Populism is democratic, it's the checks & balances that fail us, says Sultan Khokhar 2/6
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 05. 2024
- Sultan Khokhar, Lincoln College, speaks in opposition of the motion that This House Believes Populism is a Threat to Democracy.
This is the second speech of six.
This speaker is a competitive debater and the views expressed may not represent their own beliefs.
SUBSCRIBE for more speakers ► is.gd/OxfordUnion
SUPPORT the Oxford Union ► oxford-union.org/supportus
Oxford Union on Facebook: / theoxfordunion
Oxford Union on Twitter: @OxfordUnion
Website: www.oxford-union.org/
ABOUT THE OXFORD UNION SOCIETY: The Oxford Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. Since 1823, the Union has been promoting debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe.
The Oxford Union is deeply grateful and encouraged by the messages of support in response to our determination to uphold free speech. During our 200 year history, many have tried to shut us down. As the effects of self-imposed censorship on university campuses, social media and the arts show no signs of dissipating, the importance of upholding free speech remains as critical today as it did when we were founded in 1823. Your support is critical in enabling The Oxford Union to continue its mission without interruption and without interference. You can support the Oxford Union here: oxford-union.org/supportus
#speaker
Pelosi pummeled at Oxford!
Unfortunately, she is so stupid and arrogant she doesn’t even realize how bad she looked.
pummeled, or got pummeled?
@@korbandallas8931 🧐?
@@TheNewMinimum lol ya sorry ready it wrong at first. Spot on
@@korbandallas8931 Either way, Pelosi is an ass! 😉
Polosi is such a hypocrite
Awful woman. Second only to Hilary.
American here.I love this speech!!!Absolutely awesome!!!!! Pelosi is disgusting.
Love watching Speaker Pelosi showing her true, anti-Democratic, common-man-hating colors.
Honestly surprised Nancy didn't sneak out an exit after the first argument. She was in wayyyy over her head.
She was too high on booze & Vicodin to stumble around to look for an exit.
Mostly because she can't gavel her way out from here.
She is a complete airhead compared to these people.
She has no idea 🤷🏼♀️😜🤪😂🤣
This is a major problem: you all are drastically underestimating her. You may be able to see through to her hypocrisy, but you don't know what she knows, or what she's doing. And she knows what she's doing. She knows you can see her, and knows you underestimate her. She's still a step or two ahead of us, laughing at us.
Excellent response to Pelosi’s pathetic opening.
Pelozzi embarrassed herself with her waving hands and jumbled words.
These young men spoke eloquently.
At first I thought the old bat was having a stroke, spitting, incoherent, drooling , talked as if she had a mouthful of marbles. Pathetic old thing needs to go home and stay there. Her time has expired 😔 😅
Her sad attempt at performing her witch craft.
perhaps the waving hand helps keep her balance..hic burp..excuse me 😂
I wonder if this young man realizes that his words would be considered, "far right" , in the United States.
Agreeing with you...and not for the first time!
I think he would be considered a conspiracy theorist, racist & a President Trump cult member like the rest of us. I wear those titles like a badge of honor. I know I am doing it right when I'm called those names.
Not just in U.S. but also Canada and most of eur0tr@$h. The corrupt, greedy corporate globalist regime is far reaching and much of this invasive, pervasive subversion and revisionism is coming from european elites/oligarchs. soros, pritzger, wef, etc.
Pelosi won't forget him making light of her.
Of course he knows and who should care. Truth is like a lion ...it doesn't need defending.
I can’t imagine American ‘intellectuals” to be this eloquent
These debates aren’t getting England very far though is it
Of course they are. you just don't know enough American intellectuals, because they are never invited on major TV programs, because US culture doesn't value -- indeed is repulsed by -- intellectualism.
If you look, though, some of the most eloquent intellectuals in the English language are, not surprisingly, American. Are you interested in political science? philosophy?
@@bdoubleu6 no. The rhetoric is sparkling, but usually all you get is a well-summarized version of the dispute. Like if the entire dispute was jammed into a sort of youtube-style video
I find Thomas Sowell to be very eloquent.
Since when is Nancy Pelosi either an intellectual or eloquent?
So Oxford is one of the last colleges that has common sense. Idk. But this guy has a brain and uses it.
