Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
Stefan Basil Molyneux is an Irish-born Canadian blogger/vlogger
Which is relevant . . . how?
Supports a Stateless society
What he means by the State may well be different than what you mean by it. He is by no means anti-society. He doesn't support the power of the State as it has evolved in its present form of massive top-down power over individuals. Most libertarians do not support Statism.
Supports the Voice of men a strongly antifeminist and frequently accuses feminists of being misandrist in their mindset. another 1st
What do you mean by "feminist"? Most women don't consider themselves feminists. The number that actually do has dwindled. He is not anti-women. He is married. Claims to love women. And doesn't consider them as unequal. He actually believes women have the power to make society more peaceful and productive by their choices in whom they marry and have children by.
But again thanks for posting a Canadian blogger's opinion As real new's and TRUTH
|
I posted an articulate, intelligent, insightful person's opinion. It didn't occur to me to check out his credentials before I heard what he has to say. I think what he said was correct. I didn't hear anything that I considered lies. He was pointing out the bigger picture (I know you like to refer to the big picture) of what is actually fake in the "news."
Your Wikipedia bio of him was limited and not totally unbiased. There are, however, more scathing bios of him on the net. And also more positive and inclusive ones. None of them add to or detract from the video I posted. For me, in respect to the video, they are irrelevant. I don't agree with everything Molyneux says (and I have watched several videos), and don't have strong opinions about him as a person. But I find his opinions and interviews interesting and informative. And, even more, an alternative to the warmed over intellectually limited version of the main stream news, which, to me, has a lot of fakeness.
His credentials as a "mere" blogger are far more impressive than you imply. But, if a narrow, slanted description of the messenger is the important message for you, rather than the message itself, I understand how that works.
I like this little item by him: