of people who voted for Trump probably were under the impression that he was gonna reduce foreign intervention whether that was a fair impression for them to be under or not is debatable but I like again I just think it's insane to say that we should target those people of violence because they voted for somebody who's doing something that the other party would also be doing ok sure all right I don't really have a whole lot to add like I think you've pretty strongly scaled back your your advocacy for violence here in a way that I we I can agree with an S man if you wouldn't listen to like five more seconds of any of my conversations we wouldn't even had to have this conversation at all how how crazy is that I mean dude I listen to the kill stream thing like three times because I made a video on it there's there's other stuff you said in there that I thought I disagreed with but I don't really feel like we need to go into it because this conversation didn't go exactly how you want it is that oh no it went it went fine I mean I like I think you've basically admitted that you don't believe you you don't have any conviction in the things that you've been more trying to morally justify you're just saying they're morally justified under somebody else's system and I don't actually agree with it yeah that's true so so from a normative ethics point of view I would be considered a rule utilitarian a rule utilitarian a form of consequentialism where I look for what rules in society can we craft to make the best outcomes I've never changed this position over the past several years I've never I don't advocate for political but I'm pretty pretty strongly shown your hypocrisy and how you called sofa Nazi and said that so I didn't call sofa Nazi well I'll see if I could find the clip or not it might have been something alike nazi-like views sure that's true she does see she did seem to have a lot of like pushing them not to like views or whatever okay so mine are distinct in there so you said she has not see like views but then you base that offer for statement about Muslims but then you also said that all Muslims like this is something that I notice it a lot of conservatives have trouble with and it's always like something that it really frustrates me is this like an ability to see nuance on anything and like these conversations are so complicated they're do a lot of nuance so for instance do you think that there's a difference between saying somebody might be homophobic versus somebody might commit to some homophobic actions or have some homophobic views do you think there's a difference are those two are those the exact same thing for you I think that it's a it's a pretty irrelevant distinction okay that distinction is paramount to me I think it's incredibly important to recognize the difference between these things but if you don't I mean it I mean it makes sense while you're conservative I guess if you don't want to even look at literally anything I think that when you smear somebody with a term like Nazi or homophobic or whatever the the little plausible deniability that you leave yourself to say oh I wasn't calling her a Nazi I think that that's that's just more weakness okay I'm sorry that nuance appears his weakness to you ah fuck it makes so much sense though I understand you have no conviction no I understand that right this is like the saying of like Trump is like is like a weak man's version of a strong man like to you conviction means making simple statements that sound right that offer no gray area in no room for new eyes it's like it's how you view the world right like I wish everything has had a simple Muslim bad America good Dhaka bad like that's what it sounds like that's what you're saying to me though you're totally unwilling to see the new ones and like any pullet like these oh yeah I don't know I'm sorry I feels like I'm just out ha me now which I kind of am so do you I'll give you the final word what do you got I'm not like running away or anything I just like my other I guess like like some of the problems I had just to let you know what those were I don't want to kick off a whole nother thing but like you're saying that white people and man are not targeted and conservatives are not targeted but this is kind of part of your wiffle waffling because you originally said you were being hyperbolic then you justified the hyper ball ISM by saying it's okay to make genocide jokes about nah protected classes and uh yeah I understand I make sense I agree so like for instance like if I say like you probably shouldn't make genocide jokes about black people but it's probably okay about white people that's like a contradiction to you right yeah yeah I understand to me it for me to explain why you would invite and it would just sound like wiffle waffle to you cuz all of this stuff is just yeah yeah I mean there's hate crimes against white people just like there's there to I mean specifically ethnic hate crimes black people specifically are the most disproportionately affected but white people are the second most likely to be the victim of a hate crime in America or or at least the second most in raw numbers I don't know about a per capita thing maybe not but it's like look basically there's hate crimes against white people there's violence against conservatives that does happen right so I just think that to say that they're not targeted doesn't seem accurate gotcha okay so so that's one thing another thing is that like you like you said the same thing about women and men that women are oppressed or whatever that like that they suffer systemic discrimination in America I'm wondering if you've seen that study that came out in January of this year