Videos like this make me miss Christopher Hitchens all the more. In a world where the New York Times asks if they should call politicians on their BS, who will describe with such exquisite brutality precisely why we should despise the next religious morons to show their miserable faces? Cancer has robbed the world of the almighty hand of Hitchslap.
@clayfootz ; not that day as it's years before his diagnosis, he did how ever collapse shortly after daily show appearance after promoting hitch 22 , here he is promoting love poverty and war
i think the laughter are the people uneasy with the fact that stewart has been outmatched, silenced and completely dominated in every way, through each and every sentence, by a portly, unassuming british gentleman.
@richter75 I stopped watching after the third time in 6 months the Daily Show website showed an error for a month saying: "This video is not available in Great Britain." Quite annoying when you live in Holland. I would like to go on his show and show him a map.
On your P.S.: I heard, incredible that this should happen in your country. Friends of mine just arrived in Oslo and were quite near the explosion. They are alright, but quite shocked. Good luck over there!
@richter75 ....lol. Lets not argue over something so subjective. And yes, yes I have, maybe too often--I plan to be one tonight!! I just find it bad-ass that Hitchens would drink as much as he probably did, while on the Daily Show.
@purewilderness I believe that he went to that show just after being diagnosed with cancer, that is why he answered the question how are you doing by: it is too early to say, (yes it sounds: I have a hangover, and need some time to sober up), but then he says: to soon to say. I am not surprised he has a Johnny Walker by his side.
@Android811 Well, the guy drank and smoked himself to death. And we're all supposed to listen to his words of wisdom ? Oh yes, he also rewrote the ten commandments. Talk about arrogance, People like Hitchens thinks they are gods.
@Android811 From the ghettos to the corporations to the pristine halls of the government, we can see people whose hearts and souls are empty. Hitchens is such a person.
@Grendo147 Stewart is one of those mysteries of life i cannot understand, i never laugh. Its like watching the Ellen show when u wake up with an hangover, all im waiting for is her to show some lesbian things. Lol.
When comedians expect laughing just by laughing my stomach turns, but worse is when the audience follow up.
@richter75 You're so right. I enjoy his way of taking on the extreme right, but but as a comedian, Jon is just terrible. Strange thing is that I tolerate his terrible sense of humor purely for the content of the show.
@KryzMasta He's actually pretty damn funny doing interviews on other people's shows, its the only time I hear the crew on cable news network shows laughing
@nvieira100 As far as the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are concerned, he's a bit loopy. Concerning Mother Theresa, Gandhi and Henry Kissinger aswell as religion, he is spot on.
He was voted the worlds 5th public intellectual, incidentally. I would be curious as to what 'a bit loopy' actually constitutues, it sounds like a vague, non-committal, generic ad hominem to be honest. A meaningless statement, quite literally. If you're not going to specify what precisely you disagree with him about, you just come off like a jerk off.
@BelfastAtheist Gee I would have thought that my statement "...everything else" other than the topic of religion would have been specific enough for you, but I guess some people need to have everything spelled out for them. Sorry not enough character space on these comment boxes to take you by the hand. I suggest you listen to the clip again so you understand the "everything else" he says that I don't agree with. As for "a bit loopy", it means a bit CRAZY. U know, 1 fry short of a happy meal.
Okay..well, you seem very patronizing. I asked you to justify what you were saying, because you left it vague and meaningless. Which is precisely the same process you're following now..
Calling someone 'a bit crazy' is basically a non-sequiter. As for implying you hate his Politics, I'm afraid he has been a foreign correspondont for the 80s, one who did many great things at the time, incidentally.Act sarcastic and condescening and sneering all you like, I only asked you a question
@wovokanarchy hitchens doesn't attack people who believe in christianity or islam if that is all they do. he attacks the belief, but not the person underneath.
@detahdomo Rubbish, tell that to someone who hasn't heard Hitchen's lecture on youtube for hours and hours of ad homenim against people who believe in the Muslim faith.
@wovokanarchy he has choice words to describe believers, but the way i think you're describing it just isn't accurate. which lectures are you referring to?
@detahdomo Your right- that's why I respect and like him. He's an honest broker unlike the typical left/right partisan BS that passes for discourse in the US.
@theyasin33 See if u can find the missing link in evolution while you're at it, and don't come back empty handed. He has corrected ppl when they introduce him as conservative, even if he agrees with the conservative representatives. If you know anything of Hitchens, Conservative is not a label for him.
@raptors222222 Libertarian, contrarian, he also still have views aligned with Trotskyists. He will no longer use the word socialist since they have embraced tolerance for intolerance.
He has said that he is not really sure what he is now, but he for sure is no kind of conservatist.
@raptors222222 Nah, there is no true capitalism out there where the market can do whatever it wants. Modern Democracies with its regulated markets have given us the welfare we have in the western world. "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
@raptors222222 Well i would be equally worried in men stopped watching porn; OR stopped lying about watching porn.. We've all done that, and its perfectly natural. I would worry more about ppl who do a lousy job..
@raptors222222 Neoconservative do not believe in a free market; their sole purpose is to increase disparity. Neoconservatives are the reason we are in this financial disaster. They believe in Imperial domination and Imperial corporations. So, YES, they are that bad.
@theyasin33 I believe that you have been misinformed about what Neoconservatism is. According to Wikipedia, 'neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes.'
That does NOT sound like promoting income disparity, I believe that is called a Autocracy.
@raptors222222 But, neoconservatives is a more broad definition than that. Neoconservatives only looks after their self interest and by doing it by any means necessary.
@theyasin33 I believe the best way is corporations and government not intruding in each other. BTW, what do you have against profit, and the fact that corporations are at the center of this disaster? No... I blame the government for giving people loans that they shouldn't have had! I mean, a bank has the best indicators for which people can afford loans. The fact that the government forced those loans is a clear indication of how the politicians play off your emotions.
