가입하기 로그인
번역의 전당
최신 번역 영상
번역해 주세요
번역자 포럼
하이라이트
갤러리
최근 본 동영상
지금 로그인하여 원하는
갤러리에 가입해 보세요!

로그인 가입하기
누날 문의
@2019Noonal
patent pending technology

약관보기
개인정보 처리방침

Hate Speech Doesn't Exist
조회수 144회 · 11개월 전
번역자 : 클로이
저장
하이라이트 제작
해외 보수 유튜버 영상
갤러리 참여



표현의자유>>>>>>나만 불편해??

다음 동영상
자동 재생
Hate Speech Doesn't Exist
해외 보수 유튜버 영상
조회수 144회 · 11개월 전
Socialism Makes People Selfish
Which is better: socialism or capitalism? Does one make people kinder and more caring, while the other makes people greedy and more selfish? In this video, Dennis Prager explains the moral differences between socialism and capitalism, and why anyone who wants a kind and generous society must support one and oppose the other. Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2ylo1Yt Joining PragerU is free! Sign up now to get all our videos as soon as they're released. http://prageru.com/signup Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips. iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/29SgPaX JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2c8vsff Script: In the contemporary world, it’s taken as a given that capitalism, with its free market and profit motive, is based on selfishness and produces selfishness. Socialism is based on selflessness and produces selflessness. Well, the opposite is true. Whatever its intentions, socialism produces far more selfish individuals and a far more selfish society than a free-market economy does. And once this widespread selfishness catches on, it is almost impossible to undo it. Here's an illustration: In 2010 the United States President, Barack Obama, addressed a large audience of college students. At one point in his speech, he announced that young people will now be able to remain on their parents' health insurance plan until age 26. I don't ever recall hearing a louder, more thunderous, or more sustained applause than I did then. Had the president announced that a cure for cancer had been discovered, it is highly doubtful that the applause would have been as loud or as long. But what were they so happy about? To be told that you can now remain dependent on your parents until age 26 should strike a young person as demeaning, not liberating. Throughout American history and, for that matter, all of Western history, the great goal of young people was to become a mature adult – beginning with being independent of Mom and Dad. Socialism and the welfare state destroy this aspiration. In various European countries and now increasingly in the US, it is becoming common for young people to live with their parents well into their 30s and not infrequently beyond. And why not? In the welfare state, taking care of yourself is no longer a virtue. Why? Because the government will take care of you. Therefore: Socialism enables -- and as a result produces -- people whose preoccupations become more and more self-centered: How many benefits will I receive from the government? Will the government pay for my education? Will the government pay for my health care? What is the youngest age at which I can retire? How much paid vacation time can I get? How many days can I call in sick and still get paid? How many weeks of paid paternity or maternity leave am I entitled to? The list gets longer with every election of a liberal or progressive or left-wing party. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/socialism-makes-people-selfish
Does Free Speech Offend You?
Should offensive speech be banned? Where should we, as a society, draw the line where permitted speech is on one side, and forbidden speech is on the other? Should we even have that line? And should free speech be limited by things like trigger warnings and punishments for microaggressions? Greg Lukianoff, president of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, answers these questions and more. Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2ylo1Yt Joining PragerU is free! Sign up now to get all our videos as soon as they're released. http://prageru.com/signup Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips. iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/29SgPaX JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2c8vsff Script: Freedom of speech. The ability to express yourself. It's a cherished idea -- as well it should be. Most of us who live in liberal Western democracies think of it as a basic human right. People have fought and died for it. But now we may be in danger of losing it. The threat is not coming from without -- from external enemies -- but from within. A generation is being raised not to believe in freedom OF speech, but rather that they should have freedom FROM speech -- from speech they dislike. This is a threat to both pluralism and democracy itself. We see this in Europe where "sensitivity-based" censorship attempts to ban anything deemed hateful or even just hurtful, and to ban criticism of religion, especially Islam. But the United States, despite its strong Constitutional protections in the Bill of Rights is far from immune from the rising trend of suppression of speech, or what is sometimes called political correctness. This is especially true at America's colleges and universities, the place where our future leaders are educated and where you'd expect speech to be the most free. Highly restrictive speech codes are now the norm on campuses, not the exception. According to a study by my organization, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education -- FIRE -- 54% of public universities and 59% of private universities impose politically correct speech codes on their students. And thanks to recent Department of Education guidelines 100% of colleges may adopt speech codes in the coming years. How bad is it? At a public campus