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 -  (4 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.

[–]NeoRail[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I disagree with some of the things you say, but I must say, some of the positions he takes on imperialism and internationalism are strange. I have not watched his debate on imperialism, but in this video on popular sovereignty he briefly addresses imperialism. I think he makes some good arguments against imperialist rhetoric, since given the situation in the West today such rhetoric is completely needless and a liability, but at the same time, the anti-imperialist position that he has adopted seems just as needless. I had thought that his condemnation of imperialism was motivated by a desire to build international solidarity, but according to the statements in this video the point of taking this position is to build more popular support in the West. In that case, it is difficult to see the utility of actually taking a position on the issue at all beyond the typical isolationist arguments about the cost of military interventionism, because beyond that imperialism really does not impact the lives of Western people in any way.

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.

You do not consider these a part of the humanities? I suppose STEM is a separate field, but there is also the philosophy of science which is just as important. All these make up a part of the humanities. I would assume that the study of warfare is also a part of the humanities, as a topic in history.

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

beyond that imperialism really does not impact the lives of Western people in any way.

Keeping shipping lanes clear is not imperialism?

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

You make a valid point, but I do not think it is relevant to my argument. If we have to be realistic, modern Western normies don't really care about the war in Syria or Israeli imperialism in Palestine.

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

Fair enough.