@raptors222222 Well my views tend to correlate with anarchist communism which puts the blame on BOTH the govt and corporations for taking advantage of innocent people who do not know any better. And trust me banks don't give a fuck about you, all they care about is making profit, so for you to put trust on them is highly ignorant. And you tend to forget the govt. WORKS for corporations so if you are going to blame the govt then you have to blame the corporations as well
@theyasin33 Banks don't care about you. Have you ever met a real banker? They're some of the nicest people you will ever meet! They know that they're putting serious risks when they invest in your business or home. So to believe that banks care ALL about their bottom line is not entirely correct, rather a corporate mentality is 'how can we provide the best service for the lowest cost?"
And how do you think corporations are 'controlling' America?
@raptors222222 Let me clarify on my prior statement. I meant to say big banks do give a fuck about you. Local/community banks do care. And it is obvious corporations control americans decisions. We gave them trillions of dollars. The richest corporations in america owns 80 percent of the money supply. So it abundantly obvious who controls the govt. Corporations and govt dont give a fuck about you..
Christopher is a example of what you get if mix above average intelligence with a scoop of lack of integrity and top it with a shitload of arrogance. A yummy dish for your typical shallow, superficial American.
@richter75 Thanks for making my point. By the way, Axel Jones is a lunatic who convinced somebody to put a microphone in front of his face because crazy has enormous entertainment value in this country. The thing that bothers me about Hitchens fans is that they are too easily impressed by intellectionalism, without caring if there is any substance to what he is saying. We have to be a little more discerning otherwise we'll vote another Bush into office.
@richter75 ...also remember that he supported an obvious moron like Bush for the longest time and happily supported the killing of over a hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's. So just because he has a strong intellect it means nothing in the light of reality. What matters in the real world is a good mind paired with integrity and it's developing integrity that's the real challenge here. Anybody can be a smartass. Hitler was smart. Cheyney was smart too...
@jst1998 You cant have watched much of what he has said about Bush, like fantastic stupid etc. The point is that he agrees with Bush on the response to 911 with the following attack on Al`Quida and their taliban helpers in Afghanistan. He also thinks the Iraq cleanup was overdue and should have been done long ago. The kurdish massacres, Iran non-provoked war, Kuwait invasion, suicide bombing sponsorate and jihad callings from the baath lunatics should be enough. Only fools think it was wrong.
@richter75 Remember that tens of thousands of innocent people died, including american soldiers. The Bush gang and Hitchens lobbied for these murders, including american soldiers. If this doesn't phase you at all then I don't know what else to say.
@richter75 this guy said the word 'intellectionalism' in a response to you below. Don't you feel like you're getting bukakked by stupidity sometimes? Look out, political science departments from every major university in the usa are scrutinizing your youtube comments haha
You are over-simplifying by ignoring fact: Hitchens supported Bush's deposing Saddam and the Bush Admin.'s efforts against the Taliban. Hitch is consistently anti-theocracy/anti-totalitarian. This is the extent of his "support" of Bush. For example, look at what Hitch says about Bush the man. And weigh the dead you mention against Saddam's crimes against the Kurds and the Taliban's crimes against the Afghanis. Hitchens's integrity can be measured, in part, by the above.
@StoneFredFlint But Hitchens doesn't seem to be bothered much about the fact that in the process of deposing Saddam, we also killed and maimed tens of thousands of innocent civilians. To me, that matters. To Hitchens this seems to be collateral damage that is happily accepted because we got our favorite bad guy. How you justify it doesn't matter, because killing innocent people can never be justified. He would realize that if somebody killed somebody close to him and calls it collateral damage.
@richter75 Putting labels on people is a useless and immature exercise. What matters is what people think, feel and do. Indifference to the slaughter of innocent people should lead to public outrage. Sadly in our sedated society, it's about as relevant as the latest boner commercial. Don't you love American culture?
@jst1998 Labels on ppl are useless only when they dont fit; nothing immature about it as long as u have it right. Slaughter of innocent ppl have not occured by western powers since the dresden bombing, yea I even take vietnam and korea in the equation here.
@jst1998 Collateral damage is part of war. Millions died in WW2, but I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks that Hitler and the Nazi Party should not have been stopped, and brought to justice.
To those Europeans and ignorant Americans who are still perplexed as to whether the United States is a republic or a democracy or whether there is confusion in the wishfull thinking that the terms are somehow overlapping, please google: "Democracy versus Republic" for a more detailed exposition of the stark differences in political terminologies. Educate YOURSELVES.
@0906peter It's like oil and water. Which is easy to explain. It just takes a bit of historical leg work, while putting aside lazy almost wishfull definitional thinking.
For some reason you don't want to accept that democracy isn't 1 definable form of government. A democracy can come in the form of a republic, like the US.
You mentioned the representatives in a republic are democratically elected. That makes it a democracy! Just not a pure democracy. It's just semantics. You define democracy as a pure democracy. I use the broader definition that includes representative democracy. Like a republic. Not oil and water.
@0906peter We are not governed by democratic elections. How we democratically elect officials is in no way a reflection on how we are actually governed by them. A representative democracy is a structure which permits your democratically elected representatives to absolutely govern by a simple majority vote or rule. That cannot happen in a republic, where rules of law predominate over the wills of any happenstance majority.
That kind of protection is present in every government of every civilized western nation. That would mean there is no democracy in the entire western world.
I still think you are using the wrong definition of democracy. Like i said, its all just about semantics. I never meant to suggest the US doesn't have minority protection. Anyway, it's been interesting, that's for sure haha.
I'm pretty tired so I'm going to bed now if you don't mind.
@0906peter Oh, no! Democracy is still replete in the western world. We learned from the corruptive mistakes of the Old World. That's why we formed a constitutional republican form of government. The world's oldest . Often derided. Never really duplicated.
You should realize the founders of the US based a lot of their writings and ideas on writings and ideas from the old world. The US declaration of Independence for instance, was partly based on the Act of Abjuration. A lot of the ideas of the American revolution originated in enlightened France. The Americans were fortunate enough to be able to create a whole new country around that time and implement all those ideas.
@0906peter The Founder's ideas of a Constututional Republic were based primarily on 17th century Enlightenment political and social philosophy. You cannot school me on this. I teach this stuff for a living - LOL!
Now.... if I just knew more about the combustible engine I'd be more well rounded.
