The Left has right on its side
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 04. 2018
- Want to join the debate? Check out the Intelligence Squared website to hear about future live events and podcasts: www.intelligencesquared.com
__________________________
Let’s be honest. It’s the political Left that has society’s best interests at heart, that works for the good of all. It has always been the Left that has struggled to protect the weak from the strong, that has fought for workers’ rights, for sexual and racial equality, for the welfare state. It is the Left that now challenges abuses of power by corporations and financial institutions. And it is the Left that seeks to build a world based on mutual respect, not individualistic self-seeking. It is the Left, not the Right, that has right on its side.
Yet according to conservatives, it is precisely that self-regard, that attempt to monopolise virtue, which exposes the hypocrisy of left-wing ideology. To flaunt your concern for your fellow man doesn’t make you right - it just gives you the smug glow of virtue signalling. In fact, by expanding the state, overtaxing the rich and splurging benefits on the poor, the Left has always damaged society by crippling people’s natural instinct to better themselves. It is the Right, by championing free markets, free choice and social cohesion, that has right on its side.
Forgetting politics for a second, can we all agree that being on your phone while being engaged in a debate is incredibly fucking rude?
Maybe he was taking notes?
Some debaters are also checking facts.
The guy who asked about antisemitism on the left and followed it up with homophobia on the right, made me laugh my head off.
He is on the left. The Jews are evil, but so is sodomy. I am on "the right." However, my views regarding economics have put me according to one measure far to "the left."
The big truth is this: no one is right. Neither side is completely right or completely wrong. Who is right depends on who is in charge, the time period, the geography, the economy, and the effects of every other countries economy, culture, history, institutions etc on yours.
Taxes might need to be higher now or lower later; we might need to lessen gov't control here or increase it there; we may need to keep institutions here against the peoples wishes or demolish them when they're no longer popular, or any other example, doesnt mean one party is *better* than another. We need everyone, arguing from a diversity of views, to shed the most light on our collective present and future.
The only definition of “right” here entertained is a left wing one.
Titus Monk sure but the topic of the video was one not both.
Didn’t think I’d see you here, Scruton is always great!
I'm watching this in May 2021. World is missing Sir Roger.
2023 reporting, not missing Kwasi
November 14th, 2023@@roberthorne9597
where is here?
Roger Scruton is a great writer but not a great orator. You should have invited Thomas Sowell.
I wish they wouldn’t have MPs and current professional politicians on these debates; they’re so dull. But I suppose it’s not in their professional self interest to be interesting.
They take up the end votes before the speakers have made their final statements. I know they need to fill time while the votes are counted, but people should be able to hear everything the speakers have to say before voting. I suggest that the introductory remarks about how the winner is determined be saved for the end while the votes are being collected & counted. The only thing people need to know at the beginning is how to vote. There should be some way to shift thing around so that people are not missing what the speakers are saying b/c they are distracted with voting, or by people collecting votes, etc. either at the beginning or at the end of the presentation.
She turns up late and plays with her phone, just rude
What a poorly moderated debate. I tuned in to see a discussion on the posted topic and ended up sitting thru what seemed like a typical political party debate with both sides saying very little on topic and mostly typical rhetoric designed for votes. Shame on you IQSquared for pandering to local politicians and denying us informed intellectual debate that IQ2 is known for.
Yes I agree there was far too much intervention from the chair
Really enjoyed this.
Sir Roger Scruton is one of my heroes. Miss his incisive commentary today.
I'm glad he isn't here to waste building straw men that the left defends the soviet union. He loves that my old landlord was able to extract 30k from me without ever fixing the shoddy state of the house I lived in. I will be nearly dead when I pay my mortgage and will have to sell to pay for social care in all liklihood. I won't be able to leave anything for my children.
I suppose rent control is what the lefties would suggest as a solution. Just look at how wonderful it worked in NY. Anybody ever try to rent a u-haul in a lefty run state these days? They are all in Texas and Florida. Nobody wants to drive them back to any blue state. Why would they?
@@adennagruetzmacher6076 no id suggest banning buy to let. Landlords are leeches they are a drain on society
@TFEA no they don't they make poor people pay the mortgage for them. If we we were building social housing people would be able to effectively save to buy a home and if we didn't allow parasites to buy to let then house prices would be much lower.
@@soup8786 Do you suggest you should get housing for free then ?
Kwarsi basing his argument on "how can you agree with a philosophy backed by someone whose predictions failed" really hasn't aged well.