in California on Constitution Day in 2013, a student who also happens to be a decorated military veteran was told he could not hand out copies of the Constitution to his fellow students. The objection from the university was not ideological; it was out of control bureaucracy imposing limits on speech. That same day another college student in that same state was told he could not protest NSA surveillance outside of a tiny "free speech zone," an area that comprised only 1.37% of the campus. Months later, college students in Hawaii were told both they could not hand out the constitution to their fellow students and that they could not protest NSA policies outside the school's free speech zone! FIRE took these colleges to court, but the that fact we had to shows you how bad it has become. Recently, students and sympathetic faculty have joined forces to exclude campus speakers whose opinions they dislike. At FIRE we call this "disinvitation season" although the season lasts all year round. Since 2009 there has been a major uptick in the push by students and faculty to get speakers they dislike disinvited. These speakers have included former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; the Somali-born feminist and critic of Islam, Ayaan Hirsi Ali; and the director of the International Monetary Fund, Christine Lagarde. And that's only the obvious part of the disinvitation problem. Few conservative speakers are invited to speak at colleges lest they have to be "disinivited" later. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/does-free-speech-offend-you
Why Obamacare Doesn't Work As Promised
President Obama made many promises to the American people regarding health care reform — but the Affordable Care Act was destined to fail. Why? Lanhee Chen of the Hoover Institute explains why government-run health care is not the answer. Never miss a new video. Join PragerU for free: https://www.prageru.com/join
The Left Ruins Everything
From the Boy Scouts to literature, from the arts to universities: the left ruins everything it touches. Dennis Prager explains. Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h To view the script, sources, quiz, and study guides, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/the-left-ruins-everything VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com Get PragerU bonus content for free! https://www.prageru.com/bonus-content Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! SHOP! Love PragerU? Now you can wear PragerU merchandise! Visit our store today! https://shop.prageru.com/ JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/2aozfkP JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2y9 Script: If what I am about to tell you is true, almost everything we most treasure – freedom, beauty, reason, the family, economic well-being, and even goodness – is in jeopardy. Who or what poses this threat? The answer is the most powerful ideology of the last hundred years: leftism. Not liberalism; leftism – or, if you prefer, “progressivism.” Leftism destroys everything it touches. Here are a just a few examples: 1. The universities Perhaps the most obvious example – one that many liberals acknowledge – is the left’s near destruction of most universities as places of learning. In the words of Harvard professor Steven Pinker – an atheist and a liberal – because of the left, “universities are becoming laughing stocks of intolerance.” At almost every university – and now high schools and even elementary schools – students are taught to shut down – not debate – those who differ with them. And to rely on feelings rather than reason. 2. The arts Throughout history, the primary purpose of art was to elevate people – through beauty, artistic excellence, and emotional depth. To the left, the primary purpose of art, sculpture, and music is to shock. That’s why so much contemporary art is meaningless, and involves the scatological, meaning urine and feces. Yes, urine and feces. To give one of countless examples, in 2016, the Guggenheim Museum in New York featured a pure-gold working toilet, which visitors were invited to use. The name of the exhibit was “America" – so one could literally relieve oneself on America. 3. Literature The English department at the University of Pennsylvania replaced the portrait of the greatest English-language writer who ever lived, William Shakespeare, with a picture of a black lesbian poet. Why? Because he was a white European male. Leftist professors have replaced the pursuit of excellence with the pursuit of diversity. 4. Late-night television In America, late-night television shows were completely apolitical. The hosts believed their role was to entertain viewers and offer them relief and laughter after a difficult day. No longer. You cannot watch late-night television if you just want to be entertained. Late-night TV is now left-night TV. 5. Religion The left has ruined much of mainstream Protestantism and Catholicism, and non-Orthodox Judaism, which are now little more than left-wing organizations with religious symbols. In many churches and synagogues, one is more likely to hear the clergy talk about political issues than about any other subject, including even the Bible. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/the-left-ruins-everything
You Can't Fix Other People, But You Can Fix Yourself
Want a better life? Want to make the world a better place? You can, when you take responsibility and start bettering yourself. Best-selling author and clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson explains how incremental daily changes can lead to a better life and ultimately a more harmonious world. This video was made possible thanks to the generous support of Dr. Bob.
