Destiny Brainstorms Excuses For Crowder's Abuse

[@AProbablyPostman]

The details of the situation don't even matter. You don't speak and treat your spouse this way unless you're a pos

[@meguca201]

You don't treat anyone that way, frankly. I wouldn't appreciate if my friend talked to me that way.

[@pogo8050]

Destiny’s style of arguing here summarized: 1. Speak condescendingly slowly and don’t reveal any emotion. 2. Break down situation into parts and argue that individually they could be fine. E.G. “is there a reason she should NEVER do anything with gloves?”. Load it to sound as asinine and minuscule as possible. This creates the sense that the video is less than the sum of its part. As if each individual piece fails to live up to scrutiny, the video falls apart. 3. Obfuscate by appealing to the narrative of people jumping to conclusions in other cases. 4. Throw in “it’s possible you’re completely right, Crowder could be a lazy pos we don’t know” to appear as reasonable and evenhanded as possible. 5. Create insane counter narratives that could feasibly explain things away. E.G “what if crowder had done 100 shows and the wife never did anything around the house” etc. assume the absolute worst of the person. Couple this with more of the false narrative of part 3. Rinse and repeat.

[@secularbeast1751]

Kido was on point. It wasn't a matter of litigating for Crowder as Destiny did, it was a matter of Crowder's lack of basic empathy for his wife which you'd expect in a marriage.

[@valentin703]

Crowder could have beaten her to death on camera and DGG would defend it as a "pro gamer moment" change my mind

[@PresidentSunday]

Even DGG is piling on Steven for his Crowder takes.