I'd like to see a debate between just Scruton and Monbiot without all this unnecessary stop-starting.
Chair seemed a tad biased. She certainly seemed disgusted ran away from the result as fast as rhetorically possible.
Watching Kwarteng in the UK in October 2022, all I can say is that this has aged well!
czcams.com/video/JojH0xVmHC8/video.html you guys have a weird audio artefact where you can hear the applause looped at this point, might want to fix it?
Challenging premise, as are all these debates. Looking forward to digging in
Sir Roger was the ultimate boomer complaining about how things were so much better back in the good old days.
The Labour MP gave more of a campaign speech. It would be better to avoid sitting politicians for topics as this one.
My thought exactly, already the Tory MP gave a pretty bland, buzzword-filled speech. Stella was basically campaigning XD
The fourth speaker, especially, seemed merely to be giving a campaign speech. How disappointing. I’d have preferred a more erudite debate.
I thought so too! It's like she was on a campaign trail instead of debating specific ideas
Totally agree. It was a monologue performance. When asked to actually answer to the question of the concerned mother, she brushed it aside as a particular case - which it clearly not is. She was not there to enter a dialectic coversation, neither to debate, not even reflect on the input she was given in her replies. She was there to repeat her inner mantra. I tend to lean towards the left politically, however politicians (and activists) like her are poor represetatives of arguments and interests that hold way more weight, neuance and logic than she manages convey here.
Is that canned applause at 30:26 ?????
I think its the acoustics of the hall, it happens every time for the first few rounds of applause. Unless you were just taking a jab at his speech.
Sounds like intentional editing. Some idiot in post-production thought that Sir Roger needed him to commit fraud on his behalf.
51:25 Never a truer word were spoken....
1:23:40
You are missing 1% in the post-debate vote.
157 alt right bots didn't bother to watch or listen and proceeded to spam comments about communism.
That labour MPs talked about "Lost Pote tial", in New York the left stood in opposition and defunding of schools for kids with natural talents and in UK grammar schools, does she count their "Lost Potential"? She only sounded like a normal politician to me, less explaining about how things actually work and much more of it is promises and usual sales pitch of a politician.
Nice discussion, it’s a shame there weren’t a few billionaires elites, philosophers, and economists included in this debate, no doubt I would have been a different discussion, however this took place several years ago, perhaps we need another intelligence2 to host another discussion debate…
I didn't understand if the outcome meant the left acts like the right (a play on words?) Or the left is right in its approach? I think the key issue is that the government is treated like an abstract entity, perhaps above the law in some ways (because it can form laws, even though that requires time and voting) but is ultimately made up of people... So whether the groups are small or not, or left vs right, the truth of it being made up of fallible human beings needs to be addressed.
At the same time I think part of the problem is that people tend to be shy to reach out; like most people think that the farthest point from them in the universe doesn't affect them, and view others the same way; you wouldn't just walk up to a stranger and strike up a conversation, much less, see yourself in that position, doing so, and being affected. So what Im saying rather obtusely/metaphorically is that we have more power than any political system can give us, if we tune into our inner voice which is a non verbal knowing of the things we truly want to do in our lives, and just by daily working towards this, the opportunities will come, as will the work to get us mentally and emotionally prepared for such things (ie dreaming of an opportunity and in the meantime you end up working on your confidence because at a later point in your life, both acts are necessary to manifest the very dream you've been holding). So maybe it's because the MPS were so passionate but I believe both sides were much too abstract, as politicians and rhetoric is want to do.
The audience are more mature than I expected.
Because they're not in the USA.
Good moderator. Kwasi was the best. Stella was campaigning which was annoying (Also, who goes on their phone during a debate???) Roger and George were ok. Roger fumbled the destabilizing question and George capitalized it a selective data set about social mobility in distributive economy, continently ignoring the stark the example of east vs west Germany.
Thanks for providing this content.
I agree Kwazi was impressive. I see him as prime minister potential.
Heard high praise for int squared and had really high hopes, came to check it out and couldn’t be more disappointed. Wow.
It's one of their worst one, but there are a couple really great ones - about capitalism vs socialism, and one about defending western values. I liked those ones.
I'm just here to appreciate the literal title.
Winston Churchill (1909 liberal version) would have won this debate. Scruton is hugely disappointing here - he sounds like a member of the house of lords in 1910 trying to fight off the land tax. Monbiot let's him get away by failing to recognise that the critique of rent-seeking works best from a liberal, not a socialist starting point. The critique of rent-seeking *is* classical liberalism and involves lessening state control (via geofiscal reform ie the Single Tax) not increasing it.