It is fascinating to watch such debaters. We need this in America.
if you like this, watch UK Parliament. It's the same kids just from previous years, and now with real power
@@ChannelMathThat young man wiped the floor with Pelosi smug attitude ❤
It’s amazing that they have real debates. We can learn from this in our country. It’s classy, entertaining and educational.
Good ol’ Oxford Union - keeping alive the fine art of reasoned debate.
can't tell if this is sarcasm
@@ChannelMath Nope. I love OU debates! In this day and age, when people have lost the ability to argue with sound reason and emotions under control, it’s refreshing.
@@ChannelMathare you listening to the debate? Or just trying to stir up an unnecessary argument
You young men give me hope for the future 👏 keeping speaking freedom to power
It’s sad that American speaker of the house had to go to London to be reminded what is democracy!
Apart from the fact that Oxford is not in London, which is not really material to the point you're making (which I have sympathy with), the irony is that British citizens are pretty tired of elites from Oxford running their own country. I say this with the utmost respect for the Union having attended debates there myself. But the Oxford toffs along with the Cambridge toffs run the City of London, British business, and the British political machine. They often come from elite schools and become rich from politics if they weren't already. Think of Boris Johnson or David Cameron or Jacob Rees Mogg. And the system in the UK has pretty low party participation. The recent leadership changes haven't been based on a a national vote but instead on an internal party vote. They aren't really showing Americans a strong example of democracy in action. The average Briton is poorer than the average American and their NHS is at risk. The cost of living crisis there is worse than ours in the US and their housing market is more broken, against the backdrop of high streets in towns hollowing out, farmers being under great stress, and much more. The situation for the Conservative Party - replete with Oxbridge toffs - is so dire that Economist gives them a 1% chance of winning the snap election in July. Lizz "Lettuce" Truss is trying her hand at an US style populist party. We shall see.
This is gold. ❤ from USA. Sad we don’t have representatives as eloquent and succinct.
we don't require them to be. maybe we should
Utter nonsense. Pelosi is not what we want in the UK. She is an anti democrat.
Refreshing to hear a student who appreciates and respects his academic mentors
We need debaters here in the United States, I'm not kidding.
I agree! The USA has many talented and erudite public speakers but there seem to be precious few formal forums for debate. Do Yale and Harvard have debating societies? If so, why aren’t their debates here on CZcams? Are they?!? All too often online debates are “one-on-one” which seldom seem to reach a conclusion. Bring back AUTHENTIC debate!
The media wouldn't cover it. We're in an information war.
We are here, just ignored. Facts don't work anymore.
Yep, I hate to be a bearer of bad news, but despite this there are already college 'debate clubs' in the US that all they do is speed-talk or "spreading" they call it, off a paper to the point you cant understand them and otherwise weird hyperventilating and gasping for air. Somehow this is called 'policy debate' as though only policies should be debated in this fashiojn.
Then it's up to judges who 'can' understand them or some garbage, it's a totally ridiculous circus act. Complete opposite of debates worth hearing.
dumpster fire example: czcams.com/video/fmO-ziHU_D8/video.html
Theres a lot of master debating in the states all right
Brilliant start Sultan! Expose the elites of the disdain they have for the commoner
🤠🇺🇸 In America we have a Constitutional Republic! That is what our founders gave us. Not a democracy! It’s up to us to keep it.
Sultan Khokhar taps the three key points behind Populist tendencies world-wide:
1. Populism is inherently democratic in expressing dissatisfactions that many believe are unseen and unheard by ruling administrations. Denying a populist voice is undemocratic and elitist.
2. Populism is a corrective force expressed by the people - whether to the left or right. It is currently used as a tool to weaken opposition to current regimes.
3. Populism is an expression of need to correct to maladministration, injustice, and political oppression. Populism responds to the expressed needs and discontents of the people. An unelected, unregulated bureaucracy is inherently anti-Democratic. Administration outside the boundaries of law - starting with Constitutions - is also anti-Democratic. Both are violations of the inherent right of citizens to institute laws as expressions of the social contract and to have a say in how those laws are administered.
Democracy - and representative government - functions with the least turmoil when every person has an opportunity to express their thoughts and intentions, to have a say in the shaping of society ad in how society is managed. Top-down administration will always ensure conflict and opposition, as will oppression of peoples voices.
Very good.
