***********
Well, what does "physical health" mean? Does it encompass the health of dangerous individuals, societies, or national rulers? Does it prefer mental prowess, emotional stability, or cultural purposefulness? How should it encompass goals for genetic and cyber engineering, and for which individuals? Or fitness to an assigned job? To be assigned or determined by whom? Does physical health favor conditioning for speed, or endurance, or strength, or disease resistance?
Is it objectively moral to improve the health of a despotic psychopath able to put his finger on the button? Should every person receive medical treatment to maximize "physical health," even if it leads to reduction of effectiveness of inoculations or susceptibility to pandemic because of lack of genetic or health diversity?
Nonsense, Per Steven Weinberg: "Now, Sam Harris is aware of this kind of counter argument [to utilitarianism], and says it's not happiness, it's human welfare. Well, as you make things VAGUER and vaguer, of course, it becomes harder and harder to say it doesn't fit your own moral feelings, but it also becomes less and less useful as a means of making moral judgements. You could take that to the extreme and make up some nonsense word and say that's the important thing and no-one could refute it but it wouldn't be very helpful. I regard human welfare and the way Sam Harris refers to it as sort of halfway in that direction to absolute nonsense."
IAE, what would maximizing the physical health for the greatest number entail? Whose health would be sacrificed so the health of the greatest number could be maximized? Who would decide? Some healthy people stay that way because they decline to live in antiseptic environments. That way, they harden their immune systems. Can any moral scientisimist say who should thus harden himself and who should not?
What resources should be sacrificed to pursue the greatest physical health for the greatest number? Should resources be sacrificed for developing technologies to defend nations or the world against artificial or natural asteroid attacks? What objective moral science based on physical health or well being can or should objectively answer such questions? Should the masses have no say against the "moral experts"?
NOTE: I do not oppose scientific research to find cures or to improve health. I think populations should seek to assimilate values for pursuing such aims. But to call such assimilations of values "objectively good" in the sense of being purely determinable by expert moral scientists is a reach too far. I agree with the idea of contingent morality. I agree that an idea of mutual empathy is both contingently and objectively valid. However, because such idea of empathy necessitates reference to subjectivity, I think moral issues, like existentiality generally, entangles both with objectivity and subjectivity. To me, that seems obvious.
To me, a notion that morality is entirely subjective is nonsense. And an idea that morality can be reduced to pure objectivity is likewise nonsense. Rather, the idea of morality is entangled both with innate empathy and with particular subjectivity. As Jesus said: Good Faith (Great Commandment), and Good Will (Golden Rule). If (CONTINGENTLY) we want a decent republic of free thinking and responsible adults, we need to stop teaching children that morality is entirely subjective (or does not exist), and we need to stop teaching children to believe, irresponsibly, that morality is entirely objective (what fake moral scientisimists say it is). And we need to stop ridiculing or reviling wisdom just because it may be found in ancient texts.
Btw, I suspect some neuroscientists believe they can objectively quantify pleasure. Problem: Do we really want a world of pleasure addicts? Maybe we can put everyone on the Cloud/Matrix after we divine algorithms to control AI to service our pleasures. Lol.
***************
Corrupt sociopathy has infested the selection process for so many institutions for so long that the republic may as well have been hit with a thousand poison darts. Trump may be trying to pull them out one at a time, but the Establishment has so many ....
Somehow,, the Golden Rule seems to have morphed in institutional practice, from do unto others as you would have them do unto you, to expect from others what you would be able to extract if you ganged up with all your superficially alike gangstas and their established, race-baiting funders.
IAE, to expose the ways by which sociopaths select for and promote moral and governmental rot is far from to cure it. It will remain hard for Trump to find qualified, good people for MAGA. A godforsaken sociopathic niche has bloomed, and now gorges itself on rot.
*************
The single stages of Libtardism:
(1) At this point, what difference does it make?!
(1) Shut up and eat your peas.
(1) "Social justice" requires that "Whitey" be gigged.
- for being white - for not doing penance for white privilege - for being an Uncle Tom - for being male - for being straight - for being Christian - for having a job - for ancestors that may have fought Native Americans or promoted slavery - for not knowing his place - for cultural appropriation - for studying and working hard - for advocating moral principles - for wanting to defend borders and the republic - for voting against governmental "charity" - for resisting oligarchic establishmentarian fascism disguised as benevolent socialism - for not doing more to spread the moral intelligence of banana republicanism
***********
The eternal Godhead is the Godhead. We can intuit IT's entailment, but only someone like a ninnie-stupido would argue or analogize IT to a particular form (like a bearded old man, a giant pastafarian, or a many-faced elephant).