Illegal Immigration: It's About Power
Historically, Democrats supported strong borders because they knew American workers could never compete with illegal immigrants. Now, they regularly support “open borders.” So why the drastic change? Tucker Carlson, host of Tucker Carlson Tonight, explains. Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h Get PragerU bonus content for free! https://www.prageru.com/bonus-content Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips. iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! SHOP! Love PragerU? Now you can wear PragerU merchandise! Visit our store today! https://shop.prageru.com/ JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/2aozfkP JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2y9 Script: I recently watched a group of protestors, most of them young, denouncing President Donald Trump’s immigration policies. They were waving Mexican flags and shouting: “¡Si, se puede!”—"Yes, we can!” This is now the rallying cry of the open-borders left, but it wasn’t always. In fact, I wondered if a single person at the protest knew where it came from. The slogan first became famous fifty years ago, thanks to Cesar Chavez. He was the founder of the United Farm Workers union. When Chavez said “Si, se puede,” he meant something very different: “Yes, we can… seal the borders.” Cesar Chavez hated illegal immigration. He was Hispanic, obviously, and definitely on the left, but he fought to keep illegal Mexican immigrants out of this country. He understood that peasants from Latin America will always work for less than Americans will. That’s why employers prefer them. Chavez knew that. “As long as we have a poor country bordering California,” he once explained, “it’s going to be very difficult to win strikes.” In 1969, Chavez led a march down the center of California to protest the hiring of illegal immigrant produce pickers. Marching alongside him was Democratic Senator Walter Mondale, and the Rev. Ralph Abernathy, the longtime aide to Martin Luther King. Ten years later, Chavez dispatched armed union members into the desert to assault Mexican nationals who were trying to sneak across the border. Chavez’s men beat immigrants with chains and whips made of barbed wire. Illegal aliens who dared to work as scabs had their houses fire-bombed and their cars burned. Chavez wasn’t embarrassed about any of this. He bragged about it. No matter. Chavez remains a progressive hero. President Obama declared his birthday a commemorative federal holiday. It’s an official day off in half a dozen states. There’s a college named after him, and dozens of public schools. Cesar Chavez’s life is a reminder of how much the left has changed—and how quickly. Until recently, most Democrats agreed with Chavez. They opposed unchecked immigration because they knew it hurt American workers. And they were right. One study by a Harvard economist examined the effects of the mass migration of Cuban refugees to this country in 1980—the so-called Mariel boatlift. He found that American workers in Miami with a high school education saw their wages fall by more than thirty percent after the refugees arrived. If you believe in supply and demand, this is not surprising. After the fall of Saigon in 1975, Democratic Governor Jerry Brown opposed letting Vietnamese refugees into California on the grounds that the state already had enough poor people. As he put it at the time, "There is something a little strange about saying, 'Let's bring in 500,000 more people' when we can't take care of the one million Californians out of work.” First term Senator Joe Biden of Delaware agreed; he introduced federal legislation to curb the arrival of the Vietnamese. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/illegal-immigration-its-about-power
Who Does the Media Most Want to Silence?
In the mainstream media, women on the left are almost always portrayed as paragons of compassion and virtue. But when it comes to conservative women, it’s a different story. Why is this? Heather Higgins, chairman of Independent Women's Forum and CEO of Independent Women's Voice, explains the reasons behind the double standard.  For more information on Independent Women's Forum visit IWF.org Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h To view the script, sources, quiz, and study guides, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/who-does-the-media-most-want-to-silence VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com Get PragerU bonus content for free! https://www.prageru.com/bonus-content Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! SHOP! Love PragerU? Now you can wear PragerU merchandise! Visit our store today! https://shop.prageru.com/ JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/2aozfkP JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2y9 Script: Who's the first woman appointed to the Supreme Court? My guess is that most Americans would answer: Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She’s so famous now that she is often referred to just by her initials—RBG. Elevated to the high court by President Bill Clinton in 1993, the left-leaning Justice Ginsburg was the subject of not one, but two movies in 2018 alone. But she isn’t the first female Supreme Court justice. She’s the second. The first doesn’t have a movie named after her. That’s because Sandra Day O’Connor was appointed by a Republican president, Ronald Reagan. We hear a lot about “the year of the woman,” “the women’s march,” and “the war against women.” But if the major