I think some countries today are finding the political 'sweetspot' which are some of the economic values of the Left, but the socially Conservative values of the Right (Faith, Flag and Family). Sweden and Italy come to mind although they are in their infancy at this moment as governing parties. When Roger Scruton spoke about freedom of speach and equality he was leaving the others behind in grasping what he was alluding to. He did a lot of work in the communist bloc and he did try to explain the importance of comparison from experience. It appears now that with progressive liberalism and driving narratives on equality, that even asking where you are from can have disasterous effects and the yet to be seen consequences for us all.
One too many on each team
What are you trying to see how fast you can lose the most subscribers?
Teutone that's just the debate topic. I'm as far right as it goes, but be a little bit charitable.
Teutone sorry I'm 3 minutes in and she has already framed it such that the right are on the defensive.
Teutone actually I read the question wrong, sorry for the notifications. You were right the whole time.
I initially disliked it too before realising Scruton was actually scheduled to speak and he does a good job of bulldozing Monbiot.
AugustusPugin I've watched some of his part but I'm so far out of the overton window, there isn't much for me here.
I think the best defense of conservativism is the biological one. Something like "morality is the culmination of evolved adaptations allowing individuals to cooperate when selection pressures pushed them in that direction" the fact that we have basically clear lines that people draw, we can either ask chunks of the population to live against their deepest held convictions, or you allow full freedom of association, including segregation, handled at the individual or local council level. That segregation will largely be racial, but mainly it will be along political temperament.
Cities would remain largely multicultural and multiracial, but the best global society will be one of voluntarily cooperating but distinct populations with strong borders if they so wish.
the last vote just showed this country is becoming more right wing all the time & a bigger majority seem to support inequality. very sad we are not progressing in the way we should be.
That's a false dichotomy. Rightwing is not equal inequality. I count myself more in the center and it seems obvious to me why so many people are leaving the 'left'. There has been too many stories of late of the radical left doing horrible groupthink and being zealots for causes that should be discussed with a lot of nuance (Such as BLM). The hypermorality that many on the left propose has many logical inconsistencies and people pick up on it. It really does feel at times like 'If you don't think like me, then you must be a facsist, transphobic, homophobic,.... pig', while actually many of the retorts are valid arguments that have nothing to do with being a bigot. I hope there will come people on the left that can uphold the mirror to their followers and point out that they are actively pushing people away with being zealots. Because the left has done a lot of good for the world.
@@Ezelaarify The problem is that because we as a country have become more & more right wing each year since Brexit leftie socialists like me who advocate for progressive change for the better, things like everyone having a place to call home & everyone being able to earn enough money for them & theirs among other things is considered radical far left extremism which is ridiculous.
@@MrRailjunkie I don't know if your claim holds any truth to it (I'm Belgian). But to me it seems the issue is why is rightwing-populism on the rise? And in short you could make a very strong case that a big part is thanks to several leftwing ideas and realisations that didn't really comply with the sentiment of a large part of the population. The current abyssmal state of journalism and social media polarized it even more and make moderate left/rightwing viewpoints seem extreme. The position of many leftwingpoliticians that they think that they are in the right blinds themselves to their own faults. It seems to me you're blaming a consequence of a (partially) selfcreated problem that could've been avoided if some concerns towards globalism/multiculturalism were taken seriously in the past and not brushed aside as being racist and xenophobic.
@@Ezelaarify I'm just observing what I see in the UK. The left have had no real power or influence for decades yet we get blamed for a lot of the problems which we have not created. I think the reason right wing populism is on the rise is mass brainwashing from right wing propaganda from the right wing media against the left & anything else they don't like. I am partly blaming the racist backlash of multiculturalism & immigration because I believe a lot of those so called genuine concerns people have are not genuine concerns but opinions influenced by media racist lies & propaganda.
Eventually ALL people will rent from land barons. There will be little no 0 home ownership
The left turned me to the right.
Welcome
same, I listened to Jordan Peterson, Sam Harris, and Ben Shapiro complain until I had no choice but to shill for capitalism.
You must have a lot of money, if you haven’t you must be just stupid.