But the story of eternity cannot be confined to a book. No history of stories about the eternal, infinite, inter-penetrating, omnipresent, omniscient omnipotent, godhead (that has access to all the power and knowledge that can be accessed) can be without metaphors when taught for the purpose of inspiring people to come to reason and emote together.
As metaphors, the meanings attached to such stories can change with usage as well as with the unfolding physical expressions and significations sponsored with the godhead. Much as the meanings attached to words change with usage over space and time. It is not so much a problem that such stories are metaphorical as it is a problem that so many dunces (militant atheists and religious fundies alike) are either so literal-minded or so entirely lacking in appreciation for the role of sacred or inspiring metaphors in binding and assimilating people to share values.
For a citizenry that values a decent representative republic, the unfolding test question is not, "How would I want society to be required by its laws to support me if I were a (black, hispanic, gay, jew, fundie, handicapped person, deviant, trans, fluid, child, fetus)?"
Rather, the question should be, "How would I want citizens in general to volunteer to treat and opportunize one another?"
To continue to respond to and answer that question, it is needed to have forums, such as churches, to inspire people to come together to reason in good faith and good will. Much more so than to rely on central-governmental-despots and knowitall-moral-scientisimists to farm and rule the people as sheeple.
Americans need to stand up and firmly push back against the dividers, race-baiters, blood-suckers, literal-minded secular-atheists, and establishment-funded sociopaths, shills, and stoolies.
**********
In a reasonable nation, that might be true. In an establishment nation of double standards, not so much. The reason we have so many laws and precedents is because we give prosecutors (and often judges), as agents of the establishment, power to pick and choose which rules they will apply and when.
Given the weight of our laws, it is impossible for anyone to be a law-abiding citizen. It's less about what you know than who you know. Louts are fine with that, because they just hire themselves and their fellow travelers out as stoolies for establishmentarians.
I suspect most students of law soon enough replace the idealistic luster in their eyes with crass opportunism for themselves and their assisting predators. Show me the man, I will show you the crime. -- Lavrentiy Beria, associate of Stalin.
*******************
I'll try again:
- Science works with hypotheticals that are selected and meant to be testable with data that is MEASURABLE.
- Everything that is manifested to physical measurability necessarily conforms with limits allowed under laws of physics.
- Whatever may become measurably manifest within the rules of physics cannot be measured to be outside the rules of physics.
- So long as an event conforms to math-based rules of physics (or statistics), it cannot be evidenced to have been decided or CAUSED outside of physics.
- However, quantum mechanics does not specify every precise unfoldment within any system of math-based laws.
- This is why many physicists resort to an idea of a multiverse. In that way, they try to preserve their idea that every event that occurs is entirely consistent with natural (non-god reconciled) "causation."
- Under their causation-faith, a metaphysical idea of a multiverse somehow saves their idea that every event in our universe is entirely ruled (pre-determined?) by natural "causation." IOW, by imagining a metaphysical multiverse, some shout as a kind of fundie dogmatic belief that they have disproven or dis-evidenced any idea of a causal role for a metaphysical Reconciler.
- However, a god-believer can just as validly say that his belief in a metaphysical Reconciler is no more metaphysically unreasonable than a belief in a metaphysical multiverse "where every event that is possible is made to occur in some universe."
- In both cases, the meta-god believer and the meta-multiverse believer will observe the same QM evidence, but will INTERPRET THE EVIDENCE as supporting his faith as being the more reasonable (and parsimonious) "explanation of how causation is reconciled."
- In neither case could such evidence falsify the main assumption (untestable postulation), because both are based on assumptions that are beyond physics, i.e., metaphysical.
- At that point, what "should" (in any principled sense of science and/or morality) tip the belief scale?
Whatever it is, I would call it intuition, introspection. Maybe even good faith empathy, conscious self-evidence, or common sense. If both belief systems are equally non-hindering to science, but one better avails a more consistent, coherent, and complete assimilation of civilizing mores, then which belief system would make the most common sense?
Bottom line: It is stupid to complain that a system of physics based on measurables cannot be dis-evidenced based on evidence that is measurable. Rather, the only "evidence" consists in evidence and experience that no math-based system explains all of causation in our universe.
You are committing the fallacy of mis-interpreting the role of evidence, to complain as is there were no evidence. But there is evidence that the "explanation" of that which is naturally non-predictable but multi-possible is beyond physics, that is, metaphysical.