"In common parlance a republic is a state that does not practice direct democracy but rather has a government indirectly controlled by the people. In the rest of the world this is known as representative democracy. This understanding of the term was originally developed by James Madison, and notably employed in Federalist Paper No. 10. Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy as opposed to direct democracy"
@0906peter Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. James Madison - Federalist #10. Madison feared democracy as much as monarchy. Madison was very clear on the subject. You just have to read the whole lengthy text. These are the last words on the subject.
@0906peter I don't really care how others or other nations or how other countries define their system of government or our republic. The fact will always remain this: We are a republic with rules of law and democratically elected representatives acting within the context of our legal constitution, not by majority rule, direct or representational. No where in the constitution does the word "democracy" appear. But "republic" is replete throughout. That's enough proof for me.
It's not just outside the US. Within the US people use that meaning of democracy too.
"use of the word Democracy as meaning merely the popular type of government--that is, featuring genuinely free elections by the people periodically"
"This double meaning of Democracy--a popular-type government in general, as well as a specific form of popular government--needs to be made clear in any discussion, or writing, regarding this subject, for the sake of sound understanding."
"A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy ...", from James Madison. The Federalist, Number 10, The New York Packet, 23 Nov., 1787
So a representative democracy, as apposed to a pure democracy.
And because it is democratically elected, it is a representational democracy.
That's why i quoted Madison, he explains why he wants a representational democracy (and not a direct democracy), and he wants it in the form of a republic.
@0906peter Madison never stated he wanted a democracy. Nor a direct or representational democracy. Madison wanted a representational constitutional republic whose representatives are democratically elected. How else can you elect a representative if not by a democratic majority voting procedure?
That democratic majority voting procedure makes it a democracy. The republican government form doesn't mean it's not a democracy, it just means it's not a pure democracy. Madison did state he wanted a representational democracy, in the form of a republic, and he goes on explaining how it varies from pure democracy.
Anyway I'm really off now, thanks again for replying to my comments.
@0906peter The democratic voting procedure makes it, well....... a democratic voting procedure. Self evident, I'd say. This is all well within the context of a republic. Given his apparent distaste for mere democracy, please provide proof in Fed. #10, or any other Federalist writings for that matter, that he favored a democratic over a republic form of government?
Correct. The United States is a representational constitutional republic. To call it a democracy is a disgrace, to say the least, a disservice to those who planned it and fought and died to conceive it.
@richter75 Nope, fail. The word "democracy" isn't even mentioned in the Founder's writings, other than to admonish it. Not in the Constitution nor the B. of Rights either. A republic is rule by law. Democracy is rule by majority. Our leaders are democratically elected, but only to serve under a republic, rule of law. You get an F, grasshopper. BTW: Didn't your mammy tell you the first person to name call holds the loser's the argument?
@FaganRoberts Funny to read your stupidity. Elected representatives OF the people IS A DEMOCRACY. Its a wider term than representational constitutional republic. Look up democracy before you continue to make a fool out of yourself. Here in Norway we have constitutional monarchy over parliament; still a democracy. The US is a constitutional republic; also runs under the term democracy. Lol, its funny to educate ppl with such obvious misguidings.
@richter75 Democracy is THE PROCESS by which we elect our representatives in our republic. However the laws which govern us are not based on majority will, but by rules of law, hence a republic. You are starting to learn well, my grasshopper. But name calling your teacher will limit your abilites, my Norwegian student. Insolence is NOT a becoming trait and is often the hallmark of a young mindless child. But you seem eager, so what the heck!
@FaganRoberts@FaganRoberts Haha, you still dont wanna admit anything. You dont always need majority to represent the people. Its actually rare to have majority in a representative democracy. What you stupidly talk about is direct democracy , which do not exist in full; closest is the swiss government.
Again , to say that representational constitutional republic is not democracy just show that you have no idea what you are talking about. Its a first grade fact!. Lol.
@richter75 Please conduct a simple google search: "democracy versus republic." Peruse the differences in terminolgy. Then proceed to invalidate the terms by providing evidence for your claims and assertions. I will then submit your findings to the political science departments at every major university in the USA and we can then work together to rewrite the terms according to your wishes. But...... YOU MUST have convincing evidence for your desires, or no go.
@FaganRoberts You still going at it , lol. If you read a little further you will see that the distinctions made is opposing direct democracy, not representative democracy as a term. A republic IS a representative democracy. Democracy IS a wider term. Again i ask you to look it up. if you are gonna make distinctions its between direct democracy and republic/representative democracy. Now maybe you get it..
@FaganRoberts "There are two principles that any definition of democracy includes: equality and freedom.These principles are reflected in all citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to power and the freedom of its citizens is secured by legitimized rights and liberties which are generally protected by a constitution."
@richter75. If you investigate the history of democracy you'll find it isn't particularly occupied by equality and freedom. For a quick example, less than 50% of soon to be Americans were in favour of separating from the commonwealth at the time of the revolution... very democratic no? Is our democratic system fair? We should have proportional representation... but in an attempt to sustain power, our politics in North America is still prone to represent minorities... Democracy?
@richter75 Direct Democracy is rule by majority. Fortunately, the majority does not necessarily rule in the USA, as we have a system of laws incorporated in our republic, under our constitution, which guarantees the rights of the minority which prevents, at least ideally, mob rule. This is what sustains a theory of government under a democracy. I think you wish America was one, but we are a constitutional republic. Our Founders abhored democratic mob rule.
@FaganRoberts Ill take that answer as the admittance of you being wrong about the obvious fact that representational constitutional republic IS a democracy and leave the adjectives. Direct democracy is a mob rule , representative democracy is not necessarily one, but could be without the rule of law. In practice every democracy have rule of law and protection of minorities.
Videos like this make me miss Christopher Hitchens all the more. In a world where the New York Times asks if they should call politicians on their BS, who will describe with such exquisite brutality precisely why we should despise the next religious morons to show their miserable faces? Cancer has robbed the world of the almighty hand of Hitchslap.
stevens326 15 hours ago
Getting Hitchens to smile is a greater display of accomplishment than a 10 foot trophy.
jwdogg1551 2 days ago
Such a legend :')
sparkymmilarky 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
He supported an invasian that lead to the deaths of more than a million Iraqis. His time in hell will come.
LibnanGR 1 week ago
Seems ridiculous to say RIP Christopher Hitchens, so instead, cherish his memory. We're awfully proud of him in the UK.
gaz28 3 weeks ago
Did he say that it's a mistake to think this is a war against Islam? The audio was not clear enough.
PerpetualMotion3 3 weeks ago
Is there a laughter track on this video or is the audience really so dim that it will laugh at anything and everything?
mikelheron20 3 weeks ago
@clayfootz ; not that day as it's years before his diagnosis, he did how ever collapse shortly after daily show appearance after promoting hitch 22 , here he is promoting love poverty and war
DRnab1983 1 month ago
Comment removed
clayfootz 1 month ago in playlist Christopher Hitchens
Haha ! he's pissed as a rat in this interview...brilliant ! good on ya Hitch!
nzmarc 1 month ago
@nzmarc Really? What's your evidence for that? I wish I could talk so cogently and intelligently when pissed as a rat.
mikelheron20 3 weeks ago
When else have you heard Hitchens say to an interviewer, "Excellent point."?
dragonettecooper 1 month ago 2
@dragonettecooper Numerous times actually.
richter75 1 month ago 4
@dragonettecooper Whenever the interviewer makes an excellent point - which is rare.
mikelheron20 3 weeks ago
Never Chris. Always Christopher. Well done, Hitch.
Korelterramalcaor 1 month ago 3
RIP Chris
rayban5016 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In this vid Hitchens reminds me of a child yelling cunt in a crowded room in a bit to get some attention from shock value... I suppose it worked.
icemanisdangerous 1 month ago
Comment removed
icemanisdangerous 1 month ago
Comment removed
icemanisdangerous 1 month ago
Comment removed
icemanisdangerous 1 month ago
@icemanisdangerous Aw, someone still believes in "Mother" Theresa. How endearing
belzondium 1 month ago
@belzondium What you talking about willis?
icemanisdangerous 1 month ago
RIP
ccashman5 1 month ago
i think the laughter are the people uneasy with the fact that stewart has been outmatched, silenced and completely dominated in every way, through each and every sentence, by a portly, unassuming british gentleman.
zackhanscom 1 month ago
john fuck up and let him answer dumb yank always making its not a joke you clownnnnnnnnn
Fozzeeeh 1 month ago
@Fozzeeeh That was like a word salad. Please type more coherent sentences and try again.
zzyzx0788 2 weeks ago
Jon Stewart is a much better host and interviewer now
JLJorgenson18 2 months ago
I don't think the Iraq war was unethical in any way, I just think it was a waste of money.
adamprocks761 3 months ago
@Grendo147 Actually Jon did confront him on another episode and actually held his own really well
jacenskylo 3 months ago
chris getting up like "On to the next"
ElBandit990 3 months ago
huh, first time ive ever seen a video with Hitchens where nobody got Hitchslapped
adamprocks761 4 months ago
@richter75 I stopped watching after the third time in 6 months the Daily Show website showed an error for a month saying: "This video is not available in Great Britain." Quite annoying when you live in Holland. I would like to go on his show and show him a map.
On your P.S.: I heard, incredible that this should happen in your country. Friends of mine just arrived in Oslo and were quite near the explosion. They are alright, but quite shocked. Good luck over there!
KryzMasta 6 months ago
comma
suffern63 6 months ago
This makes me want to stand up in a silent crowd and start clapping.
mattshane 6 months ago
What did he get *bleeped* for?
mattshane 6 months ago
Comment removed
purewilderness 6 months ago
@purewilderness Then you have never witnessed a drunk man...
richter75 6 months ago
@richter75 ....lol. Lets not argue over something so subjective. And yes, yes I have, maybe too often--I plan to be one tonight!! I just find it bad-ass that Hitchens would drink as much as he probably did, while on the Daily Show.
purewilderness 6 months ago
@purewilderness I believe that he went to that show just after being diagnosed with cancer, that is why he answered the question how are you doing by: it is too early to say, (yes it sounds: I have a hangover, and need some time to sober up), but then he says: to soon to say. I am not surprised he has a Johnny Walker by his side.
aleksandra718 5 months ago
Comment removed
tvilhena 6 months ago
@purewilderness
FYI
According to Hitchens, this was held a few hours after being released from ER hospital and instructed to consult a oncologist for throat cancer.
tvilhena 6 months ago
Somehow I get the idea that Hitchens isn't very popular in India. haha
warmongerpro 8 months ago
i wanted to punch stewart in the mouth. shut the FUCK UP! let him finish the point.
halflifeproductionz 8 months ago
Hitchens has the profile of the Sociopath.
tfrenn 9 months ago
@tfrenn yeah, as seen from a fucked up society!
If you put one sane man in a room with a thousand insane men, the majority would think he's the strange one.
Android811 8 months ago
@Android811 Well, the guy drank and smoked himself to death. And we're all supposed to listen to his words of wisdom ? Oh yes, he also rewrote the ten commandments. Talk about arrogance, People like Hitchens thinks they are gods.
tfrenn 8 months ago
@tfrenn hitchens is more credible than god. At least we have evidence that he existed.
Android811 8 months ago
@Android811 From the ghettos to the corporations to the pristine halls of the government, we can see people whose hearts and souls are empty. Hitchens is such a person.
tfrenn 8 months ago
@tfrenn You must be a person of faith.
Only people of faith claim to see things that can't be seen and know things that can't be known.
People who make such claims should not be trusted.
Android811 8 months ago
@tfrenn And who are you with the x-ray tosso-vision? Looking into your heart and soul I can only see golf balls.
jomper 5 months ago
@jomper Yes, and they are Titleist golf balls.
tfrenn 5 months ago
@tfrenn .Thomas jefferson rewrote the bible in that way he deemed fit lol.Hitchens would slap you for that comment.Think they are god? well....
laudrup90 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I had sexual intercourse with a BBQ chicken.
ExNihiloJimmy 10 months ago
This type of audience needs a laugh track; they are never quite sure when they are supposed to be laughing or being serious.
sybo59 10 months ago
I respect Hitchens, but, what the hell is with that hair?
DeaconBlood 10 months ago
@DeaconBlood
LedDaveZeppelin 9 months ago
@richter75 Yeah. Despite the lighthearted atmosphere that the Daily Show gives off it's corporate is apparently a real bitch about copyright claims.
CommanderC4 10 months ago
@Grendo147 Stewart is one of those mysteries of life i cannot understand, i never laugh. Its like watching the Ellen show when u wake up with an hangover, all im waiting for is her to show some lesbian things. Lol.
When comedians expect laughing just by laughing my stomach turns, but worse is when the audience follow up.
Crazy humans.
richter75 10 months ago 7
@richter75 You're so right. I enjoy his way of taking on the extreme right, but but as a comedian, Jon is just terrible. Strange thing is that I tolerate his terrible sense of humor purely for the content of the show.
KryzMasta 6 months ago
@KryzMasta He's actually pretty damn funny doing interviews on other people's shows, its the only time I hear the crew on cable news network shows laughing
zzyzx0788 2 weeks ago
I didn't want this to end.
BobDylan1201 10 months ago 3
Fuck I love Hitchens.
Nerd042 11 months ago
I've been looking for this interview forever. I honestly can't tell which one of them is funnier.
CommanderC4 11 months ago
Brilliant how quick-witted Hitchens is even when he's drunk :D
lagerbaer 11 months ago 4
@lagerbaer He's always drunk xD
LiBlub1 11 months ago
Half-naked crook :)
lagerbaer 11 months ago
i wish he'd come on now. it'd be much more intellectual.
fanofthemusic1090 1 year ago
Hitchens has it right regarding religion. As far as everything else is concerned, he's a bit loopy.
nvieira100 1 year ago
@nvieira100 As far as the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are concerned, he's a bit loopy. Concerning Mother Theresa, Gandhi and Henry Kissinger aswell as religion, he is spot on.
Averagegamer100 1 year ago
@nvieira100
A bit loopy..?
Hm, someone has studied Political science..
He was voted the worlds 5th public intellectual, incidentally. I would be curious as to what 'a bit loopy' actually constitutues, it sounds like a vague, non-committal, generic ad hominem to be honest. A meaningless statement, quite literally. If you're not going to specify what precisely you disagree with him about, you just come off like a jerk off.
BelfastAtheist 11 months ago 2
@BelfastAtheist Gee I would have thought that my statement "...everything else" other than the topic of religion would have been specific enough for you, but I guess some people need to have everything spelled out for them. Sorry not enough character space on these comment boxes to take you by the hand. I suggest you listen to the clip again so you understand the "everything else" he says that I don't agree with. As for "a bit loopy", it means a bit CRAZY. U know, 1 fry short of a happy meal.
nvieira100 10 months ago
@nvieira100
Okay..well, you seem very patronizing. I asked you to justify what you were saying, because you left it vague and meaningless. Which is precisely the same process you're following now..
Calling someone 'a bit crazy' is basically a non-sequiter. As for implying you hate his Politics, I'm afraid he has been a foreign correspondont for the 80s, one who did many great things at the time, incidentally.Act sarcastic and condescening and sneering all you like, I only asked you a question
BelfastAtheist 10 months ago
hitchens is wisest man alive
Thastorcyclone 1 year ago
LMAO 7:42
a1W6av1e8 1 year ago
Thieving Albanian dwarf. OH MY. lol
lashkaretoiba 1 year ago
"Thieving Albanian dwarf." Epic.
ubernaffa 1 year ago 51
amazing interview
LowleyUK 1 year ago
I wonder if he attacked a person because of his belief in Judaism Hitchens would be allowed to spew his filth?
wovokanarchy 1 year ago
@wovokanarchy hitchens doesn't attack people who believe in christianity or islam if that is all they do. he attacks the belief, but not the person underneath.
detahdomo 5 months ago
@detahdomo Rubbish, tell that to someone who hasn't heard Hitchen's lecture on youtube for hours and hours of ad homenim against people who believe in the Muslim faith.
wovokanarchy 5 months ago
@wovokanarchy he has choice words to describe believers, but the way i think you're describing it just isn't accurate. which lectures are you referring to?
detahdomo 5 months ago
@detahdomo Come on don't play coy. Invest some time and go to Hitchen's youtube page.
wovokanarchy 5 months ago
@detahdomo Your right- that's why I respect and like him. He's an honest broker unlike the typical left/right partisan BS that passes for discourse in the US.
Beavis1144 4 months ago
Very subtle Monty Python reference about summarising Proust
cbak12sg 1 year ago
Why does he have two cups? (Like I need to ask)
pupil8 1 year ago
well, he is never boring
tmonster 1 year ago
hitchens = awesome.
76sagi 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I hope Christopher has a speedy recovery.
jwtfst 1 year ago
I wish Christopher a speedy recovery.
jwtfst 1 year ago
I wish Christopher a speedy recovery .
jwtfst 1 year ago
Christopher Hitches NEEDS to stick to evolution. His political views are atrocious..
theyasin33 1 year ago
@theyasin33 What, being a Libertarian? He came to that conclusion after he realized that Socialism doesn't work. Read the Wikipedia article on him.
raptors222222 1 year ago
@raptors222222 Actually Hitchens is a neo-conservative, which is drastically different than a Libertarian..
theyasin33 1 year ago
@theyasin33 Lol, he is no kind of conservative or neo-conservative; try again.
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 LOL, you need to try again. He admits it in MANY interviews, so yea you need to try again..
theyasin33 1 year ago
@theyasin33 Admits? He himself says " I am no kind of conservative". This is not debatable pal. Don't bother to try again.
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 I will find you the link..
theyasin33 1 year ago
@theyasin33 See if u can find the missing link in evolution while you're at it, and don't come back empty handed. He has corrected ppl when they introduce him as conservative, even if he agrees with the conservative representatives. If you know anything of Hitchens, Conservative is not a label for him.
