Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
David Horowitz / Front Page Mag Cuts Ties with Candace Owens
Shot:
Goodbye Candace
A statement by the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
[Excerpted without ellipses — bdb]
Six years ago, the David Horowitz Freedom Center invited the then little-known Candace Owens to its annual Restoration Weekend gathering of conservative movers and shakers.
“This really is the conference where everything started for me,” Candace later said. “I started my career, my political career on YouTube making just funny, satirical videos, and I got an email from David Horowitz inviting me to this conference, and let me just tell you what a big deal it was for me. I had no connections whatsoever.”
At this conference she met Charlie Kirk, and connected with his nationwide student organization Turning Point USA, and became a national figure.
— https://www.frontpagemag.com/goodbye-candace/
In 2018, Candace tweeted that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was clueless. She’s “programmed to hate Israel and she has no idea why.” Now she has become AOC. Candace hates Israel for the same reason that AOC does.
The David Horowitz Freedom Center wishes to express its deep disappointment with Candace’s ignorant, hateful and morally obtuse remarks about Israel and the Jews. But, of course, it’s not just about the Jews. The Jews are the canaries in the mine. The West is next and America above all.
It’s one thing to have been alive in the Thirties and not realize where the Nazis were heading. It is quite another to be alive during a 75-year campaign by Islamic jihadis to “finish the job that Hitler started,” and fail to stand against their open campaign to create a second Holocaust.
We are in a civilizational war and Candace is either on the sidelines or actively supporting the crusade against the West.
Goodbye Candace, we will continue to support those who truly strive to raise up the movement for liberty and life, not selfishly tear it apart.
Chaser:
This editorial from the DHFC also mentioned her support for the loathsome Andrew Tate, which they did not jump on in the hopes that she would get better — she didn’t.
I have to agree with the DHFC’s take on this, as Owens’ position has not been one of fairness or objectivity, and frankly, that’s not what I’m after anyway. I don’t want a referee; I want accomplices. But even objectivity would be better than what we’re seeing recently. I want people I know I can count on in a fight, and increasingly, this is not Candace Owens. I hate saying that, but she has worked hard to get herself into this quandary, and has worked even harder to avoid getting out of it.
I’ve grown embarrassed by her comments if I consider myself a supporter, so I gotta say thanks but goodbye. I don’t believe that I have any single “litmus test” that she has failed, but this Israel/Hamas war has been clarifying around the world. Increasingly, I find that Candace Owens is defending things I am against and questioning (at minimum) things I support. Not that anybody cares about supposedly anonymous internet gadabout BDB withdrawing his support, but there it is.
Good call, Horowitz, and it has helped make my mind up. Perhaps someday she will come back with explanations and apologies. Probably not.
What a shame.
Published in General
I haven’t watched much that she did since she got stardom. But she’s in company with Carlson on Tate. And I’ve tried to read what she did wrong this time and can’t find anything other than that she pissed somebody off. What did she do?
She joins the ranks of other outspoken guys like Mark Steyn, Kevin Williamson, Jonah somebody, and who’s that other guy who left NRO under a cloud?
So sad. I can’t help wondering what’s going on in her mind. I was an admirer of hers. Now, I’m not. Too bad.
I have not been following Candace Owens for a couple of years. I had no idea that she had fallen into what I consider to be a typically ignorant attitude held by a majority of African Americans toward Jews. It’s really strange, but Jews have always been on the front lines marching side by side with AA’s championing their right to live in a prejudice-free society. To me that doesn’t mean we are all the same, nor are we all equal, but we are each unique human beings with our own qualities and abilities. She is a particularly smart and unique individual. How she can equivocate Hamas with Israel is unimaginable to me. Is that really what she is doing?
If supporting Tate and opposing Israel don’t make the case, there’s little that I can do to convince.
I’ve been vocal on Ricochet about support for Israel and opposition to Tate. It would be pointless to try to reproduce it here.
Beating a drum, here, but this is I guess the second article about Owens here on R>, but no one’s yet said what she did. Apparently it’s too sensitive to but into words. But what did she do?
I watched Ben Shapiro insult her as
disgusting, absolutely disgraceful which — if she wasn’t disgusting — is about as impolite as you can get in polite society. But what did she do?I’ve looked up articles and videos, but I haven’t found what she said.
There’s no conspiracy of silence. It’s all over the place. Do a search for Owens and Israel. Here, I’ll do it for you.
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=owens+israel&atb=v348-1&ia=web
What you will see is a LOT of coverage and even some links directly to her various unfortunate statements.
If you feel that her support for Tate and her equivocation of Hamas and Israel are okay, then this post may not be for you. Sorry to be that way, but you sound like Fred Cole today.
Okay, you’ve said it. Seriously, how did she oppose Israel? I not being goading here. I really don’t know and I can’t find it on-line.
I don’t understand the point of writing an article without a point. I’m not doing any homework, so, nevermind.
It’s been a series of running back-and-forths over several weeks. Which is why most of what you see is coverage of the sniping.
You’ll find more than one opinion out there, of course. Newsweek and Palestinian groups are happy to hear her “support for their cause,” so it’s not as though an odd stripe of conservative just suddenly started hearing her different.
https://www.newsweek.com/candace-owens-opposition-genocide-welcomed-palestinian-supporters-1840914
When both sides of an argument interpret your remarks in context as support for one side, that’s a pretty good indicator. The conversation has been running for weeks, and I’m hardly capable of stringing it all together for any price.
I apologize for being dismissive — I’m probably actually pissed off about being confronted with having to let Candace go. I liked her a lot for a long time, and she has done a lot of good.
It’s not as though Charlie Kirk does anything for me, or Ben Shapiro (half the time). Kirk is radioactive, and Shapiro is impressive but annoying and frequently wrong. That’s fine, I don’t need perfection from anybody, having none to offer.
I’ve just reached a point with Owens. I was already down on her for her Tate stance (which has been discussed on other thread, I know some don’t agree with me), and now what is to me a clear impression that she is equivocating between Hamas and Israel. She gets cutesy in the comments, (paraphrasing) “Oh gee, too bad you disapprove, but if you choose to see it that way, that tells me something about you…” as if there were no context with that faux-fairness that strikes me much more as sophistry and Clintonian word-bending. Not that her tactic or method there is by itself invalid — I’ve said similar myself, but I respectfully submit that I was standing on a much better case when I’ve said it. Once again, it’s context-dependent, and I cannot string the whole context together. In this case, it rings hollow and false.
Quotable specifics are scant. Sometimes a person just begins to smell.
This doesn’t make sense. When the condemnation comes with over the top assertions something is wrong right there.
Citation?
Or is this more paranoid mind reading?
That Horowitz gave her her first big break or opened doors for her is irrelevant. What is this, some patronage game where people’s opinions on how we deal with Israel’s actions must perpetually conform with this group’s policy prescriptions?
Maybe I’ve missed something. Please show us where Candace is hateful
Moreover, they use quotation marks of several in this letter juxtaposed with Candace’s name of a vile statement using the H-word with no other attribution. Notice they quote two of her statements first, then later a quotation of something other people said, but with no attribution. It implies she agrees with this statement, and if not read very carefully, it appears as though she made the statement.
This is dirty pool.
The great John Derbyshire.
If you look at the fruits of the Civil Rights Act and where we are today, as well as the state of “equality/equity” today that is being promoted by a lot of lefty Jews and the race hustlers of today, you would see where some of these comments are coming from.
I think there’s two things going on here… maybe three.
First, taking generalized speak as being generalized in intent. That is absolutely how people on hair triggers or not react to generalized speech and it’s exhausting trying to qualify everything to satisfy every niche or you end up with nothing to say. Get over it. Lefty Jews have been involved and promoted and been thought leaders in a lot of crap in this country, and Candace being involved in ripping off blinders on the AA population would be well aware of.
Second, how to handle Over-generalized intent in speech by extremist instigators or supporters. It is possible to qualitatively agree with someone without agreeing in total AND/OR gain the support of extremists without detracting from the truth of your own personal statements. It’s cruel to hang on one person the foibles of others where there appears to be agreement in argument.
Third, I know all of you absolutely hate this, but I don’t care. It is true, not false. We point to the left and claim they pander and play identity politics. But so does the right. It’s possible to support Israel’s existence and not agree with our providing material support for a war when we can’t afford it. It’s possible to agree with many Jews without agreeing with other Jews. It is possible to say what this group is doing is evil without thinking that applies to all members of the group. To claim anti-semitism where none exists is NOT ok. It contributes to stupid discourse and it distracts and evades actual true things.
You can’t react like that when people start asking questions. What’s the rule?
“To learn who rules over you simply look to those you cannot criticize.” ― Voltaire
Does anybody actually have a link to this offending thing that Candace Owens said? I keep being told she is a hater but not what she hates.
That’s typically where I believe I’m being lied to. That what she said isn’t so bad that reasonable people can come to different conclusions… so instead, we are told how we should think instead of what we should think about.
It seems to me that Owens has stepped into something without having adequate information. She talks about some kind of segregation of Arabs in Israel. She doesn’t seem to understand that Arabs can live anywhere they can afford, in Israel. In Jerusalem there are areas where people self-segregate into Jewish, Muslim, Christian, and, I think one other ethnic group, as is the case in many cities around the Western world. I don’t know what she expects of Israel. When Muslims are shouting Death to Israel and executing terror on Israeli civilians, it’s a little difficult to not have some distrust and uneasiness with some fellow citizens who are Muslim. But my bottom line has remained the same throughout this newest conflict in the Middle East. Hamas is very clear. They want the destruction of Israel and the removal of all of the Jews from the land by any means necessary. Anyone who is pro-Hamas is anti-Semitic. I do not see a middle ground. That includes Candice Owens.
Candice Owens has always been a mixed bag for me. When it comes to speaking to Blacks about “Black issues” she’s does a good job. She’s read Thomas Sowell and listened to Larry Elder, and has piggy-backed on their work to promote herself and reach an audience that conservatives typically have trouble reaching. On other issues I don’t think she has as much to offer. She gets her facts wrong often enough to where I don’t consider her reliable, and she he often takes credit for things she did not do (e.g. Blexit). She continued to defend Kanye West — while vehemently denying she was defending him — long after his notorious meltdown. In this latest dustup, she strongly implied that Israel is guilty of genocide.
I think Owens is a talented and impressive lady. In her best moments, I see someone who is seeking wisdom, sometimes even with a humility that is usually absent. Most times, however, her penchant for self-promotion gets in the way. She seems to go out of her way to take contrarian positions, pick unnecessary fights, traffic in gossip and sensationalism — anything that screams Look At Me!
In the end, I tuned her out. There are only so many hours in a day, and there just wasn’t enough there there. And that’s a shame, because she’s got the skills to make a real contribution.
This is where I am. I just don’t know what she said and in what context, so I can’t condemn her. Not enough info, just seeing the outrage machine in gear.
Heck, you won’t see me criticize piggy-backing (shoulders of giants, and we *want* people to spread that stuff) or self-promotion (without self-promotion, nobody will be heard).
I agree with your long- and short-term observations.
You mean the “finish the job” statement? That seems clear to me that it’s the Islamic jihadis being quoted, not Candace. Did anybody think that was supposed to be Candace speaking?
I’ll summarize. She was talking about her visits to Israel and reflected on how their were Jewish areas and Palestinian areas and how that reminded her of the segregated South. She implied there was “red-lining” and that Palestinians had fewer freedoms. This with the backdrop that she strongly opposed US aid for Israel. She has ignorance on the red-lining and rights, but that is not surprising with the gaps in her knowledge.
I think Horowitz is being overly dramatic, just as Candice and Shapiro were overly dramatic last week. It seems more like a teachable moment.
That was one of the things. She’s just been digging a hole.
Yes. You mean anyone here? Probably not. These are people who pay to be on a site that emphasizes writing. But people skim articles and the way minds work is by association.
We see two quotes of Candace and another quote with no reference other than unnamed jihadis. And Hitler and Holocaust trigger words. Why did they have to invoke that in this context?
On a second reading, I found another dirty trick. Can you see it?
Do you see it?
What is implied here? What false assumption has been smuggled into the argument?
Why is this written like this?
Was that “hateful”?
Where’s the “hateful”? I want the evidence of hate.
And what is the “morally obtuse” position ? What precisely does that mean, and who decides?
You must be quoting the wrong person, Franco. DonG, didn’t say anything hateful or infer anything Owens said was hateful. Ignorant, not hateful, but the result can be almost as destructive. The young brainiacs protesting against Israel and for Hamas on our elite campuses are ignorant, as well.
From other places, she said “Christ is King” to a Jew and takes the position of being merciful to Palestinians, regardless of actions taken against Hamas, but I’m still getting it third hand and am not party to quotes.
But this what I mean – this is a reasonable and not hateful interpretation of whatever was said… ergo we aren’t allowed to know what was said.
Thanks. This helped me find the podcast that is upsetting everybody. Anybody that is interested can hear it at
https://www.dailywire.com/podcasts/candace/am-i-antisemitic-candace-debates-jewish-comedian
or at least that is my understanding.
“Genocide is bad” is a truism that remains true regardless of who the people are. I think Candace is in hot water for criticizing the intemperate manner in which Israel advertised their intent.
And that has absolutely nothing to do with whether Israel was justified in retaliation.
When Ben got mad at her for not supporting Israel unequivocally, she doubled down and claimed her morality comes from a higher authority than his or the Republicans or the world. And that made everyone more mad.
What authority would that be?
God.
More with the conspiratorial “we aren’t allowed to know” bull____. That’s crazy, at best.
I _______ answered the _______ question in my _______ comments above.
____.
Comment #9 among others.
I am just out of time for people who wish to proceed, and who wish for Israel to proceed, as if 10/7 did not just happen, and as if a worldwide wave of “Free Palestine” horsepoop had not just crashed on everybody’s shores.
I can understand and empathize with wanting to reduce and avoid our overseas adventurism. I cannot understand and refuse to accept arguments and repeated insinuations that Israel is somehow equivalent to Hamas.
No pause. No ceasefire. No negotiation. That’s where I am, and I hope that’s where Israel stays too.
I am no-kidding ready to defend myself and my country (freelance) right here at home when this crap rolls up to our door, and I would want the same support that I express for Israel while they currently fight our future war. We won’t have a choice when it comes, the same way that Israel does not have a choice now, unless one obscenely advocates for surrender. Hamas must not survive this, and the fact that they have spent two decades turning gaza into a military base wearing a thin condom made of civilians is not the fault of the Israelis.
I’m done with people who consistently cannot get right with that.
I thought more people here were right with it. Sure sounded that way on 10/8.