What is left? What is right? Its easy to think you are correct when you define your side as the correct one. Im intentionally not using the word "right", as both sides are guilty of this. On the whole, this distinction is meaningless. Worse even, it promotes tribalism. No, you dont have to define yourself by this false binary! I have viewpoints that would be considered leftist (whatever that means), and I also have viewpoints that would be considered right wing (whatever that means). Dont just subscribe blindly to one side, think about the issues and come to your own conclusions!
Watching in 23 proper.
Watching this in 2022. seeing Kwasi speak for the right... such schadenfreude.
You can have a powerful left or uncontrolled immigration but not both.
Tax income for the state works per capita. The more people the more income. That is provided we have decent paying jobs. The fact that earth no longer and will never again have those jobs for all people in itself defeats Conservative ideology. That world is over nationalist ideas cannot solve it.
@@soup8786 importing people isnt solving it either.
@@megasizer5119 you didn't address the crux of the global issue I raised at all
This probably shouldn't have to be said, but George's closing rant about free speech is completely dishonest. Scruton did not claim free speech was the antidote to wealth inequality, he said a lack of free speech is a consequence of wealth inequality, that's something very different.
Both sides made good points though, yet I'm not surprised (but still disappointed) that the left seems to be losing the ball in a lot of places as of late.
1:10:20 #LIES!! It’s *not* a debt! It’s more like a tax than a debt: if they don’t earn more than a certain amount each year, they don’t pay - ever. And even if they do pay, it’s limited to 30 years, I believe; after that, any outstanding ‘debt’ is automatically cancelled. Education, George: it’s a wonderful thing.
The current left no
Read some Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, he’ll tell you about the Left.
It was a curious debate. I think Sir Roger was out of place. Apart from being far too gentle for these strident polemisists, his major theme was social conservatism and he is not a poltician and not wholly concerned with economics. He was an academic and an intellectual and not used to the savage cut and thrust of party politics. I found the MPs both harangued and were very loud and aggressive. The other two not at all.
Scruton is a brilliant philosopher and aesthetician. But when he talks about the details of history and politics and ethics he turns trivial, anecdotal and plain stupid.
Neither left nor right is correct. The answer is very simple:
www.henrygeorge.org/isms.htm
Geo-fiscalism gives both left and right what they claim to want - a pro-worker, pro-business small-state meritocracy that defends the commons.
*You know you’re right or wrong based on whether you need the [force] of government to compel society to follow your ideals.*
Was Civil War to end slavery wrong then?
All leftist revolutions have been voluntary movements of the people while almost all right wing power grabs have been unpopular military dictatorships. Get a clue.
@@BattlestarZenobia, read your history again. The Civil War was NOT for ending slavery, but for keeping the Union intact.
@@BattlestarZenobia We need it to end illegal channel hopping.
@@dreadarchive-6915 Viva the right.
roger is impressive enough to owe anyone by his intellect, but in this debate it is obvious that the he is truly ignorant about the points he is against. what does the right stand for really when its most sophisticated intellectual is that far from reality, and his arguments are bankrupt, nevertheless he is an intellectual asset in most of other topics.
Monbiot - a tree hugger - praised Labour's postwar 'rescue'. In industrial Britain, this mostly translated into pumping untold wealth into dead duck industries which produced high-ish quality stuff that didn't usually need to be that high quality and could be replicated elsewhere - for about a third of the price. Maintaining this farce became ever more expensive and ever more destructive. The damage wasn't just economic, it was also cultural and ecological. The continued destruction of working-class self-help groups, the increased powers of the state over our lives and the laying the foundations for Thatcher's later centralisation of everything Attlee could not or would not centralise, were laid under Attlee.
In the 1970s, start-ups and investment in old industrial Britain were rare. Why would anyone invest in a place where the best workers idle away on unmatched salaries? This caused disparities of wealth which are often ignored. In the 1960s, the shrinking of the use of Welsh caused such concern that fanatics took over preservation of the language. This is just one more example of the consequences of top-down and centralised thinking that we just casually ignore. Actions have unknown and unpredictable consequences. The left's case adds up to: trust in our theory and our ability to manage according to that theory.
By the end of the debate. Voter results right: 57%, left 36%.
@Michel Chamilov the right did a much better job, and remained calm unlike their opponents.
Well I thought this was a pretty good debate
Freedoms and rights with not infringe others Life living. Than rights and freedoms of the "Me I" and others have Life living as well. En matiere criminelle et en matiere de preuves. Parameters. Logistic of justice. Constitution/ality.