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 Then why does his notions correlate with many neoconservatives?
theyasin33 1 year ago
Comment removed
theyasin33 1 year ago
@richter75 What do you think he is? I know that he's an ex-socialist... Mr. Hitchens, you are not making this easy...
raptors222222 1 year ago
@raptors222222 Libertarian, contrarian, he also still have views aligned with Trotskyists. He will no longer use the word socialist since they have embraced tolerance for intolerance.
He has said that he is not really sure what he is now, but he for sure is no kind of conservatist.
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 correction ; Conservative.. ;)
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 lol. He likes capitalism for its rate of progression too. Nothing beats the profit motive for advancing technology right?
raptors222222 1 year ago
@raptors222222 Nah, there is no true capitalism out there where the market can do whatever it wants. Modern Democracies with its regulated markets have given us the welfare we have in the western world. "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
W. Churchill
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 That is, if the regulatory bodies stop looking at porn ;).
Google: SEC Porn Problem: Officials Surfing Sites During Financial Crisis, Report Finds @ ABC News
BTW, I know no Laissez-Fair economies exist. But, still. You can't deny the power of the market.
raptors222222 1 year ago
@raptors222222 Well i would be equally worried in men stopped watching porn; OR stopped lying about watching porn.. We've all done that, and its perfectly natural. I would worry more about ppl who do a lousy job..
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 Which the SEC did...
raptors222222 1 year ago
@theyasin33 OK, neoconservative. Is that so bad then? To believe in a free market state and a willing to take decisive action?
raptors222222 1 year ago
@raptors222222 Neoconservative do not believe in a free market; their sole purpose is to increase disparity. Neoconservatives are the reason we are in this financial disaster. They believe in Imperial domination and Imperial corporations. So, YES, they are that bad.
theyasin33 1 year ago
@theyasin33 I believe that you have been misinformed about what Neoconservatism is. According to Wikipedia, 'neoconservatives are generally comfortable with a welfare state; and, while rhetorically supportive of free markets, they are willing to interfere for overriding social purposes.'
That does NOT sound like promoting income disparity, I believe that is called a Autocracy.
raptors222222 1 year ago
@raptors222222 But, neoconservatives is a more broad definition than that. Neoconservatives only looks after their self interest and by doing it by any means necessary.
theyasin33 1 year ago
@theyasin33 Just to end the conservative label u put forth watch?v=at8kdzJdrjs&feature=related
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 HUH?!
theyasin33 1 year ago
@theyasin33 I believe the best way is corporations and government not intruding in each other. BTW, what do you have against profit, and the fact that corporations are at the center of this disaster? No... I blame the government for giving people loans that they shouldn't have had! I mean, a bank has the best indicators for which people can afford loans. The fact that the government forced those loans is a clear indication of how the politicians play off your emotions.
raptors222222 1 year ago
@raptors222222 Well my views tend to correlate with anarchist communism which puts the blame on BOTH the govt and corporations for taking advantage of innocent people who do not know any better. And trust me banks don't give a fuck about you, all they care about is making profit, so for you to put trust on them is highly ignorant. And you tend to forget the govt. WORKS for corporations so if you are going to blame the govt then you have to blame the corporations as well
theyasin33 1 year ago
@theyasin33 Banks don't care about you. Have you ever met a real banker? They're some of the nicest people you will ever meet! They know that they're putting serious risks when they invest in your business or home. So to believe that banks care ALL about their bottom line is not entirely correct, rather a corporate mentality is 'how can we provide the best service for the lowest cost?"
And how do you think corporations are 'controlling' America?
raptors222222 1 year ago
@raptors222222 Let me clarify on my prior statement. I meant to say big banks do give a fuck about you. Local/community banks do care. And it is obvious corporations control americans decisions. We gave them trillions of dollars. The richest corporations in america owns 80 percent of the money supply. So it abundantly obvious who controls the govt. Corporations and govt dont give a fuck about you..
theyasin33 1 year ago
Gandhi was a naked fundamentalist ,, haha
adesochade 1 year ago
Christopher Hitchens obviously is lured into a trap of the devil. a Fool.
just0408 1 year ago
Christopher is a example of what you get if mix above average intelligence with a scoop of lack of integrity and top it with a shitload of arrogance. A yummy dish for your typical shallow, superficial American.
jst1998 1 year ago
@jst1998 Ye, we need more middle aged alex jones fans to tell us the truth.. Lol.
Average american is more as the average world citizen than any other country.
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 Thanks for making my point. By the way, Axel Jones is a lunatic who convinced somebody to put a microphone in front of his face because crazy has enormous entertainment value in this country. The thing that bothers me about Hitchens fans is that they are too easily impressed by intellectionalism, without caring if there is any substance to what he is saying. We have to be a little more discerning otherwise we'll vote another Bush into office.
jst1998 1 year ago
@richter75 ...also remember that he supported an obvious moron like Bush for the longest time and happily supported the killing of over a hundred thousand innocent Iraqi's. So just because he has a strong intellect it means nothing in the light of reality. What matters in the real world is a good mind paired with integrity and it's developing integrity that's the real challenge here. Anybody can be a smartass. Hitler was smart. Cheyney was smart too...
jst1998 1 year ago
@jst1998 You cant have watched much of what he has said about Bush, like fantastic stupid etc. The point is that he agrees with Bush on the response to 911 with the following attack on Al`Quida and their taliban helpers in Afghanistan. He also thinks the Iraq cleanup was overdue and should have been done long ago. The kurdish massacres, Iran non-provoked war, Kuwait invasion, suicide bombing sponsorate and jihad callings from the baath lunatics should be enough. Only fools think it was wrong.
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 Remember that tens of thousands of innocent people died, including american soldiers. The Bush gang and Hitchens lobbied for these murders, including american soldiers. If this doesn't phase you at all then I don't know what else to say.
jst1998 1 year ago
Comment removed
iamthe3rd 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@richter75 this guy said the word 'intellectionalism' in a response to you below. Don't you feel like you're getting bukakked by stupidity sometimes? Look out, political science departments from every major university in the usa are scrutinizing your youtube comments haha
iamthe3rd 1 year ago
You are over-simplifying by ignoring fact: Hitchens supported Bush's deposing Saddam and the Bush Admin.'s efforts against the Taliban. Hitch is consistently anti-theocracy/anti-totalitarian. This is the extent of his "support" of Bush. For example, look at what Hitch says about Bush the man. And weigh the dead you mention against Saddam's crimes against the Kurds and the Taliban's crimes against the Afghanis. Hitchens's integrity can be measured, in part, by the above.