that looked at 134 countries and found that like 94 of them men faced more discrimination and America was one of those countries I would love to see that what this is referring to I'd be very you haven't seen this one nope I can get you a link here real quick men discriminated so like the normal way that they I'll just send this on Twitter yeah this is a daily mail link but the link to the study is in there the the normal way or I think what most people use it's called like the gender inequality index I forget what it's called but they use a really inherently biased system where they only look for discrimination against women and anything that discriminates against women or like any anything where women have worse outcomes is considered like a gender equality gap but where women have better outcomes it's actually considered like an anti gap or whatever like it's considered good so it doesn't it doesn't register on the scale so what they did was they actually looked at like both men and women and things like life expectancy workplace deaths and whatnot and they found that in a lot of places men are worse off gotcha I'll take a look at that okay cool yeah take a look at that I think that's about all I had to say there's some other topics I would potentially be interested in debating with you at another time one of them is the whole incest thing I think I'm I haven't I haven't ironed it out but I I'm working on an argument that incest is immoral so we can do that sometime if you're interested and then the other one is circumcision because I think you mentioned your auntie circumcision so I don't like I don't really care about that one but but you really care about the incest one that's a really important argument for you it's it's interesting it's like it's it's a fun philosophical debate you know it's I don't think it's important but it's it's just a philosophical argument that could be fun I like that kind of autism oh shit gotcha all right that's I think that's it man okay have fun buddy yeah you too Cheers fuckin Christ this is something that I like I don't care about this position much so I haven't spent like too much time like hardcore like ironing it out but my response the idea behind like political violence being justified some by being justified against some countries is just like it's a reaction to this idea that I feel like a lot of people feel like their countries policies they are free from the consequences of those policies and I don't like that idea something that I really really really hate I think that if you are voting for people that are causing like measurable harm to people either in your country or abroad that that's something that you should share like in the con like you should share the responsibility for those decisions but I don't advocate for like political violence I don't think that you should like go out and fucking kill people it's really not good but was he a bad faith actor I don't think that guy was a bad faith acting they literally don't distinguish me an advocate and justification yeah but like that's like a big problem I noticed with like a lot of conservatives is that like they don't seem to have like like nuance is lost on a lot of these people and really drives me crazy I make this argument a lot where like it cuz even when I ask like like very bluntly like is there a difference being like a homophobic person versus a person that just has like some homophobic actions or words and he's like no it's like damn like okay also yeah this weird obsession with lumping me in with like Hassan and the Young Turks is really fuckin weird considering that me and a son like disagree on like more than we agree on like I don't know it's like really really really strange well I don't know if that's true actually I guess we just talk about our disagreements more than not yeah and like I'm an extreme leftist like okay maybe socially I am I got do you think they do it to trigger you I don't know I think people just like I think people like to call like people like to play like the guilt by association card so they'll call like Oh chunk of The Young Turks like that's who destitute so she was like no I'm not but like a lot of people like hate the Young Turks by default so by like associating me with them like right off the bat they've already like strongly established how horrible of a person I am you know the absurd gotcha by drawing a line between Nazi and Muslim yeah I don't know so guilt by association isn't valid well guilt by association can be valid if somebody actually associates themselves with somebody but I don't associate myself with a Young Turks I barely associate myself politically with Hasan like most of me and Hassan's interactions with each other are usually us fighting each other like over something they disagree with wasn't that one of your criticisms of laman which one yeah that he associated stuff with a lot of weird like kind of like alrighty people yeah it's not good I think they're gonna keep calling your far left is forever yeah maybe why accept this remedy set up for you when he assumed you're justifying killing all conservatives I was advancing the proportional deportation will result in less violence than bombing oh yeah sure yeah no you're right actually never even thought about that right proportional proportional like violence or whatever that like maybe the type of violence occurred it's fair to be like rioting like or like defacing like a government building not necessarily like killing all Jenna citing all consider something why do so many conservatives not recognize that US foreign policy is real consequences themselves I don't know especially is I would think as a Canadian but I've seen jars