media—the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, CBS and others—were more interested in accuracy than advocacy, it would be that they are promoting “the year of leftist woman” or “the leftist women’s march.” The major media like to pretend that all women think alike and that conservative women are just the exception that proves the rule. But according to a 2018 Pew Research study, about a third of women are Democrats; a little less than a third are Republican; and a little more than a third are independents. So if there are all these conservative women around, how does the media make it seem like they barely exist? They use three strategies. The first is Omission: If you don’t see something, you don’t have to deal with it. Open up a glossy magazine. Every liberal woman is glamorized. Stylishly dressed, beautifully photographed, their personal stories are almost always an inspirational version of Joan of Arc: they have overcome overwhelming obstacles to make the world a more compassionate and tolerant place. Glamour magazine recognized eleven Democrat women among their 2018 Women of the Year. No Republican made the cut. First Lady Michelle Obama was on the cover of Vogue three times. First Lady and former fashion model Melania Trump? So far, not once. Every now and again, the major media will do a story about a female conservative to “balance things out.” But, let’s be honest, it’s not balance—it’s tokenism. The second strategy the media uses to diminish conservative women is Mocking: Making fun of a woman’s appearance discounts what she says. You would think the major media would resist this kind of objectification. But they don’t. Not if the target is a conservative woman. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, and Kellyanne Conway, the first woman to run a winning presidential campaign, are routinely belittled for their hair, their eye makeup, or their weight. Their significant accomplishments, in contrast, are rarely acknowledged. Why? Because the media doesn’t like their boss. And it treats women who work for him as traitors to their sex. The third strategy the media uses to demean conservative women is Labeling: Using stereotypes precludes there being a valid reason for conservative women to hold the positions they do. The major media simply can’t accept that conservatives have serious and important reasons for their beliefs. So they have to come up with answers to explain this seeming anomaly to themselves: these women must be racist or self-hating or just weak-minded. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/who-does-the-media-most-want-to-silence
PragerU v. YouTube
Free speech is in jeopardy. Big Tech behemoths like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter are putting their thumbs on the free speech scale, “restricting” conservative content they don’t like. PragerU is fighting back with a lawsuit against YouTube and its parent company, Google. The real winner (or loser) will be the American public. In this video, Attorney Eric George, who is representing PragerU, lays out our case. Be the jury. Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h To view the script, sources, quiz, and study guides, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/prageru-v-youtube VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com SHOP! Love PragerU? Now you can wear PragerU merchandise! Visit our store today! https://shop.prageru.com/ Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/2aozfkP JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2y9 Script: The most important lawsuit in America right now—and perhaps the free world—is Prager University v. YouTube. You might consider this a grandiose statement, especially since I’m the lead attorney for PragerU. I assure you, it’s not. That’s because this case is about the most fundamental freedom Americans have: freedom of speech, as enunciated in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. All our freedoms—the very concept of freedom—springs from this right. Lose it, and we’re no longer free—not as individuals, and not as a nation. I’m not willing to accept that. PragerU doesn’t accept that. And you shouldn’t, either. Okay, so how did we get into this situation? A little background. PragerU is what is called a 501(c)(3)—a non-profit educational media company. It’s known primarily for its five-minute videos. In 2016, viewers began to notice that certain PragerU videos were no longer available. YouTube had placed them on its “restricted” list, which prevents the videos from playing on computers using content filters to screen out violence and pornography. PragerU assumed this was simply a case of “bad algorithms.” But YouTube said no—each “restricted” video had been reviewed by a walking, talking human. The list included such diverse titles as “Are the Police Racist?” by Heather Mac Donald, “Israel’s Legal Founding” by Alan Dershowitz, and even a video on the Ten Commandments by Dennis Prager. YouTube deemed each one unsuitable for young people, treating these videos the same as they would, say, for ones containing pornography or excessive violence. Keep in mind, this is PragerU we’re talking about—as Main Street as you can get! And that, ultimately, turns out to be the issue. PragerU’s center-right content—many of their videos, by the way, have no political theme at all—offends YouTube’s sensibilities. In other words, the videos aren’t being restricted to protect young people from inappropriate content; they’re being restricted to protect young people from ideas YouTube disagrees with. We didn’t want to sue. We tried to reach an accommodation. But when YouTube wouldn’t take the “offending” videos off their restricted list—there are now 100 on that list—we had no other option. YouTube was infringing on our right to free speech. We filed in federal court in late 2017, and thereafter in California state court. Wait a second, you might say—YouTube, which is owned by Google, is a private company. Can’t they do anything they want? The answer is: Yes…and no. Yes, if they are a publisher. No, if they are a public forum. So what’s the difference? This gets right to the nub of the matter. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/prageru-v-youtube