StoneFredFlint 1 year ago 25
@StoneFredFlint But Hitchens doesn't seem to be bothered much about the fact that in the process of deposing Saddam, we also killed and maimed tens of thousands of innocent civilians. To me, that matters. To Hitchens this seems to be collateral damage that is happily accepted because we got our favorite bad guy. How you justify it doesn't matter, because killing innocent people can never be justified. He would realize that if somebody killed somebody close to him and calls it collateral damage.
jst1998 1 year ago 2
@jst1998 Pacifists deserve no respect and get no respect, they have no regard for freedom.
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 Putting labels on people is a useless and immature exercise. What matters is what people think, feel and do. Indifference to the slaughter of innocent people should lead to public outrage. Sadly in our sedated society, it's about as relevant as the latest boner commercial. Don't you love American culture?
jst1998 1 year ago
@jst1998 Labels on ppl are useless only when they dont fit; nothing immature about it as long as u have it right. Slaughter of innocent ppl have not occured by western powers since the dresden bombing, yea I even take vietnam and korea in the equation here.
You have no clue, its obvious im wasting time.
richter75 1 year ago
@jst1998 Not to forget Hiroshima and Nagasaki..
richter75 1 year ago
@jst1998 Collateral damage is part of war. Millions died in WW2, but I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks that Hitler and the Nazi Party should not have been stopped, and brought to justice.
PCrePs 1 year ago
hes probably that drunk because jon steward is so boring
mageservant 1 year ago
Its funny because this guys smarter than everyone even while hes drink
awsomewinecone 1 year ago
@awsomewinecone
LoL! So was Hunter S Thompson.
BlackAcid1313 1 year ago
To those Europeans and ignorant Americans who are still perplexed as to whether the United States is a republic or a democracy or whether there is confusion in the wishfull thinking that the terms are somehow overlapping, please google: "Democracy versus Republic" for a more detailed exposition of the stark differences in political terminologies. Educate YOURSELVES.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
The way you seem to suggest the words republic and democracy conflict or can't overlap doesn't make sense. It's like saying whiskey vs alcohol.
Whiskey ís alcohol, like a constitutional republic is a representative democracy.
It's a strange comparison but it's hard to explain.
0906peter 1 year ago
@0906peter It's like oil and water. Which is easy to explain. It just takes a bit of historical leg work, while putting aside lazy almost wishfull definitional thinking.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
It's not wishful thinking xD.
For some reason you don't want to accept that democracy isn't 1 definable form of government. A democracy can come in the form of a republic, like the US.
You mentioned the representatives in a republic are democratically elected. That makes it a democracy! Just not a pure democracy. It's just semantics. You define democracy as a pure democracy. I use the broader definition that includes representative democracy. Like a republic. Not oil and water.
0906peter 1 year ago
@0906peter We are not governed by democratic elections. How we democratically elect officials is in no way a reflection on how we are actually governed by them. A representative democracy is a structure which permits your democratically elected representatives to absolutely govern by a simple majority vote or rule. That cannot happen in a republic, where rules of law predominate over the wills of any happenstance majority.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
That kind of protection is present in every government of every civilized western nation. That would mean there is no democracy in the entire western world.
I still think you are using the wrong definition of democracy. Like i said, its all just about semantics. I never meant to suggest the US doesn't have minority protection. Anyway, it's been interesting, that's for sure haha.
I'm pretty tired so I'm going to bed now if you don't mind.
Thanks for replying to my comments :)
0906peter 1 year ago
@0906peter Oh, no! Democracy is still replete in the western world. We learned from the corruptive mistakes of the Old World. That's why we formed a constitutional republican form of government. The world's oldest . Often derided. Never really duplicated.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
You should realize the founders of the US based a lot of their writings and ideas on writings and ideas from the old world. The US declaration of Independence for instance, was partly based on the Act of Abjuration. A lot of the ideas of the American revolution originated in enlightened France. The Americans were fortunate enough to be able to create a whole new country around that time and implement all those ideas.
0906peter 1 year ago
@0906peter The Founder's ideas of a Constututional Republic were based primarily on 17th century Enlightenment political and social philosophy. You cannot school me on this. I teach this stuff for a living - LOL!
Now.... if I just knew more about the combustible engine I'd be more well rounded.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
That's true, and that political and social philosophy originated in France.
I really hope you don't teach your students a republic can't be a democracy btw.
A Republic can be a democracy ( ie: USA or France ) and a Constitutional Monarchy can be a democracy ( IE: Australia and Canada )
0906peter 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
Just found this:
"In common parlance a republic is a state that does not practice direct democracy but rather has a government indirectly controlled by the people. In the rest of the world this is known as representative democracy. This understanding of the term was originally developed by James Madison, and notably employed in Federalist Paper No. 10. Madison defined republic in terms of representative democracy as opposed to direct democracy"
Hope that clears it up for you.
0906peter 1 year ago
@0906peter Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. James Madison - Federalist #10. Madison feared democracy as much as monarchy. Madison was very clear on the subject. You just have to read the whole lengthy text. These are the last words on the subject.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
Countries highlighted in blue are designated "electoral democracies" in Freedom House's 2010 survey Freedom in the World
The United States is on the list.
I can't link in this comment, but if you want I can send you the survey, so you can see for yourself.
0906peter 1 year ago
@0906peter I don't really care how others or other nations or how other countries define their system of government or our republic. The fact will always remain this: We are a republic with rules of law and democratically elected representatives acting within the context of our legal constitution, not by majority rule, direct or representational. No where in the constitution does the word "democracy" appear. But "republic" is replete throughout. That's enough proof for me.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
It's not just outside the US. Within the US people use that meaning of democracy too.