Excellent, largely. Although the inherent fallibility of democracy - that always was and always will be present- is that idiots/stupid people can vote.
I wonder if a system could ever be thought up to make it so that only those with some moderate level of understanding of how the interplay between politics and society really works, then perhaps we could filter out those voters who have no idea about politics, yet only a very surface-level, superficial understanding and grasp of policy design/implementation/intended effect/actual outcomes, and that’s to put it promisingly.
Perhaps creating a standardised test to measure the political astuteness and comprehensions of the people would be an appropriate method to implement.
Also, raising the voting age to 21 would be propitious; 18 year olds are too stupid and inexperienced in life, fundamentally, often lacking sufficient life experience and maturity. Another 3 years of development and the inevitable maturity that accompanies will surely do no harm but only manifest in more self-aware and politically receptive and attuned individuals.
So well done! Great job Sultan
Great and lowly are RELATIVE. 😉
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
he's truly the Sultan of populism
Great and lowly are RELATIVE. 😉
Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱
Wiped the floor with Pelosi smug attitude, thank you 😊 🙏 ☺️
Oh, man. Who wouldve thought id be thanking a bunch of Brits for speaking up for me a small town American. Pelosi got utterly humiliated. Good to see her true colors on display on the global stage for all to see.
I love watching this, such great speakers
Im amazed he didnt include nancy’s amazing ability of making millions on the stock market.
Checks & balances are only as good as the humans that manage them/use them within the system, that's the problem. This guy doesn't seem to get that it always ends in smth flawed or dangerous, because humans have power over it all, humans built the whole system, and humans are very flawed, therefore it's all faulty. And so far, there is no alternative, maybe someday the answer will be a different species, more stable and logical, like some hybrid between humans and AI, but then, the deadly 'error' within the AI system is of course always possible even predicted, because again - humans built the AI. There is no escaping this paradox.
I stand and applaud you from across the pond here in the U.S. I commend you. If only she could’ve just listened and not go to flailing about as she does😒I’m just like damn woman all you gotta do is listen to what people are trying to say to you. But then again you and a very very few others are the only ones who have spoken the actual truth to her. I could go on and on but I digress. Thank you. And you are absolutely right in every sense. Btw sorry for any typos. On my phone.
Mr. Khokhar, we wish you continued success in your life’s work. God bless you and the choices you make in life,
So proud to see all of you putting truth populism’s meaning in context!
Well said🎉
This guy is a fabulous speaker! I vote for you for everything.
Democracy is government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives. The US is a Constitutional Republic. US Senators and Representatives swear an oath to uphold the Constitution not simply democracy. The US Constitution codifies the rights of the individual above the tyranny of a majority or pure populism. This is the genious of the US politic and what distinguishes it from an ordinary populist democracy.
There's nothing genius about america. It's like a business where the rules were laid out years ago, and management vehemently upholds those rules and refuses to listen to the employees.
Nobody is taught this anymore. I am glad there is still hope.
Great Job PELOSI is wrong
Term limits!
I love debates, this gentleman is very clear and concise in his argument.
I wanted them to go over the *changing of definitions of words* like INSERRETION. One was a civil war with hundreds of thousands killing each other, and states seceding.
The other, a riot where 1 party opened up magnetic doors at the Capitol building - to that riot.
Why can't we have such passionate, yet civil, debates here in the US?
Brilliant! Totally brilliant!!
Fellow Americans: I caution you. Do not become accustomed to eloquent and informed debate. It will only make it more readily apparent how incredibly addled is the current resident of the White House. An intelligent, educated, profound and respectful presentation stands in stark contrast to the embittered, vindictive, ad hominem-laced mumblings of a controlled figurehead.
Bravo! Excellent Pelosi roast!
What an impressive young man! Bravo
If I was there I would shake hands all around!
I would love to hear President Trump debate at Oxford Union.
He doesn’t need to… these students are doing a fine job
Bravo!!👏👏👏👏👏
These guys are fantastic
She definitely thinks we average citizens are too stupid to make decisions
This gives me hope for the future!
She's drunk as usual
he as part of the elite is standing up for the common man.....
Thank you sir!!!!
Now everyone just needs to understand that democracy ain’t all the great either. Slowly then suddenly.
Which side disregards truth, facts, and laws, and even the U.S. Constitution as written? Therein lies our country's greatest threat.