Interview: Jordan Peterson and Dennis Prager at the 2019 PragerU summit
Dennis Prager interviews Jordan Peterson at the 2019 PragerU summit. Never miss a PragerU video - join for free today at PragerU.com/join
Capitalism vs. Socialism
Decades after capitalism seemed to have triumphed over socialism, politicians are once again arguing about the merits and drawbacks of these opposing economic systems. Why are we still having this debate? Andy Puzder, former CEO of the parent company of Hardee's and Carl's Jr., explains the misconceptions that keep the debate alive. Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h Check out Andy Puzder's book 'The Capitalist Comeback: The Trump Boom and the Left's Plot to Stop It": https://amzn.to/2UbEf0V To view the script, sources, quiz, and study guides, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/capitalism-vs-socialism VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com Get PragerU bonus content for free! https://www.prageru.com/bonus-content Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! SHOP! Love PragerU? Now you can wear PragerU merchandise! Visit our store today! https://shop.prageru.com/ JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/2aozfkP JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2y9 Script: Capitalism versus socialism. We can sum up each economic system in one line: Capitalism is based on human greed. Socialism is based on human need. Right? No. Wrong. So wrong, it’s exactly backwards. And I’ll prove it to you. Been on Amazon lately? Each of the thousands of products Amazon offers represents the work of people who believe they have something you want or need. If they’re right, they prosper. If they’re wrong, they don’t. That’s how the free market works. It encourages people to improve their lives by satisfying the needs of others. No one starts a business making a thing or providing a service for themselves. They start a business to make things or provide services for others. I speak from personal experience. When I was the CEO of the company that owns Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s restaurant chains, we spent millions of dollars every year trying to determine what customers wanted. If our customers didn’t like something, we changed it—and fast, because if we didn’t, our competitors would (pun intended) eat us for lunch. The consumer—that’s you—has the ultimate power. In effect, you vote with every dollar you spend. In a socialist economy, the government has the ultimate power. It decides what you get from a limited supply it decides should exist. Instead of millions of people making millions of decisions about what they want, a few people—government elites—decide what people should have and how much they should pay for it. Not surprisingly, they always get it wrong. Have you ever noticed that late-stage socialist failures always run out of essential items like toilet paper? Of course, this isn’t a problem for those who have the right connections with the right people. Those chosen few get whatever they want. But everyone else is out of luck. Venezuela, once the richest country in South America, is the most recent example of socialism driving a prosperous country into an economic ditch. Maybe you think it’s an unfair example. I’m not sure why, but okay. We’ll ignore the fact that leftist activists celebrated it as a great socialist success—right up until it wasn’t. But what about Western European countries? Don't they have socialist economies? People seem pretty happy there. Why can’t we have what they have—free health care, free college, stronger unions? Good question. And the answer may surprise you. There are no socialist countries in Western Europe. Most are just as capitalist as the United States. The only difference—and it’s a big one—is that they offer more government benefits than the U.S. does. We can argue about the costs of these benefits and the point at which they reduce individual initiative, thus doing more harm than good. Scandinavians have been debating those questions for years. But only a free-market capitalist economy can produce the wealth necessary to sustain all of the supposedly “free stuff” Europeans enjoy. To get the “free stuff,” after all, you have to create enough wealth to generate enough tax revenue to pay for everything the government gives away. Without capitalism, you’re Venezuela. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/capitalism-vs-socialism
The Left Wants to Keep Racism Alive
"If you are not a person of color, and millions of people of color...are saying a thing or person is racist, it's really not your place to say it isn't." -MSNBC 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ In America, there's a card more valuable than any card from Visa or American Express. What is it? How can you get one? Candace Owens answers these questions and explains why the Left continually invokes racism.