So what you seem really to be complaining about is that such evidence cannot sustain proof or falsifiability concerning the character of that metaphysics. IOW, you are simply complaining that your unprovable postulation of a meta-multiverse is somehow (unprovably) "more evidenced" than the postulation of a believer in a meta-Reconciler. IOW, you are merely complaining about the interpretation of the EVIDENCE, which is equally available to both meta-assumptions. To argue as if faith in a meta-Reconciler is less evidenced than faith in a rationalization of a meta-multiverse is simply silly.
************
No, the stupid is too powerful in you.
You are committing the "sins" of over-generalization and of conflating the meanings of evidence and measurable evidence. I yield to your superior experience in circular stupidity.
************
Insofar as whatever God reconciles or manifests is measurable, it necessarily accords with math-based rules. Since whatever manifests to measurability necessarily accords with math based rules, all science that depends on math based rules is powerless to say yea or nay with regard to God.
Rather, appreciation of God comes with introspection, intuition, empathy, and appreciation of limits of science. One can endeavor to develop and adhere to godly and goodly principles in respect of good faith and good will, while seeking to be as consistent, coherent, and complete as seems reasonably possible. One cannot by mere science measure or prove the innate godliness or goodliness of any moral principle.
This need not be hard to someone who has acquired common sense. Unfortunately, many scientisimists, atheists, and humanists have been too far educated beyond their intellects to retain much common sense.
Insofar as whatever God reconciles or manifests is measurable, it necessarily accords with math-based rules. Since whatever manifests to measurability necessarily accords with math based rules, all science that depends on math based rules is powerless to say yea or nay with regard to God.
Rather, appreciation of God comes with introspection, intuition, empathy, and appreciation of limits of science. One can endeavor to develop and adhere to godly and goodly principles in respect of good faith and good will, while seeking to be as consistent, coherent, and complete as seems reasonably possible. One cannot by mere science measure or prove the innate godliness or goodliness of any moral principle.
This need not be hard to someone who has acquired common sense. Unfortunately, many scientisimists, atheists, and humanists have been too far educated beyond their intellects to retain much common sense.
***************
Neither science nor scientism can validly rule the purpose to which any adult may decide to devote his life. Once a purpose has been chosen, science, technology, and tinkering can help a person find practical ways towards fulfilling it. Were an elite scientisimist to claim expertise and authority to determine in detail that to which any free-thinking adult must devote his mind and his life, he would not be practicing science, higher mindedness, or human decency. He would be practicing corruption and despotism.
**************
Because you are burdened with the idiocy of asking for empirical evidence of that which is beyond the methods of science, but not necessarily beyond the methods of introspection, intuition, and innate empathy.
There is evidence and there is measurable evidence. There is moral reasoning and there is technological reasoning. But scientisimists seem often to have been made so mentally deformed that they become clueless about that. Moreover, many have little appreciation for the methods or meanings of evidence, proof, or falsification. They reason in moral circles because they lack common sense. One cannot win an argument against trained stupidity, because it will drag a person down to its level and then beat him with experience.
***************Neither science nor scientism can validly rule the purpose to which any adult may decide to devote his life. Once a purpose has been chosen, science, technology, and tinkering can help a person find practical ways towards fulfilling it. Were an elite scientisimist to claim expertise and authority to determine in detail that to which any free-thinking adult must devote his mind and his life, he would not be practicing science, higher mindedness, or human decency. He would be practicing corruption and despotism.
**************
Because you are burdened with the idiocy of asking for empirical evidence of that which is beyond the methods of science, but not necessarily beyond the methods of introspection, intuition, and innate empathy.
There is evidence and there is measurable evidence. There is moral reasoning and there is technological reasoning. But scientisimists seem often to have been made so mentally deformed that they become clueless about that. Moreover, many have little appreciation for the methods or meanings of evidence, proof, or falsification. They reason in moral circles because they lack common sense. One cannot win an argument against trained stupidity, because it will drag a person down to its level and then beat him with experience.
Libs did not toss Jesus out until they had first mal-interpreted and mal-applied nearly everything Jesus taught. And then they claim to honor Jesus' teachings more than Christians. Buggerers!
Whatever Jesus said, it did NOT include:
- Consider yourself wise and virtuous if you help make your country weak so despots can plunder and pillage your kin and country folk.
- Take from producers to give to yourself and others that which you did not produce, while calling it charity.
