Candace Owens - logic, hypocrisy, celebrities, and politics

Mar 6, 2018
1,873
2,507
300
#1
One of my favorite you tube channels recently covered an argument by Candace Owens. It's a favorite of mine, because it challenges arguments, not ideology. They've tackled arguments from the left and the right, and do a pretty good job of it.

I don't especially like or dislike Candace Owens. I do appreciate she's there out there challenging the idea that people should think alike politically because they have a certain skin color. But at the same time, I'm not really a fan of hypocrisy, and I'm happy to see anyone called out on double standards. People should make a choice and then stand by that decision no matter the ideology in question.

For example, "let's not politicize this recent tragedy" is something said by liberals and conservatives alike whenever it actually benefits them. It's also another topic that was nicely covered by this channel. With that in mind, enjoy this argument and share your own opinion of celebrities sharing their opinion on the topic of politics.


My opinion? The best time to share your political opinion as a celebrity is when asked for it. The worst time is during a performance or acceptance speech. Outside of that, maybe just try not to talk down to or otherwise insult people who might disagree with you. Most people have the common sense to not talk about politics at work, so why do so many celebrities not have the same sensibility?
 

Cunth

Fingerlickin' Good!
May 22, 2018
2,237
5,034
385
#2
I haven’t seen a whole lot of her stuff, but when I see her speak I always get this feeling like she is a phoney. Like she’s just in it to make a buck and doesn’t really care about the things she says. That said, I think she’s pretty hot so party on
 
Jul 25, 2013
5,362
310
390
England
#3
Most people have the common sense to not talk about politics at work, so why do so many celebrities not have the same sensibility?
Lazy answer:
Because if you're rich and influential enough, you can lead an entire social media campaign for years that culminates in you becoming the president of the United States of America.

Even lazier answer:
It works, apparently.
 
Apr 25, 2009
8,517
9,897
830
Australia
#7
I like her because she tells the perpetual victims to shut the fuck up at a time when few others will, and the ensuing tantrums only prove her right. On the other hand, I think she digs in too hard on things she doesn’t fully understand, like when Rogan showed her up in the climate change discussion by just gently prodding and asking questions she couldn’t answer. She’s young though and I think will hone her skills in time.
 
Likes: Bolivar687
Nov 5, 2016
7,417
7,613
315
I don't care where (just far)
#8
I didn’t know much about her until she appeared on Joe Rogan’s Podcast. She kind of lost me throughout the course of that show. She seemed very disingenuous. I also don’t like that she basically approaches climate change as a partisan issue. I don’t understand why science is political now.

I also didn’t buy her reasoning for “becoming a conservative.” Maybe I misunderstood the story she told but it sounded to me like she had a ugly interaction with a conservative politician’s son, there was a conservative political reaction to the interaction that she thought went too far, so she became conservative. Again, that’s just how I heard it. Maybe I need to listen to it again.

I don’t want to accuse anyone of being conveniently aligned to something in a time when it is profitable to be as such, but I dunno. That seems to happen on both sides. I’m just saying that, to me, she’s not genuine and also not as smart as she seems to think she is. She got blasted pretty hard after the Rogan appearance for a couple reasons, even Joe was giving some Skeptical Hippo Eyes during the show.
 
Last edited:
Dec 13, 2016
3,985
1,639
440
#10
I also didn’t buy her reasoning for “becoming a conservative.” Maybe I misunderstood the story she told but it sounded to me like she had a ugly interaction with a conservative politician’s son, there was a conservative political reaction to the interaction that she thought went too far, so she became conservative. Again, that’s just how I heard it. Maybe I need to listen to it again.
I think it was the left's reaction to her ugly interaction and the fact that they went after the kids and tried to lock them up for something she thought was a fairly harmless crime that brought her to the right. But honestly, she reeks of bullshit. She has plenty of good points on identity politics, but she's just parroting things people smarter than her have said. She's obviously the token black woman with evil white man's thoughts in her industry...
 
Jun 13, 2014
4,025
1,003
345
USA
#11
I think she's among the many personalities who got pushed out of the left and then probably went a bit too far in the other direction. Her natural impulse is to now fall on the conservative sword like she probably thought was normal when she was used to falling on the progressive sword. There's definitely been a few times she comes across as an act, and I think the folks at Turning Point USA exploit that.

That said, there have also been times where she captured a powerful, genuine moment, like when she point blank told a group of protesters that they've never faced any real adversity in their lives. I recognize how harsh that sounds, especially not knowing the background of each individual, but it's something that probably needs to be said to a lot of that crowd. I'm so surprised that they appropriate the term "Woke," when this stuff is incessantly shouted from the highest rooftops of journalism, entertainment, and academia, and it's only when you dig deeper that you find the issues are more nuanced than pop culture makes it out to be. Despite her flaws, Candace is nevertheless an important voice in a culture that has become so grotesquely closed-minded.
 