Why Trump Won
Were you shocked at the results of the 2016 American presidential election? Most people were, but Stephen Harper was not one of them. Here, the former Prime Minister of Canada explains the trends that foreshadowed Trump’s victory and left many political elites looking wildly out of touch. Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h Get PragerU bonus content for free! https://www.prageru.com/bonus-content Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips. iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! SHOP! Love PragerU? Now you can wear PragerU merchandise! Visit our store today! https://shop.prageru.com/ JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/2aozfkP JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2y9 Script: I was elected to the Parliament of Canada seven times—three times as Prime Minister. I did not expect Donald Trump to be elected President of the United States. But unlike most observers, I did think it was at least possible. Why? Because I sensed, as Mr. Trump surely did, that the political landscape had shifted. The underlying issue is this: Over the last few decades, thanks to globalization, a billion people—mostly in the emerging markets of Asia—have lifted themselves out of poverty. This, of course, is a good thing. Yet, in many Western countries, the incomes of working people have stagnated or even declined over the same period. In short, many Americans voted for Donald Trump because the global economy has not been working for them. We can pretend that this is a false perception. We can keep trying to convince people that they misunderstand their own lives. Or we can try to understand what they are saying and offer some solutions. I prefer the latter approach. Let me begin with this: In our contemporary world, there are, as British journalist David Goodhart describes it, those who can live “Anywhere,” and those who live “Somewhere.” Imagine you work for an international bank, computer company, or consulting firm. You can wake up in New York, London, or Singapore and feel at home. Your work is not threatened by import competition or technological dislocation. You vocally support all international trade agreements and high levels of immigration. You are one of those who can live Anywhere. There are a lot of those people. But there are a lot more completely unlike them. Let’s say you’re a factory worker, a small-businessperson, or in retail sales. Your work has been disrupted by outsourcing, cheap imports and technological change. Your children attend the local schools and your aging parents live nearby. Your social life is connected to a local church, sports team, or community group. If things go badly at your company, or if policy choices by politicians turn out to be wrong, you can’t just shift your life to somewhere else. Like it or not, you depend on the economic policies of your national or state government. When it doesn’t come through for you, you’re not happy. And when it ignores you entirely, you get angry. It’s easy for Anywheres to dismiss these concerns. But the Anywheres’ faith in global solutions and multi-national political bodies is founded more on fantasy than fact. The fact is, the critical functions of laws and regulations and monetary and fiscal stability, among other things, are provided by nations, not global institutions. The nation, with all its flaws, is a concrete reality. The “global community” is little more than a concept. Yet it is the Anywheres, with their faith in globalization—not the Somewheres—who have dominated the politics of almost every advanced country. That is, until now. This sea-change is not limited to the United States. The same dynamics—“Anywhere” elites versus “Somewhere” populists—is playing out all across the Western world. These populists, as I’ve tried to show, are not the ignorant and misguided “deplorables” depicted in mainstream media. They are our family, friends, and neighbors. The populists represent, by definition, the interests of ordinary people. And, in a democratic system, the people are supposed to be our customers. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/why-trump-won
"CRY BABY"Candace Owens Owned Democrats (AOC Weeps) for using Black Americans as 'PROPS'
BABY"Candace Owens Owned Democrats (AOC Weeps) for using Black Americans as 'PROPS PLEASE SUBSCRIBE AND SHARE OUR VIDEOS
The Least Free Place in America
Question: Which American institution—one that prides itself on being open, democratic, and diverse—punishes its members severely for offering unpopular opinions, while it offers them a very narrow, limited worldview? Answer: Universities. Once the vanguard of open debate and free speech, colleges have become a place where alternative thinking goes to die. Students who speak out on behalf of traditional American ideals, unfortunately, are often silenced by college administrators. Learn how the college campus, a place that should be an intellectual melting pot, has turned into anything but, violating the rights of those who have alternate opinions. Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2ylo1Yt Lecturer: Greg Lukianoff, President at The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. His book, "Unlearning Liberty," is available on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Unlearning-Liberty-Campus-Censorship-American/dp/1594036357/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1390934290&sr=1-1&keywords=unlearning+liberty Joining PragerU is free! Sign up now to get all our videos as soon as they're released. http://prageru.com/signup Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips. iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/29SgPaX JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2c8vsff Script: How important is free speech on a college campus? Here’s what the Supreme Court said in 1957 in the landmark case Sweezy v. New Hampshire: “Teachers and students must always remain free to inquire ...otherwise, our civilization will stagnate and die.” Inspiring words. And true... which is why what’s happening at American colleges and universities is so disturbing. A study conducted by the Association of American Colleges and Universities in 2010, revealed that only 30 percent of college seniors