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

​@@PresidentSunday leftism: Otherwise known as “progressivism” and even more inaccurately as “liberalism”, leftism is a term originating from the French Revolution of 1789, in reference to the political faction that opposed the French (so-called) king. However, the term is currently used in common discourse to describe those criminals who actively support (or at least tacitly condone) a host of OBJECTIVELY-WICKED ideologies and practices that contravene dharma, such as non-monarchical governances and corrupt economic systems (particularly socialism, communism, fascism, and liberal democracies), egalitarianism, feminism, perverse sexuality (especially homosexuality, bestiality, and transvestism), multiculturalism, and the illegitimate abortion of innocent, defenceless, unborn children. Cf. “dharma”. In the past decade or two (of this treatise being composed), the mass media, especially the motion picture industry and television production companies, has been aggressively promoting all the above CRIMINAL ideologies and practices, helping to expedite the destruction of human civilization. Recently, large corporations have jumped on the leftist bandwagon (so to speak), in order to profit. As explicated in Chapter 11 of this “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, the state of being of any particular human (or any other animal, for that matter) is due entirely to his or her genetic sequencing and his or her conditioning. Therefore, the explosion of the leftist/liberal mentality in recent decades, particularly in Western countries, has been caused by poor breeding strategies overtaking the more conservative tradition of mate-selection of previous centuries (and indeed, millennia). In other words, due to the fact that criminal behaviour (especially the deviant sexual acts mentioned above) has become increasingly more tolerated, condoned, and even GLORIFIED in most countries, there has been a proliferation of corrupt genetic codes within the wider human population. According to genealogists, for (almost) the entire history of humanity, most women have successfully reproduced, whilst a far far smaller percentage of males have bequeathed their genetic sequence to proceeding generations. Due to the gradual phasing-out of polygamous marriages in even the most conservative societies, as well as the eradication of poverty in most every country, more and more men (as well as women) have been producing offspring. Thus, the human genome has rapidly become adulterated by inferior genetic material (that is, DNA from truly pathetic, uxorious beta-males, bisexuals, and even homosexual couples who engage surrogate mothers or sperm donors in order to conceive children - something of a rare occurrence in previous centuries/millennia). For centuries, breeders of elite animals such as horses, cattle, and dogs, have known that selecting the finest examples of a breed of animal will result in offspring with desirable characteristics. For example, present day thoroughbred horses boast a pedigree of the best-available horses from the seventeenth century. Such breeders are willing to pay enormous sums of money merely to hire the fastest stallions on earth in order for them to mate with their mares. In the case of we humans, women have traditionally chosen the most competent and masculine men with whom to bear children, and in general, have totally eschewed those males who displayed effeminate traits, and who showed themselves incapable of properly supporting a nuclear family. Unfortunately, due to rapid moral decay over the past few decades, Western women have become extremely sexually promiscuous, resulting in a multiplication of unwanted progeny (and, of course, an escalation of abortions). Boys born to single mothers often lack proper male roles models and invariably become feminized, unable (and often unwilling) to continue a strong lineage of progenitors. The solution to this problem is simply to ensure that society adheres to the principles of DHARMA (see the Glossary definition of that term, as well as Chapter 12). Unsurprisingly, the majority of leftists find it difficult to accept the fact that their criminal mentality is largely inherited (and of course, they are unwilling to acknowledge the blatantly-obvious fact that their ideologies and practices are intrinsically sinful, wicked, evil and immoral in the first place!). It seems the consensus amongst leftist “intellectuals” is that every human mental trait is due entirely to one’s environmental conditioning and social milieu, rather than as a consequence of BOTH one’s genetic sequence and one’s life-long conditioning - a fundamentally-flawed assertion that cannot be scientifically supported. I would not be surprised if the typical leftist would believe that, if the parents of the twentieth century communist tyrant, Joseph Stalin, and the parents of the Divine Incarnation, Lord Jesus Christ, had somehow crossed the time barrier, and exchanged their baby boys shortly after their birth, that Stalin would have grown to become a Prophet for God, whilst Christ would have become a murderous, left-wing dictator! This term was very reluctantly used in the chapter on feminism. I say “reluctantly” because it is unlikely that the term will perdure for many decades longer. This is simple deductive logic, since, as clearly demonstrated in certain chapters in “F.I.S.H”, human civilization cannot survive with such leftist practices and ideologies in place. If you happen to be reading this Holy Scripture a century or more after its conception, you will probably be residing in a nation (as opposed to a country) ruled by a monarch, following the implosion of post-modern, decadent societies. So, either the term “leftism” will eventually become redundant and obsolete, or else, human civilization will devolve into a decadent, diseased state of existence similar to that of the prehistoric era, when the peoples of the world resided in caves or shacks, subsisting on whatever food can be sourced from the surrounding bushland. I trust that you who are reading these wise words will endeavour to influence your social circles to adhere to right-leaning ideologies and practices, such as (above all) monarchical governance, an entirely free-market economy, sexual purity, veganism, and all other virtuous principles. Fear not, for God is with you! P.S. As a general rule, it seems (at least anecdotally) that the farther left-leaning is a person, the more physically (and of course, psychologically) UGLY is that person. Unfortunately, that does not seem to prevent leftists from propagating their mutant genes.🤡 N.B. In order to clarify the notion of inheritability, it is not being claimed that an adharmic (far-left) couple will INVARIABLY produce leftist children, but that it is more PROBABLE that they will do so, considering their genetic sequence and the environmental conditioning they are bound to impart to their children, just as two parents with a certain physiological disorder are more likely to generate offspring with that specific disease. In this regards, it is recommended to study introductory texts on epigenetics. 🧬 In my particular case, I was raised by a staunch communist, and so was indoctrinated to believe that communism was the best course of action for a just society. Indeed, as a teenager, I even volunteered in the election campaign of a socialist politician, who eventually became the Premiere of the state of Western Australia. However, after studying dharma, I came to learn that I was misled by my father in this regard, and that the only system of governance that is dharmic (legitimate) is a divinely-sanctioned monarchy.

[@arnoldstrong3548]

@@ReverendDr.Thomas can I be the king in that monarchy?