Here here 👏👏👏
He can talk!
I'd love to know how many of the students there are from working class background and from state schools.
Quite a lot these days.
@@jonsmith1162 Why is it more now than it used to be?
@@secretname4190 Because back then education was for the upper class, you would barely find a commoner in the parliament back then.
Beautifuly said
This must have been so hard for Nancy
Getting mansplained hard facts
Bless him he is so British “esteemed and intelligent” is not how I would describe Nancy Peloci 😂😂😂😂 I would not be so polite 🤬😡🤬😡🤬😡💋🇬🇧
Well said, sir
Benjamin Franklin once said that democracy is akin to two wolves and a sheep voting to decide what is for dinner.
Democracy is majority rule. And just how are we to expect democracy to function with an uneducated and/or misinformed citizenry?
I don't wish to speak for any other nation on the planet but here in America the education system has failed miserably to actually educate and our main stream media, ever lacking of scruples, does not inform, it misinforms and does so deliberately.
Democracy is or certainly can be as dangerous as any form of tyranny out there in a nation where it's most necessary institutions are corrupted to their core.
But I am grateful that men like Benjamin Franklin never sought to give birth to a democracy when they vowed their independence from Great Britain. When the Constitutional Convention of 1787 took place and the Constitution of the United States of America was created, then ratified a democracy was not created. A Constitutional Republic was formed and in all that time since 1787 nothing has changed, at least not officially.
Our Constitutional Republic was born out of the concept that the rights of the individual trump majority rule and at least officially NOTHING has changed that what so ever since 1787.
Plato thought democracy was the worst form of government. Franklin would have read Plato.
@grannyannie2948 My apologies for my original post. Most of the Founders were quite scholarly and knowledgeable of history and various philosophies. Most of them were well aware of the concept of democracy and yet never mentioned democracy in the founding documents, nor did they define the United States as a democracy in any of those same founding documents.
@@FuzzyWuzzy75 No worries. I'm Australian and no expert, I was glad you put a name to a popular quote. From memory the reason democracy is bad is because if it results in tyranny you are fighting a large portion of your own people. A king was preferred because if he was a tyrant you only need to take out one man. But your founding fathers could hardly recommend a king in your country's case. Loosing the US is why Britain settled Australia, so we inherited your king, though perhaps he'd learnt his lesson. Queen Victoria certainly did. She was happy for us to become self governing states and later a nation.
@grannyannie2948 I believe Thomas Sowell says it best when he says, "There are no solutions, only trade-offs." I don't believe that is ever more true than with governance.
People can be easily manipulated, and that includes monarchs. Take, for example, the Emperor of Japan. For hundreds of years up to the end of WWII, the people of Japan were told that the Emperor was essentially god in carnate.
The Emperor of Japan was pretty well chosen from birth and always lived a rather isolated life primarily around the Imperial Palace of Japan.
The Emperor had counselors and advisors tell him about everything going on in Japan and in the outside world as it related to Japan. The major institutions of Japanese society all had their representatives on the Emperor's counsel. At least by WWII, the Army would have it's advisor to the Emperor, the Navy would have theirs, the Treasury would have their advisor, the diplomats would have theirs and so on. These "advisors" to the Emperor were the true power behind the throne in Japan. They would advise the Emperor, and based on their counsel, the Emperor would dictate his will to the people of Japan, and when your national ruler is god in carnate, how can you question his will?
I am certainly no expert on the monarchs of Europe, but I would imagine there were some similarities to how the Emperor and his counselors ruled Japan for centuries. For that matter, I believe we are seeing something very similar in the modern United States, particularly with the Biden administration in particular. Biden is merely a yes man for George Soros, and his appointed lackies surrounding Joe Biden telling him what to do and say.
As pointed out in this clip, the elites and oligarchs are certainly not doing the will of what is in the best interests of the people. They are doing what is in their own best interests.
These elites and oligarchs are a perfect example of individuals of low levels of morality in high levels of power. They are living proof that absolute power corrupts absolutely, and apparently, that is just as much the case in a so-called democracy as it is with a monarchy.
The elites and the oligarchs today want their new world order. They claim that this liberal world order is something new that has never been tried before that will lead us all to the Utopia. Nonsense, the new world order is just a modernized prettier way of saying empire and empires have risen and fallen since the dawn of civilization and have always lead to tyranny in the past, it will be no different this time around either.