Jan 12, 2008
2,109
164
850
#12
I haven’t seen a whole lot of her stuff, but when I see her speak I always get this feeling like she is a phoney. Like she’s just in it to make a buck and doesn’t really care about the things she says. That said, I think she’s pretty hot so party on
Yeah, she used to be a full blown SJW who also tried to kickstart a doxxing site and has never apologized or backed down on it. She is pretty smart though, she noticed there was a lack of young black attractive female conservatives which garnered her huge attention. Too me she's just an opportunist, much like an opposite Sarkesian.
 
Likes: Cunth

njr

Member
Jan 26, 2009
874
90
760
#13
The content I’ve seen of her (thankfully I’m able to see she’s not deplatformed so I can actually form my opinion) leads me to believe she argues in bad faith and plays for a team/herself rather than search for truth. As posted above Anita Sarkeesian is a good comparison of someone that argues in bad faith, Candace leans more to that style.
 
Jul 12, 2012
10,161
1,388
500
#14
While she does seem like an opportunist, the video is every bit as disingenuous as she is claimed to be. It's a very cherry picked and pedantic argument against her, and it frankly comes off as a hatchet job by butthurt crybabies who think she (and Kanye for that matter) should be "back on the democratic plantation" or whatever the fashionable phrase is now.
 
Oct 21, 2018
495
247
170
#15
I didn’t know much about her until she appeared on Joe Rogan’s Podcast. She kind of lost me throughout the course of that show. She seemed very disingenuous. I also don’t like that she basically approaches climate change as a partisan issue. I don’t understand why science is political now.
Same. Listening to her opinions on climate change during that show made my head hurt.

I suppose you have people who will claim that it's better to "live well" today and screw whatever happens to future generations. Which is at least a more honest position, even if it is also highly irresponsible.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff member
May 30, 2004
20,703
6,630
1,450
#16
I’m not really into anyone aligned with this sort of partisan provocateur role, whether left or right at this point. Candace Owens seems to be regularly dehumanized into a sock puppet by political opposition as a way to avoid addressing any substance of her arguments and the inherent power she wields if you’re using an identity politics scoring system to assess the value of her voice. That’s rather uncomfortable to me and highlights the left’s broken, racist platform and messaging at the moment, so in that sense the people who dismiss her as an empty vessel surrogate should reflect on their motives.

The climate change as partisan politics stuff has serious, consequential world-we-inhabit implications, though, and should be approached as a purely human issue with a purely empirical basis grounded in scientific rigor.

That’s one area generally reasonable conservative personalities making waves and pushing back against the dangerously credulous positions from the far left lately often lose me. There’s a strong science and evidence based argument re: erosion of social sciences into unscientific drivel, inherent racism and hypocrisy of identity politics, authoritarian extremism in any direction undermining the relative peace and prosperity of modern western culture, etc etc. Touch environmental issues and climate science though and the arguments employed often fizzle out into “fake news” and needing to discredit overwhelming consensus and preponderance of empirical evidence from the hard natural sciences without presenting the necessary supporting evidence.

As always, do your own research wherever possible, question and scrutinize everything that matters to you, and avoid credulous acceptance of whatever your “team” espouses. Find your own answers, then look at the available political parties and candidates for your best fit at any given time. Subscribing to any one person’s charismatic, appealing worldview with your brain set to autopilot is the NPC route—and that’s very much politically agnostic.
 
Oct 10, 2018
1,418
469
215
www.kickstarter.com
#18
Candance is a paid for establishment individual. Completely changes once certain people got in touch with her.

I think things like blexit and other things would work out better if it was a more grounded people person running it. Right now she treating this like being a celebrity star. Which means she can easily soon be turned on and someone may smack her back down.
 
Aug 29, 2014
2,400
394
340
#19
I used to like her in the past but she kinda just rubs me the wrong way these days when I hear her speak. She tends to come off a little too angry and excited at times. I tend to prefer more chill and jokes.
 
Jul 7, 2018
812
1,193
240
#20
She was quite clearly exposed as a hypocrite in that video. People are entitled to change their minds on things of course, but if she used that defence I wouldn't believe her, just because it would be too convenient. I would like to see her respond to it, but I doubt she will.

Has she taken part in any decent debates? By that, I mean ones where she had a decent opponent, not just speaking events where she stood on stage and annoyed a bunch of whiny SJW types in the audience. Can anyone link to anything?
 
Feb 19, 2018
337
422
225
#21
I can't fault Owens for having been on a rocket propelled journey that no one would be able to get through without sometimes falling off. She has gained a lot of political knowledge in a tiny moment of time, just a couple of years ago she was a amateur nobody. And even if she slips up now and then (JRE for one), the overwhelming majority of her thoughts are solid and important for the balance of political discourse.
 
Likes: matt404au

Ke0

Member
Aug 10, 2012
2,083
493
430
Reading, Berkshire
#22
Honestly just seems like she's playing to what she knows will make her money. She knows many Conservatives will shell out money because she's saying the things they want to hear from someone "different". They will quote her and go "she even she agrees!" She knows this and is using it to her advantage.

I don't know why ppl think she's terrible for doing that, it's capitalism. She saw a need/niche and filled it