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

@@arnoldstrong3548, you tell ME: 🐟 21. THE MONARCHY: A KING (“kṣatriyaḥ”, in Sanskrit) is a man who has a divine mandate, via his counsellor (i.e. his spiritual preceptor), to govern an area of land (and sea) and the population within its borders. He should be the head of the military, and courageously lead his army into battle if necessary (as opposed to cowardly scampering into a bomb shelter under the Pentagon building, as Presidents of the United States of America are apt to do). A king should be a natural leader among men, and be willing to sacrifice his life to protect his subjects. A good monarch will take heed of astute advice from his spiritual guide (ideally, the wisest prophet in his kingdom), as well as his ministers, in order to build a just society. A LEGITIMATE monarch will endorse holy and righteous edicts, such as absolute freedom of speech*, homeschooling of children, free markets, and private ownership of all goods and services (even such infrastructure as roads, water and sewerage systems, health care, and education). He will enforce taxation of the profits of businessmen alone (and not of any other class of society), provide material support to members of the Holy Priesthood if necessary, establish a monetary system using (or at least backed by) precious metals, and avoid interfering with the private matters of his citizens (unlike evil governments, which meddle in such things as sex, marriage, and discipline within workplaces and families). There are only two kinds of persons who would POSSIBLY object to the institution of monarchy: By far the greatest number of objectors are those who have very little idea of what constitutes a LEGITIMATE monarchy, as defined above. The usual arguments are either “I don’t want to be ruled by a tyrannical, despotic dictator” or “I don’t believe monarchy should be hereditary”. Obviously, neither of these arguments is applicable when the institution of monarchy is properly understood. Any man can call himself “King”, but if he lacks saintly (or at least noble) qualities and doesn't have the best interests of his people at heart, he is naught but a fascistic dictator. Just as a priest is, by definition, a holy man, so too should a monarch be a righteous, wise king (“rāja-ṛṣi”, in Sanskrit). After all, a king’s primary duty is the protection of his nation (“kṣatriyaḥ”, in Sanskrit), so how could a person fulfil his duty of care if he was evil and uncaring? Just as a family must be protected by its head (the father), every nation requires a good patriarch. Unless a man has the natural proclivities to do so, he ought NOT follow his father’s occupation. Therefore, a prince isn't necessarily qualified to assume his father’s role upon the demise of his sire. The only “valid” objection to monarchy could possibly be from those miscreants who wish to destroy society via an ILLEGITIMATE system of government (see Chapter 22) or those who are simply too stupid to understand how monarchy is the most beneficial form of governance. Any form of governance OTHER than monarchy must be, by definition, controlled by either workers or by businessmen (or rarely by priests or spiritual leaders), and therefore is intrinsically evil, since they are unqualified to rule a nation. If there is no aspiring monarch extant within a nation, then the best alternative is a priest (a prophet, to be more precise), but only until a monarch arises and retakes power. Although WAR is unfortunate, it is sometimes necessary to defend oneself from aggressors. In certain circumstances, it is legitimate for a ruler or aspiring ruler to overtake another (evil and corrupt) ruler and usurp his sovereignty. Unfortunately, in the modern era, it is nigh impossible for an aspiring king to seize power, since he will be easily defeated by sheer military might, as opposed to the state of affairs in ancient times, where two opposing monarchs would fight in hand-to-hand combat (or possibly lead their respective armies into a battle for the kingdom). Being a soldier is a legitimate and necessary occupation in this wicked and perilous world, mainly for the defence of a local population or nation, but unfortunately, not all soldiers serve a good master. Not all world leaders are righteous in all their ways. In fact, you who are reading this Scripture, are almost definitely being oppressed by a corrupt, tyrannical regime. The reason why you may not realize this fact is due to either abject ignorance, or because, just like your illegitimate government, you have little desire for society to be organized according to holy and righteous principles (“dharma”, in Sanskrit). Just as a newborn child has absolutely no conception of what is most beneficial to its welfare, the vast majority of citizens have very little idea of what benefits society most. Hence the decadent state of contemporary culture. Whenever there is a CONFLICT in this world, whether that be a conflict between two persons, or a conflict between two groups of persons (such as political wars), it is absolutely certain that one side is more righteous than the other. Both sides can not be equally right, because equality is non-existent in this phenomenal sphere. Equality exclusively exists in abstract concepts such as mathematics, and arguably on the sub-atomic level. Unfortunately, it requires an above-average intellect to be able to comprehend such truthful concepts. “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” George Carlin, American Comedian and Actor. 1937-2008. “I believe in political equality. But there are two opposite reasons for being a democrat. You may think all men so good that they deserve a share in the government of the commonwealth, and so wise that the commonwealth needs their advice. That is, in my opinion, the false, romantic doctrine of democracy. ... That I believe to be the true ground of democracy. I do not believe that God created an egalitarian world. I believe the authority of parent over child, husband over wife, learned over simple, to have been as much a part of the original plan as the authority of man over beast. I believe that if we had not fallen...patriarchal monarchy would be the sole lawful government.” Clive Staples “C.S.” Lewis, English Author, “The Weight of Glory”. *Freedom of speech does not negate the CONSEQUENCES of one's speech. For example, if a child berates his father, obviously, he or she ought to be punished for that sinful deed. A genuine king will permit his subjects to criticize his actions in a constructive manner, as long as they refrain from deliberate insults, which is a criminal offence (see Chapter 12). Of course, the best advisor to any monarch is his spiritual master, as defined in Chapter 19 (ideally, the most holy and wise member of the Holy Priesthood within the kingdom), so the need for him to require advice from anyone other than his guru would be scarce, at least in regards to matters of morality, which is the secure foundation of society.