I read the description, I can't watch, she seems biast in the worst way, how she got on this platform I will never know
Luke Cooper
Imagine getting this triggered by a 2 minute introduction that you can’t watch the video
"Biast"? Seriously? You do realize that you undermine your opinion by your silly error, don't you?
maybe they made the title that way to make people like you mad.
biased*
Left and right are not the issue. Free enterprise versus socialism is the real issue.
Millions of corpses are the monument to last century's experiments in socialism! Socialism in practice has always resulted in elitist tyranny and extermination and imprisonment of opposition. This is again being repeated in Venezuela. The left has given us a preview of this in the present on college campuses and other public forums with their attempts to silence any opposition to their way of thinking.
Human ingenuity and inventiveness thrive not in equal outcome, where achievement is penalized, but in equal opportunity for as many as possible and the cream is allowed to rise. The west' has not risen to it's present position of economic, technological and military dominance through socialism, but through free enterprise and capitalism. Socialism is the path to tyranny, stagnation and decay. Free enterprise is the path to prosperity not necessarily for all, but for the greatest number.
John . Yay to innercity warzones!!!
No it is individual vs collective
So Scruton just ignores the debate topic because he saw some stuff in the USA and Eastern Europe and it looked nicer in the USA (what a mind bogglingly simplistic and irrelevant argument. Maybe he's not in academia because he relies on anecdotes to back up his beliefs rather than any reality based evidence). Then Kwasi also ignores the debate topic and makes a series of unproven claims demonising the left including the oft repeated but unproven claim that capitalism lifts people out of poverty. Ironically he mentions Stalin as a cheap shot but neglects to mention the number of people lifted out of poverty during his reign presumably because he believes Stalin to be on the left (the bolsheviks were considered right wing deviations from Marxist thought and Stalin's reign was a right wing deviation even from that). If Stalin and the left are responsible for mass deaths and not for economic development then Churchill (and every other western conservative leader) and the right are responsible for mass deaths and not for economic development either. Unless you're a hypocrite. His analysis of Venezeula is so moronically simplistic as to not be worth any consideration either and the rest is just vague assertions of his beliefs.
According to this debate all conservatives apparently believe that the "left" want to institute some kind of authoritarian regime. What a horribly closed minded othering of people you disagree with.
The debate format is ironically a terrible way to debate any topic. It encourages simplifying issues to the point they no longer resemble reality and the cherry picking of evidence to support an extremist position.
The "left" generally have no standards, it changes depending on what the population want as long they're the only designated gatekeepers. The "right" generally dont care what do as long as you dont cross the obvious line or more specifically force them to cross the own personal boundaries via law.
I thought good people motivate charitable actions and never condemn those who openly refuse rather than obsess about who is against them and undermine them at every opportunity.
The obsession comes when you do nothing but think about other people
@@hughjass8337 I'm left because I think about myself. I'm a disabled man and buying a house was hell. I gave 30 thousand pounds to a man who didn't fix my leaking bathtub for 3 months. I had to threaten legal action and could only do this after I was certain I could afford to move if he attempted to harass me out of my home
“Left” and “right” are completely meaningless designations. We should stop using
these terms completely and address ourselves directly to the issues.
I prefer proactive and reactive
No the LEFT does NOT have RIGHT on it's side! The LEFT believes the GOVERNMENT can force people to do thing's the LEFT wants by making LAW'S! And that their way is the best way and most reasonable way.
Where the RIGHT believes in SELF! And doing for yourself and not forcing YOUR idea's and believes on other's. And respecting the differences of other's who may not agree with you. And know that just because you make a LAW doesn't change anything in people's hearts or mind. And You don't take from someone to give to someone else.
“You don’t take from someone to give to others” precisely. That’s why the left is against capitalism. The capitalist steals the labor of the common man to give himself wealth which can and does translate to political power through which the capitalist SELF can accumulate more and more, relatively worsening conditions for every single hierarchical subordinate. Not every leftist is an authoritarian who believes that centralized government is best. Some leftists believe in decentralized organization on a communitarian basis. Whichever way it goes for me, I know that I don’t like capitalism and I know why I don’t like it and so I am a leftist. Not forcing your ideas or beliefs on someone else sounds nice until you realize that this is a way of forcing yourself on others regardless. You can raise your fist in the air. However you have no right for your first to meet my chin. The moment you believe that it is your individual right to this, is the moment you validate every single critique the left could ever have of the right wing perspective and show the immense hypocrisy of your position. Your position is a position that gives individuals the freedom to take freedom away from others under the guise of competition and by that analysis, is not a position of freedom at all. By contrast, the left removes the individual freedom to remove freedoms by way of cooperation which effectively makes everyone freer. The left does have right on its side.