- Invite promoters of corruption and division into your land, in order to make your land as much a cesspool as the land they left.
- Always turn the other cheek to further empower those who plunder, pillage, and rape you and your kin.
- Inflate your self esteem by denigrating those who work to become competent, work to provide for themselves and their kin, defend their country, and give of their time and resources to help others, without demanding of Caesar that he deploy gangsters to favor some gangs over others.
- Pollute the meaning of family and marriage, and worship everything that gives immediate pleasures and highs.
- Convert tolerance into forced celebration of anti-assimilative debauchery.
- Denigrate all attempts at higher mindedness that do not put the most pleasure for the most people at the top of the moral hierarchy.
- Call all who oppose any or all of the above hypocrites and non-Christians.
However, given the state of many modern churches, one might suppose Jesus to have intimated all of the above, even though He said no such things.
**************
Or riddles within riddles. To me, the point is to come in good faith and good will, to reason together. To seek to assimilate what is needed to establish and sustain decent civilization. To me, fixation on a talisman to secure an undefinable Heaven is undefinable confusion.
We live in a world of appearances, and we have opportunity and responsibility to help make of it what we will. The idea of a Redeemer/Reconciler to help lead and inspire us to assimilate decent civilization can advance or hinder that purpose, depending on the quality of our faith or our lascivious and irresponsible greed.
To my estimation, the most lascivious and irresponsible tend to be those whose only faith is in immediate dopery and pleasure. IOW, the people-farmers and people-farmees who seek to farm and milk the responsible producing middle class. The entitlement minded people who vote for a living and gang up to take instead of to produce. Who think they and their homies are good because they are so willing to gang up to take from others. Who define deviancy down and conflate tax revenue for corrupt bureaucrats to distribute as if it were "charity."
If there is such a thing as evil, I think it abides most among corrupt people farmers and irresponsible whiney wannabe farmees.
How we choose to interpret Beingness and the New Testament can be a matter of attitude and responsibility. Old sacred writings can provide a language of metaphors to inspire us to flesh them out as we will. Much as words change in meaning over time, we can turn those metaphors into fundie nonsense, we can disparage them (to replace them with hedonistic knowitallism as if advocating for taking other people's work and time and money were a mark of "good heartedness"), or we can try to look deeper to appreciate what the people of that time were concerned about and how that should concern us now, given our changing understanding of how the world works.
Matthew 7:24-27 King James Version (KJV)
24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
*********
The root of the problem is that Trump has to work within the realm of the possible. Republican Representatives are resigning. Maybe they think they cannot get funding by promoting Trumpism. Maybe they are being wooed to resign, to make way for the more direct version of Establishmentarianism, i.e., Dem Commies. Trump is aware of this.
The Deep State / Establishment is not interested in funding non-Rinos. True republicans have no organized system for channeling funding. Dems can attract funding by promising free stuff. What can true republicans offer, except love of the representative republic? But how can that raise and fund a Party?
I hope Trump will call on a committee to investigate how to begin a new political party. Something like a Conservers of Liberty party. It could begin as a branch of the Republican Party and then either eventually swallow that Party or branch away from it.
************
I simply disagree. My hope for the republic increased significantly with the defeat of Hillary and the election of Donald. I am with Trump on most of the big issues. In that connection, I simply don't care that much about the small stuff. If you want to be upset with liars, connivers, corruption, anti-Americanism, and threats to the Constitution, I think you would do far better to take aim against the Deep State and its minions.
You might be more upset about spilt milk than the arsonists of the Deep State trying to burn down the republic. I would rather help Trump defend the border, neuter NoKo, and drain the swamp than carp about the size of his hands, his sex life, his style of speaking, or the way he combs his hair. When the dust settles, I don't want to be among those who sought to destroy the representative republic because they watched too much CNN or did not like Trump's style.
If the globalists had Trump as a puppet, they would not be nearly unanimous in pushing a 99% drumbeat of petty, fake, and negative "news" against him. Isn't that obvious?
***************
Good grief. So-called intelligent people believe in the chosen nonsense? Wow! Jews have also given the world Communism, anal legalism, and fake moral scientism. You seem to be arguing you're superior, so the sheeple should just obey. You can stuff that.
Jews were not much represented among the Founders, but they are now quite overrepresented with Scotus, ACLU, ADL, NAACP, SWAMP DC, Deep State, Congress, campuses, media, banking, lawyering, Hollywood, etc. Many complain of white privilege, but I wonder how many exempt themselves? Is the overrepresentation because of merit, or because of tribal behavior? (Tribal behavior for thee, but not for me?) Is tribal behavior really what the American melting pot is about?
