New Keith Woods and Joel Davis video on popular sovereignty - some criticisms

submitted by NeoRail from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]casparvoneverecBig tiddy respecter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Woods is too idealistic and refuses realism in favor of idealism which is informed by his Christian socialist beliefs.

His debate against imperialism was really weak and demonstrated that he understood nothing about military matters or supply chains. His video about fine tuning of the universe and how that proves God is real is really weak as well. For the record, I believe in God as well but his arguments against fine tuning were really weak.

People like Woods and Joel fall into the pitfall of over-intellectualization.

This is an issue with DR intellectualism. Too many philosophy and humanities graduates, blabbering about impractical and abstract concepts while being ignorant of real things like warfare, history, and scientific concepts.

[–]JuliusCaesar225Nationalist + Socialist 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Woods isn't Christian. I have a feeling Davis is just a Christian larper who decided to convert to Christianity because he finds the traditionalist Christian way of combating liberalism appealing.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

because he finds the traditionalist Christian way of combating liberalism appealing.

Why? It has failed for centuries now.

[–]NeoRail[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I hope I am not being too harsh to Davis, but I feel the same way. He does not strike me as an especially Christian man. In general, I think most of the political Christians don't really take Christianity seriously. For them, it's just a convenient tool to promote right wing beliefs, since instead of having to justify their views on abortion, sexuality, etc. through secular logic, they can just refer to the Bible instead.

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

since instead of having to justify their views on abortion, sexuality, etc. through secular logic, they can just refer to the Bible instead.

Which is silly. Secular arguments are much stronger.

[–]NeoRail[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In this era, yes, certainly. There is also the fact that secular logic makes it easier for people to understand each other and compromise. It is difficult to imagine why a secular rightist would be willing to side with the religious nationalists on issues like abortion, for example, if anti-abortionist positions are justified exclusively on the basis of Christian doctrine.