The bi-polar paradygm is the problem
We need 4 parties.
That's what I'm sayin lol people stuck on left or right like sheesh they the real sheep. Less government and free markets are truly the answers and I dont necessarily agree with a 4 party at first glance, Im open to compromise for it provided they stay out of the free market :p
@@armandoc.3150 less government yes but an unchecked free market I think has proven to be a failed enterprise - just look at the US: Unchecked exploitation by big corporate of the consumers, the eventual death of market diversity through the inevitable growth and consecutive mergers - perhaps introducing caps on the 'free' market would be a better way of providing safeguards to protect the free market itself.
@@sandragabriellanoureddine1978 I didnt say completely free markets or the proper term, laissez-faire.
Also in america it's not that it goes unchecked, its asked for. We have created this mess and nothing else.
@@armandoc.3150 fair enough
How could any intelligent person vote against this motion.
How could any intelligent person fail to understand that intelligent people might have a range of views on a hugely contentious motion?
Since might defines what is right, then yes, the left is 'right'.
The left is now all about MtF's beating the hell outta women at their own game. Hella entertaining!
What the hell? Is this supposed to be a joke?
Roger Scruton's notion that "Americans don't use the terms Capitalism and Socialism" just about sums up his degree of insight. After 65 years of living in the U.S., I can say one hears the both terms in virtually every political discussion. This debate was in 2018 - obviously Scruton heard not a word of the 2016 election arguments or debates, nor apparently any political discussion for the previous 50 years.
NO congratulations for the winners of the debate? (with whom the moderatrix disagrees ;-)
We've had various degrees of socialism for 30 years now under both Labour and Tories and we are now on the brink of a societal revolution so how would Monbiot compare this to the society of the late 1900's when according to him socialism rescued we miserable masses from the horrors of profiteering?
I'd say that we as a nation are fed up to the back teeth of socialism.
Also, one of the surest ways of providing social mobility were the grammar schools that Labour closed down in such an unseemly rush, claiming that because they took the best and the brightest poor children it discriminated against those who didn't qualify!
Bloody nonsense but very a sociliast thought process indeed.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA
Lost my subscription. The left and the right need eachother. Bye
So near, yet so far: Monbiot should have read Henry George or Fred Harrison, not Thomas Piketty. Its not about "capital" (such a woolly concept, a very poor choice by Piketty), it's specifically about land. We need to shift taxes from labour and business onto land - ie we need the single tax on land values.
except thats a terrible idea, and not every wealthy oligarch has all their assets tied up in land
@@user-ib9ky2jo9h why is it a terrible idea?
Postmodern babble
Do you ever remember outspoken atheist speakers at Christian universities like ever? Or atheist students? Tell me more about this "neoliberal" phenomenon.
Every leftist has a fan of sheep but dislikes show they are alone.
This video has 9000 views though genius
Left is best confirmed!
andid left is dead........
Dimwits, like you are glaring testament to this fact.
Don't get triggered bruh, try intersectional feminism.
andid unfortunately,for you. I am not a SJW flag burning fuckwits.
Don't ridicule yourself.
Did you know soy helps improve punctuation by 42% on average? Worth considering.
andid I don't need any sort of lesson. especially, someone of your intellectual calibre.
The right and conservatives entirely ideology is built upon theories on conquest, power, and individualism. The Left on the importance of community and collaboration. Of course the Left has moral integrity.
Literally Garbage This is the goofiest non-sequitur I've ever seen on youtube.
A perfect equality will indeed be produced; that is to say, equal want, equal wretchedness, equal beggary, and on the part of the partitioners, a woeful, helpless, and desperate disappointment. Such is the event of all compulsory equalization. They pull down what is above. They never raise what is below, and they depress high and low together beneath the level of what was originally the lowest.
Edmund Burke
Conservatism is build on community and collaboration and it is very often left winged policies that lead to the destruction of these very things....
MORON. Define morality before you claim moral superiority.
Adam Freak.
With your use of words, you can certainly not claim moral superiority.
Communism????? Socialism??????? Unsubbed!!!!!!
Discussion????? Other opinions?????? Ran away wailing!!!!!
I read the description, I can't watch, she seems biast in the worst way, how she got on this platform I will never know