And why should we expect anything but tyranny from those who tell us, "You'll own nothing and be happier!"? Why should we expect anything but tyranny from those that believe so strongly in the principle of "do as I say not do as I do" when it comes to environmental stewardship? These people are proof that evil exists and they are setting the stage for Hell on earth.
@@FuzzyWuzzy75 I understand your statement about trade offs. At least your elections seem to offer some difference in policy. Realistically both our major parties are globalist puppets, and voting never changes anything so I've given up on any democratic solutions. As I say it doesn't matter who you vote vote for, the policies never change only the rhetoric. It reminds me of what we were taught of the Soviet Union as children.
That was very interesting about the Japanese Emperor. I've never really read about it. It sounds like the current leader of China. Everyone knows about their plans for Taiwan, but they threatened to missile us during covid, apparently. So Taiwan may just be the beginning.
I was taught about English kings and Queens and I enjoy history.
Throughout the Middle Ages it really depended on the King and his personality. But they seemed to be able to get rid of many bad ones. What you refer to is the Divine Right of Kings. It began in 1603 with James 1. His son Charles 1 took it too far and literally lost his head. Parliament then appointed the Puritan Oliver Cromwell to rule. Charles' sons lived in relative poverty on the continent. When Cromwell died the English, now Great Britain, brought the son's home, and Charles 2 became King. But his powers were greatly curtailed by parliament. Especially his expenditure if he didn't do what they wanted.
He was certainly not a puritan. He loved the theatre and had multiple mistresses. But he was a man of the people. He was just as happy to speak to a working man, as to a courtier. And when London burned in 1666? He and his brother physically fought the fire. This was when puritans enmass left for North America.
After his death he was discovered to have been a secret Roman Catholic in order to extract money from the French. He had no legitimate children so the throne went to his brother James 2. When James' second wife who was Catholic gave birth to a son, he and his family were exciled on pain of death. This was the Glorious Revolution in 1688.
After that it was democratic rule though few could vote, like Plato's Greece. Parliament had to approve monarchs, and did most of the legislation the king just signed. Poor King George was a pretty helpless and pathetic case. He suffered from a combination of mental illness and the cruel treatment of his doctors. He was not a tyrant, but perhaps the elected British parliament was.
But they looked to America when considering our settlement. In 1786 they outlawed slavery in our country, we were not settled until 1788. They made it ilegal to harm our indigenous people, and to kill one carried the death sentence.
I realise I may have touched sensitive issues. I had no intention to offend. Only to discuss. And my conclusions between Kings and democracy.
I’m sick too death hearing left and right
Mike drop moment!
Very well👍
Winston VS Nancy "The Beard"
This debate is addressed in the book named Stopping 1984 by egan
Watching a man named Sultan addressing elitism in an upper class accent at Oxford is at best distracting.
These debates so often are simply arguments over definitions, they are just category errors or differences.
One side is arguing against ‘the populist’ the pandererer and lier who promises policy based of base emotion and manipulation.
The other is arguing for ‘populism’ as a simple synonym for democracy.
Is there not just a long form video of the whole debate?
By intelligent and esteemed, I presume you were not talking about Nanshee. 🤭
And yes, I am from the USA.
Get this guy on piers morgan uncensored
The husband and the rent boy.
The guy behind sitting on the middle between a lady and a gentleman, is vey handsome
🎉🎉🎉
Nancy was horrible as always...
10,000 views?
75 comments?
Definitely not shadow banned lol.
Yup. USA needs Trump 2024!! to save USA
I wish Keith Woods was on this debate. He would mop the floor
No fool like an old fool.
Does he know he looks like Oscar Wilde??
The man that’s sitting behind him over his shoulder on the right all right his left has got the funniest reactions
What the brainy posho's get up to!! Quite interesting!!
bravi👏👏👏👏👏👏
Are they going to mention pelosi's insider trading while making policy about those trades? That would be a good argument for power of the people to oversee government actions
Don’t lose your gravity
What did the guy say at 9:10?
It’s true
In your own words, define “TRUTH”. ☝️🤔☝️
No one voted to become a minority in their only ancestral homeland
America is a Republic, not a democracy.