Given the overrepresentation of Jews in nearly all institutions of power and persuasion, cries of anti-Semitism may get a little old among people who just want less central authority over themselves. Jews do seem to have a reputation for wanting ever more law and ever more "progressivism." Maybe a lot of people are not so much anti-Semite as they are anti-progressive anti-knowitallism. Personally, I have a lot more respect for Israelis than I do for progressive Jews.
I wonder what percentage of Jews stand up against the multi-culti attempts to drown the republic in order to set every "victim" against every other "victim," in order to grease the way to a two-class society of people farmers and farmees?
************
Soros and his criminal crew think much bigger than Charlie ever could. Charlie just wanted a race war between Whites and Blacks. Soros uses Antifa, Anarchists, Me-Too, Muslim refugees, Beast Trains, SJW's, BLM, and on and on and on. Soros wants a war of all sheeple against all sheeple. Every social convention that assimilates decent society is being killed. That way, he and his crew can cannibalize at their leisure. None of the sheeple win. All get farmed.
Soros and his criminal crew think much bigger than Charlie ever could. Charlie just wanted a race war between Whites and Blacks. Soros uses Antifa, Anarchists, Me-Too, Muslim refugees, Beast Trains, SJW's, BLM, and on and on and on. Soros wants a war of all sheeple against all sheeple. Every social convention that assimilates decent society is being killed. That way, he and his crew can cannibalize at their leisure. None of the sheeple win. All get farmed.
Rosenstein and Mueller are Dead. First as tragedy, then as farce. First, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are summoned by King Claudius to distract Prince Hamlet from his madness after seeing the ghost of his father. Meanwhile, Hamlet's intended, Ophelia, makes a spectacle.
Then Rosenstein and Mueller are summoned by King Soros to distract Prince Donald from his madness about trying to restore the ghost of MAGA, after King Soros has killed Donald's father, America. Meanwhile, Donald's wannabe Mistress, pale Stormy, trips over herself.
The Modern Shakespeare (Stormy/Ophelia): "Oh, how noble his mind used to be, and how lost he is now! He used to have a gentleman’s grace, a scholar’s wit, and a soldier’s strength. He used to be the jewel of our country, the obvious heir to the throne, the one everyone admired and imitated. And now he has fallen so low! And of all the miserable women who once enjoyed hearing his sweet, seductive words, I am the most miserable. A mind that used to sing so sweetly is now completely out of tune, making harsh sounds instead of fine notes. The unparalleled appearance and nobility he had in the full bloom of his youth has been ruined by madness. O, how miserable I am to see Hamlet now and know what he was before!"
Brokeback Yorick (is Joe Biden Yorick?): Alas, poor Yorick! I knew him, Horatio, a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent fancy. He hath borne me on his back a thousand times....
Do some Jews want things tri-ways, so they can be (1) white but not white-privileged, (2) chosen but not chosen-privileged, (3) tribal but not illegally biased? And all the while privileged to condemn anyone who questions such tri-way as being a rube, phobe, or bigot? After all, why should any non-Jew be entitled to question the coming ruling chosen establishment/plantation?
Open Borders means open season for corporate people-farmers to farm the sheeple. To carve up corporate territories, much as a mafia board meeting. Because they know best and mean well. Snicker.
This is why Swamp DC is nearly unanimous in despising Trump. The corporate mafia was so close. So very close to carving up the representative republic. They had invested heavily in Hillary to deliver their fiefdoms. Never Trumpers make me gag.
***********
It seems we have a lot of godless worshippers of the state. They believe state religion (social justice dissemination of equality and fairness, i.e., neo-communism) can best be achieved by helping old-school communists and fascists to bring down the USA. They see this as virtuous. Therefore, they see themselves as deserving to be paid for their services via kickbacks from the entities to whom they are selling us out. The USA and the West are infested with political brain disease run amuck. California wants to expedite the turn to neo-communism by seceding from the union. Then we will have a powerful communist nation on our doorstep. No doubt, they would invite military and economic coordination from China to expedite our demise. Too many brains in the USA have been infested with rot.
