no sure

I'm not trying to change your opinion

just trying to understand

Stefan, an ethostate with values which align more with the west than most other places in the middle east

Stefan, well - when you say ethnostate - it's not really about ethnicity as much as it is about being jewish

Stefan, which while some may view it an ethnicity - its a bit more complicated

Stefan, it is much more of a cultural identity

TheLost, I don't want to ping them

Stefan, I dunno - I'm not sure this is my view - but maybe

meh

yeah

Stefan, https://youtu.be/WmvPfbfzX4U?t=7846 < with timecode to very good part

Douglas Murray makes a very good case for why culture matters - as does many other people

Even Soros' hero Karl Popper makes a good case for it: "Conjectures and Refutations ~ Karl Popper - 17 - Public Opinion and Liberal Principles" - https://gist.github.com/anonymous/27b646ea06786047f77956b795cc6def

> (5) Institutions alone are never sufficient if not tempered by
traditions. Institutions are always ambivalent in the sense that, in the
absence of a strong tradition, they also may serve the opposite purpose
to the one intended. For example, a parliamentary opposition is, roughly
speaking, supposed to prevent the majority from stealing the taxpayer’s
money. But I well remember an affair in a south-eastern European country
which illustrates the ambivalence of this institution. There, the
opposition shared the spoils with the majority.

> (6) A Liberal Utopia—that is, a state rationally designed on a
traditionless tabula rasa—is an impossibility. For the Liberal principle
demands that the limitations to the freedom of each which are made
necessary by social life should be minimized and equalized as much as
possible (Kant). But how can we apply such an a priori principle in real
life? Should we prevent a pianist from practising, or prevent his
neighbour from enjoying a quiet afternoon? All such problems can be
solved in practice only by an appeal to existing traditions and customs
and to a traditional sense of justice; to common law, as it is called in
Britain, and to an impartial judge’s appreciation of equity. All laws,
being universal principles, have to be interpreted in order to be
applied; and an interpretation needs some principles of concrete
practice, which can be supplied only by a living tradition. And this
holds more especially for the highly abstract and universal principles
of Liberalism.

> (7) Principles of Liberalism may be described (at least today) as
principles of assessing, and if necessary of modifying or changing,
existing institutions, rather than of replacing existing institutions.
One can express this also by saying that Liberalism is an evolutionary
rather than a revolutionary creed (unless it is confronted by a
tyrannical regime).

> (8) Among the traditions we must count as the most important is what we
may call the ‘moral framework’ (corresponding to the institutional
‘legal framework’) of a society. This incorporates the society’s
traditional sense of justice or fairness, or the degree of moral
sensitivity it has reached. This moral framework serves as the basis
which makes it possible to reach a fair or equitable compromise between
conflicting interests where this is necessary. It is, of course, itself
not unchangeable, but it changes comparatively slowly. Nothing could be
more dangerous than the destruction of this traditional framework, as it
was consciously aimed at by Nazism. In the end its destruction will lead
to cynicism and nihilism, i.e. to the disregard and the dissolution of
all human values.

Stefan, depends on what you mean by works

But is values not cultural?

so then multi culturalism works to the extent where cultures are sufficently similar

stefan, well anyway - I mean - I agree with you here - but judaism - the way Isreal sees it - is quite a broad temple - but to me it seems like their aim is to maintain a core set of values in this broad temple

or what they see as core

and I don't really mind that

Mundane, w/e 😉

I still like him

I'm a liberal though

Russia or eastern europe I presume

flagging?

Creative, he is not that anti trump - he seems likely to vote for trump in 2020 and has said so himself

but none of his criticism of trump is not fair IMO

yeah - that he does

Creative, ture

Creative, well I'm also one of those people 😉

Creative, I don't like trump ... but I hate democrats more 😃

Atkins have you seen his discussions with Sam harris?

Atkins, I think principles are more important than winning also

Atkins, you have a point there I guess

Stefan, true

no you make good points - in this climate - winning matters

but I dunno - I don't hold Shapiros insistence on principles against him - but I think it is important to recognize winning matters

btw, tim was wrong about y'all - we should use it because it reminds us of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auLBLk4ibAk

Stefan, if USA goes far left - Isreal is in dire straights

Styx ?

ah that guy

__

👈 this guy

I like saying y'all

y'all

so y'all from USA?

Stefan, that would be so perfect

Stefan, yeah he is a pretty clever guy

Tim, it must be some SJW sitting there figuring they will just make up shit because nobody will check them on it

don't want facts crowding their platform

Atknis, well I dunno what to believe - but it does look like damage control

more from FBI than MSMS

MSM just shilling for FBI

Tim, well we really appericate your work - all of it

Lango, Tim's subverse channel was denied for youtube partnership program

the subverse video that was there is now gone https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRqe1dIzrAA&feature=youtu.be

Miss, it was about gender wage gap

I think

buit now it's gone

@woodchuck00 AFAIK you can make people admin of group without consent

so he may not have even been affiliated with it

wow that is pretty sketchy

and thinkprogress ... fucking trash journalism - of the highest caliber

is it ever really bipartisan?

Mark, there certainly are better options for president than trump - but the question is could they win

and who are they 😉

nobody agrees

Mark, I don't think we will see democrats and republicans working together again for some time

Mark, not more so than now

"Democrats Just Confirmed Lots Of Trump’s Judges So They Could Skip Town" - https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/senate-democrats-trump-federal-judges_us_5b86c0eee4b0cf7b00313783?utm_source=reddit.com

Mark, I'm not a USian - but I dunno - trump is okay - certainly I can't stand the democrats

Atkins yeah they don't really care - they would get confirmed eventually

Atkins, I think they can just delay, not block indefinately

but not 100%

I'm pretty sure they have no power to block Kavenaugh

Atkins - not that sure they can do it for Kavenaugh - if republicans have the votes I think they can confirm - like they did with Gorsuch - but again not 100%

Mark, republicans are also power hungry - it is just I think personally what Republicans do with their power is not as bad as what dems do with their power

Mark, you know the quote from Thomas Jefferson?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackstone%27s_formulation

oh no it is not quote from jefferso

though I'm sure he said it

> Other commentators have echoed the principle; Benjamin Franklin stated it as, "it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer"

> It is more important that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world, that all of them cannot be punished.... when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the subject will exclaim, 'it is immaterial to me whether I behave well or ill, for virtue itself is no security.' And if such a sentiment as this were to take hold in the mind of the subject that would be the end of all security whatsoever

MArk> Abraham drew near, and said, "Will you consume the righteous with the wicked? What if there are fifty righteous within the city? Will you consume and not spare the place for the fifty righteous who are in it?[2] ... What if ten are found there?" He [The Lord] said, "I will not destroy it for the ten's sake."[3]

Atkins they cannot do anything without legislative power to do it

Atkins but once they have that power they will do it

@Mark I would adhere to blackstone's formulation as I quoted above I think

Mark, hard cases make bad law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_cases_make_bad_law

Mark, the principle is one of the foundations of liberalism

and liberalism in the sense of liberalism not leftism

Mark, they are not liberals 😉

Classical Liberals is a bit of misnomer

Modern Liberalism started with John Locke - more than 200 years ago

Mark, the people you USias call liberals are further to the left

Mark, and should rather call them leftists as a group than liberals

Mark, but if someone is authoriarian they are really not liberal