"use of the word Democracy as meaning merely the popular type of government--that is, featuring genuinely free elections by the people periodically"
"This double meaning of Democracy--a popular-type government in general, as well as a specific form of popular government--needs to be made clear in any discussion, or writing, regarding this subject, for the sake of sound understanding."
0906peter 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
Webster:
A Republic is a state which does not have a Monarch at its head.
A Democracy is a state where the government consists of representatives elected by the people.
-
Therefore:
The US is both a Republic and a Democracy;
The UK is a Democracy, but not a Republic;
North Korea is a Republic, but not a Democracy;
Saudi Arabia is neither a Republic, nor a Democracy.
0906peter 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
Can you name one western nation that has absolute majority rule like what you describe? All of them have minority protection similar to the US.
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting for what's dinner. Wolves rule!"
That's not democracy, that's pure democracy.
Representational democracy can have laws to protect the sheep.
Why can't you understand your definition of what a democracy can mean isn't correct?
Republican minority protection does NOT mean it's not a democracy!
0906peter 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
"A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy ...", from James Madison. The Federalist, Number 10, The New York Packet, 23 Nov., 1787
So a representative democracy, as apposed to a pure democracy.
0906peter 1 year ago
@0906peter Madison & I say a representational republic (democratically elected, of course) You say a representational democracy.
Hmmmm....... Who shall I agree with?
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
I also say a representational republic.
And because it is democratically elected, it is a representational democracy.
That's why i quoted Madison, he explains why he wants a representational democracy (and not a direct democracy), and he wants it in the form of a republic.
0906peter 1 year ago
@0906peter Madison never stated he wanted a democracy. Nor a direct or representational democracy. Madison wanted a representational constitutional republic whose representatives are democratically elected. How else can you elect a representative if not by a democratic majority voting procedure?
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts
That democratic majority voting procedure makes it a democracy. The republican government form doesn't mean it's not a democracy, it just means it's not a pure democracy. Madison did state he wanted a representational democracy, in the form of a republic, and he goes on explaining how it varies from pure democracy.
Anyway I'm really off now, thanks again for replying to my comments.
0906peter 1 year ago
@0906peter The democratic voting procedure makes it, well....... a democratic voting procedure. Self evident, I'd say. This is all well within the context of a republic. Given his apparent distaste for mere democracy, please provide proof in Fed. #10, or any other Federalist writings for that matter, that he favored a democratic over a republic form of government?
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
Thieving Albanian dwarf, i like that lol
mariek12 1 year ago
Correct. The United States is a representational constitutional republic. To call it a democracy is a disgrace, to say the least, a disservice to those who planned it and fought and died to conceive it.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts Lol, a representational constitutional republic IS a democracy you donkey..
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 Nope, fail. The word "democracy" isn't even mentioned in the Founder's writings, other than to admonish it. Not in the Constitution nor the B. of Rights either. A republic is rule by law. Democracy is rule by majority. Our leaders are democratically elected, but only to serve under a republic, rule of law. You get an F, grasshopper. BTW: Didn't your mammy tell you the first person to name call holds the loser's the argument?
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts Funny to read your stupidity. Elected representatives OF the people IS A DEMOCRACY. Its a wider term than representational constitutional republic. Look up democracy before you continue to make a fool out of yourself. Here in Norway we have constitutional monarchy over parliament; still a democracy. The US is a constitutional republic; also runs under the term democracy. Lol, its funny to educate ppl with such obvious misguidings.
Dont tell me you still wanna debate? haha
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 Democracy is THE PROCESS by which we elect our representatives in our republic. However the laws which govern us are not based on majority will, but by rules of law, hence a republic. You are starting to learn well, my grasshopper. But name calling your teacher will limit your abilites, my Norwegian student. Insolence is NOT a becoming trait and is often the hallmark of a young mindless child. But you seem eager, so what the heck!
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts @FaganRoberts Haha, you still dont wanna admit anything. You dont always need majority to represent the people. Its actually rare to have majority in a representative democracy. What you stupidly talk about is direct democracy , which do not exist in full; closest is the swiss government.
Again , to say that representational constitutional republic is not democracy just show that you have no idea what you are talking about. Its a first grade fact!. Lol.
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75 Please conduct a simple google search: "democracy versus republic." Peruse the differences in terminolgy. Then proceed to invalidate the terms by providing evidence for your claims and assertions. I will then submit your findings to the political science departments at every major university in the USA and we can then work together to rewrite the terms according to your wishes. But...... YOU MUST have convincing evidence for your desires, or no go.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts You still going at it , lol. If you read a little further you will see that the distinctions made is opposing direct democracy, not representative democracy as a term. A republic IS a representative democracy. Democracy IS a wider term. Again i ask you to look it up. if you are gonna make distinctions its between direct democracy and republic/representative democracy. Now maybe you get it..
richter75 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts "There are two principles that any definition of democracy includes: equality and freedom.These principles are reflected in all citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to power and the freedom of its citizens is secured by legitimized rights and liberties which are generally protected by a constitution."
richter75 1 year ago
@richter75. If you investigate the history of democracy you'll find it isn't particularly occupied by equality and freedom. For a quick example, less than 50% of soon to be Americans were in favour of separating from the commonwealth at the time of the revolution... very democratic no? Is our democratic system fair? We should have proportional representation... but in an attempt to sustain power, our politics in North America is still prone to represent minorities... Democracy?
IanEColeman 1 year ago
@richter75 Direct Democracy is rule by majority. Fortunately, the majority does not necessarily rule in the USA, as we have a system of laws incorporated in our republic, under our constitution, which guarantees the rights of the minority which prevents, at least ideally, mob rule. This is what sustains a theory of government under a democracy. I think you wish America was one, but we are a constitutional republic. Our Founders abhored democratic mob rule.
FaganRoberts 1 year ago
@FaganRoberts Ill take that answer as the admittance of you being wrong about the obvious fact that representational constitutional republic IS a democracy and leave the adjectives. Direct democracy is a mob rule , representative democracy is not necessarily one, but could be without the rule of law. In practice every democracy have rule of law and protection of minorities.
richter75 1 year ago