[@little_flitter]

​@✝️Reverend Dr. Thomas🌱 that's a whole lotta words, not really any sense made though. Funny how you put fascism and socialism in the same category, despite them being ideologically opposed to one another. Christians are weird man... fascism bad! But let's put 1 family above all the rest and pretend they are chosen by God. As a brit, it doesn't work. It just protects nonces like Andrew.

[@neildepressedtyson540]

I feel like whenever Destiny defends someone on the far right, he is doing it because he acts the same way. I feel like if you could see Destiny's arguments he has said these things to Melina many times, and has used the fact that she's set him off to justify why we can't be sure that Crowder's wife didn't set him off.

[@lucy_haze]

Very good video and very good showing on Kidology's side. Looking forward to your conversation with her.

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

Good and bad are RELATIVE. 😉 Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱

[@moki1999]

The 'that's a very stupid thing to say' was the highlight of my week, she's brilliant 😂

[@lettersnstuff]

I think Kid has some pretty bad takes, I disagree with her on a lot of points. but. I’ve been waiting a long time for someone to just tell Destiny he’s being stupid. and that counts for a lot in my book.

[@lettersnstuff]

I don’t think Steven is a nazi. however. in this video, he’s arguing like a nazi. he’s being intentionally obtuse to force a reframing of the conversation more convenient to him. the whole of the situation is inconvenient for his stance, but, he can, by breaking it down, present aspects of the situation in ways that are more easily argued. seen uhhh, more than one nazi do this.

[@LinguiniP]

I don't get how Destiny didn't just flip flop opinions. Yet he banned someone for saying such. I dunno man. It's just funny

[@U311.61]

It's funny because you're incapable of critical thought. Queue: absent response or ddg comment.

[@keropi193]

Destiny sounds like he's a trash partner honestly. There are conservatives that are shaking their head at Crowder's behavior. Idk why its so hard for Destiny to understand.

[@lotanowo]

Because the point is that he needs to take a stance that will generate content, and that's the stance he's taking. It's not about the empathy, he's autistic so he doesn't have any, it's simply to make a debate out of it.

[@matthewgiroux9590]

​@@lotanowobeing autistic myself, I do take offense to being assumed as unempathetic. That is a myth, autistic people are capable of empathy. Destiny is just a psychopath.

[@lotanowo]

@@matthewgiroux9590 is that what they taught you to say?

[@matthewgiroux9590]

@@lotanowo no one taught to say anything, it's what I know.

[@alansnyder9]

Destiny: "Its bad to make assumptions on a 30 sec video." Also Destiny: "Im gonna go on Modern Day Debates and argue that Crowder is innocent based on a 30 sec video."

[@hallo-mt5tx]

you missed his entire point, he will argue that a 30 sec clip isnt proof for anything outside of those 30 seconds but to people who function like this, they assume that him telling them they shouldnt make assumptions is like saying that their assumptions are wrong, so they assume that hes saying crowder did nothing wrong

[@alansnyder9]

@hal lo Destiny's whole position is "Dont make assumptions", but then makes ALL these assumptions the other way to possibly explain Crowder's behavior. Cant have it both ways.

[@hallo-mt5tx]

@@alansnyder9 hes not making assumptions, hes giving out possible explanations "a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof" thats the definition from google, hes not saying that any of these possible explanations are true or certain to have happened, hes just saying its possible

[@alansnyder9]

@hal lo I don't think people think assumptions are true on their face. It's funny you mention possible explanations, because that's what I would define assumptions as. If I assume someone murdered their wife because maybe they cheated on him, that's a possible explanation without proof.

[@jackorlove4055]

​@@hallo-mt5tx seems like the line between "possible explanation" and "assumption" is pretty razer thin in this case 😳

[@tph2010]

Man, Destiny really is a psycho

[@Observette]

This situation has really made me see Destiny in a whole new light.

[@U311.61]

Then you saw him in the wrong light to begin with.

[@InfiniteDeckhand]

@@U311.61 Nah, lol.

[@mechanomics2649]

@@InfiniteDeckhand Yeah, lol He's been weird about women for a long time.

[@little_flitter]

Notice how everyone who destiny disagrees with gets characterised as insane / crazy aswell :/

[@JamesEmery6]

Why is your discord link always invalid? lol

[@billieeisenhower406]

I want a mural of that art of destiny floating around in space, its so funny

[@wonderfulwonderful8543]

I remember the episode when Destiny said "It's Saulin Time" & Goodmanned all over the stream. Definitely one of the streamer moments of all time.

[@trololkhil9868]

I'm a bit of a lurker at this point but felt I should chip in because this video is very "interesting", as are the various conclusions people are reaching. I'm not sure the AH vs JD point you made was that great. The evidence was very clear when it came to the mutual abuse, where it was not very clear/weak was when it came to the physical abuse claims.However, the important part was that AH admitted to that on tape (that JD retreats), in this defamation against alleged rape/physical abuse. So the jury believed JD was abusive/defamatory, but they didn't believe he was physically abusive. The point remains that prior to this lawsuit everyone believed JD was the sole abuser in that relationship and it eventually transpired AH framed him with recordings and lies in interviews with malicious intent etc. This situation can be reminiscent to some people of exactly that leaked AH video where she recorded him banging the kitchen doors to prove his abuse etc.. Your points on the "watch it" could arguably be countered by the existence of said claims already that would be hotly contested by crowder. I.e. if this is not the first time she accused him of this, the "watch it" reply makes sense because it may be an argument/fight they have already had and gone over where s crowder is disputing her narrative. Your reply of "what do you mean?" would be applicable to a situation where the argument is "new". The other interesting thing which i'm not sure anybody mentioned as to why crowder might have answered her suggestion of getting a lift with "is that a threat"? Is if I remember correctly, she said "who do you want me to call?" This is a very generic statement and could also include the police. Perhaps she has made threats like this in the past (to contact the police not just friends who hate him etc) and crowder knows of this behaviour already? Otherwise i would expect that question to be more pointed "can i call my mom, friend, guy friend's name to drive me there etc?" and also a much more amenable S crowder answer since she is not taking his car; Having said that after analysing the video, they are clearly in toxic relationship where Crowder's verbal abuse is put on display. Based on the body language from Hillary, there is a very high likelihood she abused her physically as well (slap level likely, but nothing that would scream at me like high stakes mental or sexual abuse, at least not from this video).

[@AlphaCentCom]

How does Destiny hate Vaish for anything?

[@aerithgrowsflowers]

Cool story

[@hallo-mt5tx]

destiny is just saying that steven crowder being abusive in a 30 sec clip isnt proof of a pattern of abusive behaviour, which is the picture his wife wants to paint he really just needs to accept that acting like a pos to your partner like this can be categorized as abusive, regardless if he thought its justified based on household chore agreements or whatever idk if he hesitates to use the word "abusive" because people on twitter overuse it and call everything abusive or, some wild speculation, hes defending himself because he does or did similar things in relationships, so he doesnt want to call his own actions abusive by proxy, so he just says "this is just what happens in toxic relationships" or something

[@mechanomics2649]

Hesitating to call it abuse just because some people on twitter may or may not overuse it is a cop out.

[@frapseddatsht]

So in addition to being stupid on purpose, he's also being cowardly on purpose. Got it. Another Destiny win.

[@hallo-mt5tx]

@@frapseddatsht you probably just hate destiny and anyone who isnt approaching things in a partisan team sports mentality idk how else you could possibly get that out of it

[@frapseddatsht]

@@hallo-mt5tx you probably just love destiny and anyone who isnt approaching things in a partisan pro destiny mentality idk how else you could possibly have this position

[@hallo-mt5tx]

@@frapseddatsht you just proved my point

[@alledzebu1975]

Algo

[@ReverendDr.Thomas]

leftism: Otherwise known as “progressivism” and even more inaccurately as “liberalism”, leftism is a term originating from the French Revolution of 1789, in reference to the political faction that opposed the French (so-called) king. However, the term is currently used in common discourse to describe those criminals who actively support (or at least tacitly condone) a host of OBJECTIVELY-WICKED ideologies and practices that contravene dharma, such as non-monarchical governances and corrupt economic systems (particularly socialism, communism, fascism, and liberal democracies), egalitarianism, feminism, perverse sexuality (especially homosexuality, bestiality, and transvestism), multiculturalism, and the illegitimate abortion of innocent, defenceless, unborn children. Cf. “dharma”. In the past decade or two (of this treatise being composed), the mass media, especially the motion picture industry and television production companies, has been aggressively promoting all the above CRIMINAL ideologies and practices, helping to expedite the destruction of human civilization. Recently, large corporations have jumped on the leftist bandwagon (so to speak), in order to profit. As explicated in Chapter 11 of this “A Final Instruction Sheet for Humanity”, the state of being of any particular human (or any other animal, for that matter) is due entirely to his or her genetic sequencing and his or her conditioning. Therefore, the explosion of the leftist/liberal mentality in recent decades, particularly in Western countries, has been caused by poor breeding strategies overtaking the more conservative tradition of mate-selection of previous centuries (and indeed, millennia). In other words, due to the fact that criminal behaviour (especially the deviant sexual acts mentioned above) has become increasingly more tolerated, condoned, and even GLORIFIED in most countries, there has been a proliferation of corrupt genetic codes within the wider human population. According to genealogists, for (almost) the entire history of humanity, most women have successfully reproduced, whilst a far far smaller percentage of males have bequeathed their genetic sequence to proceeding generations. Due to the gradual phasing-out of polygamous marriages in even the most conservative societies, as well as the eradication of poverty in most every country, more and more men (as well as women) have been producing offspring. Thus, the human genome has rapidly become adulterated by inferior genetic material (that is, DNA from truly pathetic, uxorious beta-males, bisexuals, and even homosexual couples who engage surrogate mothers or sperm donors in order to conceive children - something of a rare occurrence in previous centuries/millennia). For centuries, breeders of elite animals such as horses, cattle, and dogs, have known that selecting the finest examples of a breed of animal will result in offspring with desirable characteristics. For example, present day thoroughbred horses boast a pedigree of the best-available horses from the seventeenth century. Such breeders are willing to pay enormous sums of money merely to hire the fastest stallions on earth in order for them to mate with their mares. In the case of we humans, women have traditionally chosen the most competent and masculine men with whom to bear children, and in general, have totally eschewed those males who displayed effeminate traits, and who showed themselves incapable of properly supporting a nuclear family. Unfortunately, due to rapid moral decay over the past few decades, Western women have become extremely sexually promiscuous, resulting in a multiplication of unwanted progeny (and, of course, an escalation of abortions). Boys born to single mothers often lack proper male roles models and invariably become feminized, unable (and often unwilling) to continue a strong lineage of progenitors. The solution to this problem is simply to ensure that society adheres to the principles of DHARMA (see the Glossary definition of that term, as well as Chapter 12). Unsurprisingly, the majority of leftists find it difficult to accept the fact that their criminal mentality is largely inherited (and of course, they are unwilling to acknowledge the blatantly-obvious fact that their ideologies and practices are intrinsically sinful, wicked, evil and immoral in the first place!). It seems the consensus amongst leftist “intellectuals” is that every human mental trait is due entirely to one’s environmental conditioning and social milieu, rather than as a consequence of BOTH one’s genetic sequence and one’s life-long conditioning - a fundamentally-flawed assertion that cannot be scientifically supported. I would not be surprised if the typical leftist would believe that, if the parents of the twentieth century communist tyrant, Joseph Stalin, and the parents of the Divine Incarnation, Lord Jesus Christ, had somehow crossed the time barrier, and exchanged their baby boys shortly after their birth, that Stalin would have grown to become a Prophet for God, whilst Christ would have become a murderous, left-wing dictator! This term was very reluctantly used in the chapter on feminism. I say “reluctantly” because it is unlikely that the term will perdure for many decades longer. This is simple deductive logic, since, as clearly demonstrated in certain chapters in “F.I.S.H”, human civilization cannot survive with such leftist practices and ideologies in place. If you happen to be reading this Holy Scripture a century or more after its conception, you will probably be residing in a nation (as opposed to a country) ruled by a monarch, following the implosion of post-modern, decadent societies. So, either the term “leftism” will eventually become redundant and obsolete, or else, human civilization will devolve into a decadent, diseased state of existence similar to that of the prehistoric era, when the peoples of the world resided in caves or shacks, subsisting on whatever food can be sourced from the surrounding bushland. I trust that you who are reading these wise words will endeavour to influence your social circles to adhere to right-leaning ideologies and practices, such as (above all) monarchical governance, an entirely free-market economy, sexual purity, veganism, and all other virtuous principles. Fear not, for God is with you! P.S. As a general rule, it seems (at least anecdotally) that the farther left-leaning is a person, the more physically (and of course, psychologically) UGLY is that person. Unfortunately, that does not seem to prevent leftists from propagating their mutant genes.🤡 N.B. In order to clarify the notion of inheritability, it is not being claimed that an adharmic (far-left) couple will INVARIABLY produce leftist children, but that it is more PROBABLE that they will do so, considering their genetic sequence and the environmental conditioning they are bound to impart to their children, just as two parents with a certain physiological disorder are more likely to generate offspring with that specific disease. In this regards, it is recommended to study introductory texts on epigenetics. 🧬 In my particular case, I was raised by a staunch communist, and so was indoctrinated to believe that communism was the best course of action for a just society. Indeed, as a teenager, I even volunteered in the election campaign of a socialist politician, who eventually became the Premiere of the state of Western Australia. However, after studying dharma, I came to learn that I was misled by my father in this regard, and that the only system of governance that is dharmic (legitimate) is a divinely-sanctioned monarchy.

[@micmack1006]

I’ll play destiny defense. I think it’s very fair to point out that there’s a difference between saying Crowder acted abusive in the clip versus Crowder is abusive. You can recognize the abuse happening, however to make a absolute claim person being abusive, I think entails more than one reported instance. Now don’t get me wrong. I think Crowder is a piece of shit and I would be very surprised if he isn’t in fact, abusive and we don’t see a lot more instances of abuse coming up. However, the time to make the claim of that Crowder is abusive, would be once we have multiple instances reported. To make absolute claims based off of a single clip feels like it leads us down pretty dangerous and irresponsible paths. Again, I totally recognize that Crowder holds views that I think would make him more inclined to be abusive but if we are engaging with this with charity, I honestly don’t think you can make the claim until you have significantly more evidence. I also really don’t see the issue with just saying that Crowder was acting abusive (which is destiny’s position) vs Crowder is abusive (the position people want him to have)

[@InfiniteDeckhand]

Problem is, if you know anything about psychology, then you should know that if a person acts like that once, they will act like that again. What we were able to see from the leaked video recordings was not just a mere and brief lapse of judgment from Crowder, it was a tirade. I'm not even a psychologist, but even I could see that Crowder displayed several signs of some form of narcissistic disorder.

[@micmack1006]

@@InfiniteDeckhand then there should be multiple instances that we can use to create a pattern that then we can call abusive. Look, it’s honestly not that big of a deal and I think both sides are blowing it way out of proportion in the end destiny is just saying he is acting abusive he probably is abusive, whereas he want him to say he is acting abusive, and he is abusive

[@micmack1006]

@@InfiniteDeckhand like I really don’t think we lose anything just by saying that he was acting abusive rather than that he is abusive. And quite frankly we on the left do sometimes have a bad habit of taking clips and running a bit wild with them. No, I don’t think that we are doing that in this case, but it is some thing that I would like us all to be more wary of.

[@Leinja]

@@InfiniteDeckhand Ffs, you don't diagnose people after watching some 3 minute video, wtf :D

[@InfiniteDeckhand]

@@Leinja Well, I just did. What're you gonna do about it?

[@tayo17923]

Sunday you're smarter than this.. destiny is 100% willing to call Crowder an abuser... he's just not jumping to that conclusion based on the edited clips that have been released..it's like he's the only one without the "burn the witch!!" mentality

[@PresidentSunday]

If I'm smarter than this, perhaps I'm not doing what you think I'm doing.

[@Caleb-il7om]

Imagine thinking calling Crowder an abuser is 'jumping to a conclusion'. Libs are fucking stupid as fuck sometimes

[@InfiniteDeckhand]

''destiny is 100% willing to call Crowder an abuser... he's just not jumping to that conclusion based on the edited clips that have been released'' So he won't call him an abuser. Got it.

[@tayo17923]

@@InfiniteDeckhand yes because he doesn't believe the clips that have been released warrant that YET...this whole thing is just him not jumping to the conclusion that he is a DEFINITE abuser based on the little we saw...what is wrong with that??

[@billieeisenhower406]

​@@tayo17923 Why are you defending crowder