strongly agreed with the question; “Is it safe to hold unpopular positions on this campus?” Worse, the study found that students’ confidence that that they can hold unpopular opinions declines from freshman to senior year. How can it be that at the place where speech should be the most free, the university, young people fear merely holding -- to say nothing of actually expressing -- unpopular opinions? The reason is that for decades now, students have been sent a clear message from their schools: express dissenting opinions, violate political correctness, or even just criticize the administration at your peril. After working for 12 years at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, I have seen hundreds of examples of students in peril. Here are just a few: At Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, a student employee was found guilty of “racial harassment” for publicly reading a book that some of his fellow employees found offensive. The book was Notre Dame vs. the Klan and it was available in the school’s library. It recounted and celebrated the defeat of the Ku Klux Klan when its members marched on Notre Dame in 1924. So what did the university find offensive? The photo on the book’s cover. At the University of Delaware, students were forced to undergo ideological reeducation as part of the university’s compulsory student orientation program. The program was described as “treatment” for students with incorrect attitudes and beliefs. Students were taught to adopt highly specific university-approved views on politics, race, sexuality, sociology, moral philosophy, and environmentalism. They were also required to attend one-on-one meetings with their resident assistants where they were compelled to answer intrusive, probing, and utterly irrelevant personal questions, such as ... “When did you discover your sexual identity?” And an increasing number of schools are trying to drive religious students off campus. Vanderbilt University, for example, has enacted a policy that forbids faith-based student groups from selecting members and leaders based on . . . their faith. As a result, 14 Christian groups have been derecognized by the university. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/least-free-place-america
There Is No Gender Wage Gap
Is there a gender wage gap? Are women paid less than men to do the same work? Christina Hoff Sommers, Resident Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, explains the data. Donate today to PragerU! http://l.prageru.com/2ylo1Yt Have you taken the pledge for school choice? Click here! http://www.schoolchoicenow.com Joining PragerU is free! Sign up now to get all our videos as soon as they're released. http://prageru.com/signup Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips. iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys Join PragerU's text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful. VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com FOLLOW us! Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/ PragerU is on Snapchat! JOIN PragerFORCE! For Students: http://l.prageru.com/29SgPaX JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2c8vsff Script: If, for the same work, women make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes, why don’t businesses hire only women? Wages are the biggest expense for most businesses. So, hiring only women would reduce costs by nearly a quarter – and that would go right to the bottom line. Don’t businesses want to be profitable? Or, are they just really bad at math? Well, actually, it’s the feminists, celebrities and politicians spreading this wage gap myth who have the math problem. Here’s why: The 77-cents-on-the-dollar statistic is calculated by dividing the median earnings of all women working full-time by the median earnings of all men working full-time. In other words, if the average income of all men is, say, 40,000 dollars a year, and the average annual income of all women is, say, 30,800 dollars, that would mean that women earn 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. 30,800 divided by 40,000 equals .77. But these calculations don’t reveal a gender wage injustice because it doesn’t take into account occupation, position, education or hours worked per week. Even a study by the American Association of University Women, a feminist organization, shows that the actual wage gap shrinks to only 6.6 cents when you factor in different choices men and women make. And the key word here is “choice.” The small wage gap that does exist has nothing to do with paying women less, let alone with sexism; it has to do with differences in individual career choices that men and women make. In 2009, the U.S. Department of Labor released a paper that examined more than 50 peer-reviewed studies and concluded that the oft-cited 23 percent wage gap “may be almost entirely the result of individual choices being made by both male and female workers.” Well, let’s look at some of those choices. Georgetown University compiled a list of the five best-paying college majors, and the percentage of men or women majoring in those fields: Number 1 best-paying major: Petroleum Engineering: 87% male Number 2: Pharmaceutical Sciences: 48% male 3: Mathematics and Computer Science: 67% male 4: Aerospace Engineering: 88% male 5: Chemical Engineering: 72% male Notice that women out-represent men in only one of the five top-paying majors – by only a few percentage points. Now consider the same study’s list of the five worst paying college majors: Number 1: Counseling and Psychology: 74% female Number 2: Early Childhood Education: 97% female 3: Theology and Religious Vocations: 66% male 4: Human Services and Community Organization: 81% female 5: Social Work: 88% female Here, it’s the women who lead in all but one category. Even within the same profession, men and women make different career choices that impact how much money they make. Take nursing, where male nurses on the whole earn 18% more than female nurses. The reason? Male nurses gravitate to the best-paying nursing specialties, they work longer hours, and disproportionately find jobs in cities with the highest compensation. For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/videos/there-no-gender-wage-gap