46 Replies to “Advocating for political violence – Destiny debates I, Hypocrite

  1. Destiny is laying a trap for people on the right. When he SAYS it's okay to for "DACA recipients to defend themselves against being kicked out of the country with violence". HE is also espousing just an IDEA via speech. I think it's a moronic idea, but it is NOT a call to violence, it is SPEECH. People on the right need to stay consistent. When Destiny says this stuff, it's just free speech, just as when Richard Spencer says his ideas. Both are free speech. The winning point is when Destiny contradicts himself and crosses into the line of saying Richard Spencer's speech is violence. The winning argument and only point of argument is THAT. This guy failed by calling him to be de-platformed and also having a double standard. Doesn't come off good.

  2. These people cannot entertain ideas of hypotheticals nor do they understand what ethical analyses are! Saying that there could be a general ethical justification be made by someone for political violence against people who back dangerous ideas that can hurt other groups of people does not mean advocating violence against anyone who disagrees with someone else!! Destiny was a bit vague in explaining his point but these people like the hypocrite guy are extremely stupid or being disingenuous. I feel sad for these people they are quite ignorant, bigoted and dumb; they are also locked in an echo chamber that prevents them from understanding simple ideas like "bigotry bad", "imperialist wars or most wars bad" or "nazis bad".

  3. This was actually a good debate. It's sad that people here don't understand how debate works. If you assume that everyone that has different views then you is an idiot and their opinion isn't worth considering, then you sir are a bigot by definition.

  4. Lmao "is that not your claim to fame?" get these fucking whippersnappers out of here. I have to admit that nothing in any of Destinys debates triggered me more yet than to insinuate he is some recent leech. My boy has been in this from the very start.

  5. one of my biggest pet peeves is when a video shows a little “enticing highlight clip” in the beginning before the intro/video starts… a clip that you’re going to be seeing in the video already… I wish that trend would die.

  6. Destiny: "Violence is justified but it's not necessarily correct"
    Best meme 10/10.

  7. If someone sends a screenshot to an employer that causes termination it is still the fault of the person who said the thing that got them fired. These are grown-ass men expecting the general public to keep secrets on their behalf. And to add insult to injury they call that expectation free-speech.

  8. It’s like the father who beat up or killed their babysitter who molested their kid. I don’t condone what he did but i can see how that was morally justified.

  9. Destiny bringing up how he has no obligation to taking in the homeless because he pays the state to do it doesn't invalidate or even really dispute IH's point. The point boils down to: an entity only has responsibility to take care of others within a certain scope, but not for those outside of that scope. For instance,
    A homeowner has an obligation to take-in his dependents or residents of the home (exceptions for if they're adults and have no legal rights to stay).
    A local council has obligation to represent the needs of that district/region's residents.
    A state representative is to represent the constituents of that state.
    A nation has to care for its citizens. But that's it.

    A homeowner is not required to care for the man living down the road, a local councilor doesn't need to care for a different district and a country doesn't need to care for another country's citizens.

    Another point toward the end in regards to religious extremism and body counts.
    Comparing ISIS to George W Bush is not a valid comparison. Although I don't have official stats, I think it's fair to say that most if not all of ISIS's combatants are religious and operate out of perceived religious duty and justification. With GWB, sure he might have justified the invasion religiously, but the combatants, military advisers, etc. (i.e; the people actually fighting and orchestrating war) were not. They were doing it under state orders.

    And to touch on the justification for lslamic extremism (Destiny saying oppression), check out "Why we hate you", a press release made by ISIS itself on their reasoning for carrying out their attacks.

  10. I understand why destiny is trying to be more civil in these debates and im very proud of him for being able to maintain composer as of late… BUT MY GOD DID I WANT TO SEE HIM JUST BLOW UP AT THIS GUY, I miss old Destiny and love new destiny at the same time, its bittersweet.

  11. If you listen to the public congressional hearings on the 9/11 commission. The analysis state quite clearly. The reasons the Wahhabi jihadist extremists attacked the US on 9/11 because of unconditional US support for Israel and US foreign policy (supporting dictatorial regimes in the region since 1953) and stationing US troops on the Arabian peninsula.

    This guy doesn’t even know the facts about what he thinks. A typical example of “you don’t know what you don’t know”. God damn idiot. Typical embarrassment.

    Deaths from terrorism consider deaths in Syria and Iraq. Which, I mean, is an entirely different topic with a plethora of other variables.

    Pathetic debater.

  12. This man does not understand how language works. I could make a statement like "we should create a world to the exclusive benefit of people with brown eyes and beautiful afros." Some could say "that sounds nazi-like" and they wouldn't be wrong. Nuance matters

  13. Have any of these debates ever been good? I just seems like the other person doesn't want to actually talk about anything of substance or doesn't understand how to break down a topic

  14. according to destinys logic, someone who murders would be morally justified by killing the officers trying to arrest him for that murder since they are technically trying to violently lock him up.

  15. oh wow. I think it's safe to say that this is maybe the first of destinys debates that he has put out that it's going to be literally impossible for anyone to say that he came out on top.

  16. Man this guy is retarded, why do Americans have the right to live in this country? They didn't go through some immigration process, they literally stole the land, conflating legal right, with the moral right in relation to the permissibility of an action is completely fallacious

  17. God this guy is fucking cancerous, yeah and as a Marxist, I disagree with almost every point Destiny makes in relation to capitalism as a form of social and economic organisation, to say he is far-left is insane

  18. "Anti-American to ruin peoples lives because you disagree with them politically" WTF?!? America was involved in two major wars and a cold war, not to mention numerous proxy wars in Central and South America all because of its strong hatred of Communism……

  19. "Gay 12 year old kid: Steven Bonnel, I see you are an honorable man"
    I promptly lost my shit right here, that analogy had me almost on the verge of tears. I originally was almost tuning this debate out but then when he went on that tangent it grabbed me by the root.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *