slug.com slug.com

2 0

USA Turning Point is starting be of some concern

So on Tuesday, the FB-account of Candace Owens went live with yet another Campus Clash, where Charlie Kirk and Candace started with their usual ranting on the likes of Jussie Smollett, AOC, Hillary Clinton and co., victor vs victim mentality... so far so good...

Then however it went to the Q&A, and this is where I'm afraid I have to once again voice some critique of TPUSA.
While you can often see SJWs, BLMs and other snowflakes going full retard on these events, on this particular campus pretty much all of the students were very respectful and polite. I can honestly not say the same thing about USA Turning Point this week, and found their conduct quite disappointing.

So at around 1:10:30, one the the guys voices his concern about the populist nationalist movement and the Trump administration, and the response of Anna Pauline could not have been more ignorant:

"So from my understanding, after WW2, we as the U.S. actually took a big L on the fact that [actually basically economically] funded Europe's restoration "

The same student later tries to follow up on what she even meant by that, and if she was referring to the Marshall plan, with her response being:

"I was reading a book on geopolitics [...] how basically the United States, in renegotiating our trade agreement with the rest of Europe, essentially helped them reestablish their economy. By the way, the U.S does not owe the UN the responsibility for paying a large majority of their own defense programmes and budgets. [...] Fun yourself, fund you own armies. It's not our own responsibility to be protecting these countries."

First of all... congratulation to Anna Pauline for reading a book, but she obviously doesn't even understand what the Marshall Plan was - so it was either not a good book, or she is just not capable of understanding it...
The Marshall Plan of 1948 was an initiative to aid Western Europe, but let's not pretend as if the U.S. has taken an "L" here... the plan benefited the American economy just as much, if not even more, as West Germany and Europe. I mean, it was a plan constructed by the Americans... why does she think that the U.S. proposed the plan, if they would not have benefited from it themselves.

The same logic obviously goes for interventions and military funding, but Turning Point USA is pretending here as if every deal and every union is bad and the U.S. always getting screwed... and therefore we have to break up all bonds and go back to being full nationalist.
The USA itself is a UNION OF STATES and was built on the idea of the melting pot... most of today's issues can only be solved on a global scale.

Then Candace Owens once again states how the U.S. were losing money because of the Paris Agreement... I'm sorry but, what?
The Paris agreement was not legally binding, it's not even planned to start until 2020... how was the U.S. losing money??

I've also seen some posts of Candace Owens on social media where she was talking about the U.S. "not going to bail out Europe like in WW2" in regards to the Brexit. I'm sorry, but one sided statements like that just make you look like a total jerk. This entire Q&A comes across as if Europe was just a burden for the U.S.

Disappointing... you can see the video on Facebook here:
[facebook.com]

modestMillennial 6 Mar 29
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

2 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Listened to your recommended part of the Clash at University of South Carolina at around 1:10:00, and a couple of other segments. Would first like to say, wish I had access to this event, other than FaceFuss. Hopefully, a free youtube version will be made available soon. Some globally important topics were being brought up, and it was a great forum to change some hearts and minds, without animousity.

Yes, OUCH on the Candace Owens response to the student's question of, why did U.S. pull out of Paris Accord, when multi-nationalism is crumbling. She did indeed seem to be speaking,(reacting), as if the U.S financial commitment was already in play. And right before that, Charlie Kirk had stated, pretty clearly, that one of the reasons, the U.S. had pulled out is, because the contractual commitment to provide the financial aid, was a bad deal for America. Think our PotUS had mentioned an amount of final cost to U.S. could be 2.5 trillion from our economy...would have to look that up.

Another Candace, REACTION (it can't be termed better for me), that made me cringe, was a response she gave, to a question at around 1:16:00 in, A student had stated that, the U.N., had taken the stance, that America did owe black citizens reparations. She responds, "Did the Japanese get reparations, No they didn't! My brain sort of shut down, right after that comment, even though she wasn't finished. I was thinking, how can you expect students to listen to your point of view and maybe change their world view, when that particular fact is wrong - Japanese reparations were made to decedents of Japanese interred in camps because of WWII. *

You had stated on the Owens subject before, (and I paraphrase), that Candace Owens has tremendous potential, and that because of her meteoric rise to fame, many eyes are on her. And she needs to have more knowledge on certain subjects before sharing them as fact. Hopefully, I got in the general ball park, condensing what I understand your general view to be, on where she goes wrong. This Crash event was a horror show for her, IMO.

  • As for WWII comment, "U.S., is not going to bail out Europe, like they did in WW2!", ignorant to the extreme. As a Brit myself, we both know, that is a longer story.

In this country, because of the political agendas, of extreme left leaning professors and even teachers at grade schools, HISTORY is but a footnote in current events! Revisionist history, spread by Post- Modernists here and in Europe, and their de-constructionist agenda, has totally polluted the educational waters. The TPUS should be more moderate towards the students, it seeks to provide more balanced info to.

Terrorist organizations that have a strong anti-semitic voice in the U.N., and have admitted known supporters of terrorism sponsoring countries. And are anti-semitic...another subject. though. BUT, I about fell out of my chair, when Charlie Kirk said, IRAN was made the head, of The Womens Delegation at the U.N., ....are you effing kidding me!!!!

Anyway, that's it. My tuppence worth.

sorry last paragraph, nonsensical - meant to say, ANOTHER reason the U.S. has pulled away from the U.N., is because.....Terrorist Organizations......etc....

0

Well, they are correct on the Marshall Plan. The only real benefit that the US got out of it was not having to fight another war.

Had the US stayed in the Paris Agreement it certainly would have cost us. That was the whole point of the Paris Agreement to punish the US.

Tried to watch but I have lost my ability to tolerate spoiled punks asking really really stupid questions.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:25692
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.