The Poop Files have been released
(www.youtube.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (37)
sorted by:
Any that hasn't just hasn't had enough time to slip up.
From being a "minority" to a woman to a gay to any form of non-Christian (and many terrible forms of Christian), they will always default in some amount back to that identity as their core one if pushed.
They might be useful allies in the moment, but one should never stop being wary of them or think them anything more than temporary.
Yeah, that's why I disagree with Charlie Kirk who was strong when it came to Christianity, but when it came to politics, he'd defend saying "oh, so you think Dave Rubin has no place in the conservative movement?" when confronted on the fact that he didn't call for true conservativism.
My response to Charlie Kirk is ABSOLUTELY Dave Rubin does not belong in the Conservative movement. If he's secretly gay, in the closet, then fine. There's all sorts of conservatives who have secrets, but that's the point, they know it's shameful and keep it a secret. When you wear it as a badge of unashamed-ness, you have passed the rubicon.
The question of "does someone belong" is easily answered when you view it this way. How would society treat this person in 1950s America?
There were people secretly homosexual in America and if they wanted to help conservative movements, go right ahead, but if they came out as an "open gay person" they'd be shunned, because we were a rational society.
It's like if a person had a really bizarre fetish, like they're sexually attracted to automobiles. If they have that fetish and also are a conservative, no problem. If they have that fetish and let everyone know about it, post it on their twitter bio, make it a public part of their life, they're clearly not meant to be a voice any self respecting person should listen to because they're clearly mentally ill or something is very off that they think there shouldn't be a level of shame/private-ness there.
Homosexuality is a mental illness as well as an immorality, and in the past we would deal with it accordingly. We wouldn't kill them, nor do I advocate that, but there would be real societal consequences for "coming out as gay" and you'd never make it to the place of having a platform. When I looked up if there were gay rights activists in the 1950s, I found out there was basically one single actress, who when she came out for it, it ended her career. And that's in liberal Hollywood!!
I love Charlie Kirk. I think he was a great man, a great example as a Christian, and I believe he's dwelling in Christ's presence right now.
But I do totally disagree with his position that you can have a sane and truly conservative movement while listening to and promoting "transgender" and "gay" "conservatives" as though they have anything reasonable to add that someone else couldn't.
I think this type of thinking has one delineation. Stealthable characteristics and not.
In your example, someone can be gay and us not know it until they announce it, and its the same with quite a few characteristics, though most of them are so linked with politics and ideology I think its inevitable. But someone could simply live thier life doing their best as one of those and no one could be the wiser.
Whereas being a woman or a jeet is always going to be open and out no matter what you do. You can't just be a quiet one, your only hope of being "accepted" is to be open and vehemently against your own kind in a manner that could harm you if people held it universally, but you do so because its principled or morally right. Thomas Sowell is probably the most accepted example of this, as no one cares he is black because he has shown himself to be above such.
I think guys like Kirk and many other less-RINO'd conservatives are looking at things in a practicality mindset, in that "X demographics exist and vote, so we need to get them on our side and not drive them into the arms of the enemy." This is why I believe Trump keeps working for these groups, its not truly pandering and more attempting to do "the right thing" either morally or in the "we need to win to help anyone" sense.
Whereas most of us are in a far more radical camp simply because we are willing to entertain if not support ideas like complete removal of X demographic from the country, removal of their voting rights, and other more extreme measures. This is more Conservative in the ideological sense and overall the better option in general, but its unpalatable to a large amount of people to a point where the very idea of it simply doesn't come into their mind. So they fit the problem into their more limited ideology and make it work, which is how you get the problem you are describing.
This is beside the very excellent points you made, but this comment reminded me of the movie Titane...
https://youtu.be/RSHKuw2C5jc