Populism has it's place on a local level but national and state decisions must go through the correct process (Checks & Balances)
So if people want to change something that is unfair in the national and state level and go though the correct process but even them they are stopped by people that think everything is fine because the problem is not effecting them... so i say destroy the system because is not work as it should...
that alone is the claim of the deap state this people call all the time... wake the fuck up and hear what they are talking... checks and balances is to say look you can do what you want this way... and ok... but even when they follow the rules it doesn't work because people in that process dont like how things are going because it will effect them in a negative way... just say you are a elitist.
to me sounds like you want to trap populists in their place and corner this correct process does not exist in the corrent system because as i sayed people that were not elected interven in every step of the way... now if that was true for everyone maybe is the way it should be, but is not... only their way is the way.
100% Democracy is a failed ideology that came from the Greeks…to much power concentrates to a few!
The USA is a constitutional republic 100%!!!👍👍🇺🇸🇺🇸
That is Nancy's argument, to insinuate it has no place at a national level when you consider that it does have checks and balances already is insanely elitist with no reason other than elitism.
Totally agree that The United States of Northern America is a Republic. That the creation of Electoral Colleges by the Founding Fathers was genius. Giving Representation to each State.
Had the USA been a democracy in 2016, Hilary Clinton would have won based on her Popular vote.
Trump will not win in 2024 based on Populism, he remains disliked, if not hated amongst many. Any likely win will reflect on petrol prices on the pump for Americans who do not walk but use their cars. On the wars in Ukraine, Gaza during Biden’s administration and the debacle of Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. I could list further but…..
@@eeeemmteeee if populism in America reigned supreme, who knows what the country would look like? Obstensibly, white supremacy could be the law of the land under populism.
Populism doesn't really specify what a society should look like, it's just a means by which a society achieves its aims.
Without checks and balances, America would literally tear itself apart.
The push for Democracy in the United States can trace its roots to socialism and we're not having it.
Populism and democracy are tyranical. This is why the Constitution of the United States was written and is the "Supreme law of the land" (Article VI US Constitution) 51% of the feelings wants and desires are NOT the rule of law. Democracy the 51% doesnt care about the 49% nor the individual and the liberties the "populist" would surely disregard. Madison wrote about the problems populism would bring to the United States government in federalist paper 10. If populism is unlimited in its power regardless if its direct or representative it becomes authoritarian. "173 elected despots would surely be as oppressive as one" (Thomas Jefferson)
If you have "checks and balances" you do not have populism or democracy you have a Republic "if you can keep it"
Skip intro 5:50
A good speech overall but the insinuation that left wing populism is good vs right wing populism is bad is inherently incorrect. They are either both good or both bad. Personally I would say there is no right or left populism. By its definition populism is the centre.
There's alien in the background strange.
Fuck I’d like to debate at Oxford, with drinks
You think America is bad? You should see the disaster that is London.
Pelosi is also one of the luckiest stock traders out there.....hehe
"if we can't even accept that an unequal society breeds discontent then our democracy is surely doomed." - No. The greatest progress occurs when inequality is not limited. Note how much easier life is for everyone today then in 1789 France. On a side note, it was less equal in 1789 France when you compare the King to the average person. France had neither a middle class nor a productive upper class.
Progress and discontent are two different things. Both can be true-- inequality enhances technical and economic progress overall, but also breeds discontent. If leaders can't accept (and address) the latter as well as the former, that does not bode well for any democracy.
@@teresabenson3385 - Discontent was addressed by the 10 commandments, "Thou shall not covet." That is the final word, there is no need for government to address it.
@@jrstf So the government doesn't need to address stealing or murder either, because they are also in the 10 commandments?
I thought the educated French middle class led the revolution. There was a great deal of social mobility in Britain in the late Middle Ages, before democracy.
@@teresabenson3385 - I think you've twisted my thought. The government punishes stealing and murder, I prefer they not punish discontent. And moral training is something entirely beyond the ability of government.
Polosi 👿
Hag
Did you know... The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life throught Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 6:23 You and I broke the law and Jesus paid the fine. God demonstrates his own love for us in this, while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:8 Believe and repent today! The consequences are eternal.
What does populism mean?
It means the right is winning
Meanwhile debates in America be like: czcams.com/video/fmO-ziHU_D8/video.html
Meanwhile in America: czcams.com/video/fmO-ziHU_D8/video.html
Study more son or you will drown