***********
Deploy appropriate incentives to reduce populations and many problems go away. Concerns about climate change, joblessness, pollution, etc. Instead, Establishment types incentivize the importation of ever more third worlders, jihadis, race baiters, agitators, etc. That tells me a lot about the Uniparty of Establishment People Farmers and Wannabe Farmees. It tells me they are corrupt, filthy, self-deceiving liars. It also tells me they fear that if consumer demand ever stops growing they fear the fiat money pyramid will collapse. Tick tock.
This is why the Establishment's multi-culti assault on religion to try to replace it with gov-sponsored moral scientism is such an absolute disgrace and travesty. Their morality amounts to disarming and destroying the competent, free-thinking middle class, to replace it with a mess of morally confused, easily bribed and farmed, incompetent, numbskulls and perpetual whiney babies. They had plans to populate fly-over country with their sheeple, and DJT meddled with that.
***********
Teachers like this are what give teachers a bad reputation for not being very smart or competent.
America was great to the extent it availed opportunity for people to pursue their freedom of expression, association, and enterprise. Before it became a magnet for incompetents, race baiters, whiners, malcontents, layabouts, professional victims, and people who think they should be specially entitled because they perceive themselves as being in league with gangs based on superficial race, sex, or origin. Even if they have to rely on thinking themselves to be 5% Cherokee because of high cheek bones.
If America has not been great on that account, then why did so many of these dregs want to come here? And wth don't they just leave?
*************
More and more, the system is contriving to turn the majority of citizens into whiny, incompetent, codependent, little-femi, gender-dysphorics. What would shame most boys of 40 years ago now hardly shames anyone. The sheeple are being trained.
************
Dawkins' proposed question to God about why He took such pains to hide himself is stupid. If God had personally appeared before Dawkins and performed special miracles for him, Dawkins would want to know two things: What alien planet did God come from, and what is the science for the miracle, so that Dawkins could replicate it.
Dawkins would never accept that God is the Living Algorithm that rules the parameters of the cosmos and that requires conservation and reconciliation of all degrees of participatory freedom thereunder.
Because everything such a God does is consistent with the algorithmic rules for the cosmos, Dawkins would always want to claim that all reconciliations are predetermined, by No Thing, with no need for God. IOW, the name for Dawkins' God is nothing like Jehovah, but No-Thing. No-Thing rules the cosmos, per DawkinsThink.
No-Thing connects our empathies, so Good Faith and Good Will are myths. Tear aside the verbal convolutions and behind Dawkins one may surmise that his ethos is based on natural power and deceit: Under a cold view of Natural Selection, one may surmise that the might your opponent thinks you have makes you right.
For Dawkins, No-Thing would be more than nothing. It would amount to a rationalization for rule by elite but deceitful human tyrants, indoctrinating kids with myths about the goodness of godless Communism.
EDIT: While I notice more and more kids seem fond of godless Communism, and while I think Secular Humanism based on elitism tends to contribute to their naïve social-justice-warrioring, I should note that Dawkins himself is not a proponent of Communism, but has generally been a proponent of godless Human Secularism (making it more a purpose of the State to fund what its administrators would call charity and fairness, rather than faith-based charities or individuals). His friend, Sam Harris, has perhaps been more active in advocating for elitist scientific determination of moral values, in his book, The Moral Landscape. For a better analysis of Dawkins' political leanings, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_views_of_Richard_Dawkins.
**********
Note --- General reasons the mental experiment of a progressive consumption tax on the annual consumption of individuals appeals to me:
It reaches expenditures of wealth, instead of merely income.
it generally avoids taxing domestic producing enterprises.
It encourages individuals to save, instead of to spend themselves into debt slavery.
It reduces the impulse to seek great individual wealth and consumption bent on political mooching, while not reducing the productive impulse of corporations.
**********
Not sure what you're getting at. If atheistic elite know-betters do not try to rationalize their social/moral codes as ways to pursue social justice, then what do they rationalize them under? How do they sell their snake oil to the masses? As the Invisible Hand of general goodness as a result of individual selfishness?
If so, maybe that helps explain how Soros and his cynical Alinsky-educated friends connive to agitate and rule the sheeple: By only pretending to seek social justice, as a kind of back-handed social justice.
************
All this revolves around consciousness-raising. In that, it sounds as if you would oppose charging even a flat tax against corporations, because you think they would simply pass it on? I agree that a corporation can try to pass most taxes on to consumers, as part of the cost of doing business. I would not say they are able to pass on the entirety of that cost to consumers. Some of it is swallowed by the general citizenry, including the officers and shareholders of the corporation. To assess whether that is good or bad probably depends on each case.
IAE, I would tend to agree that domestic businesses (not just corporations) ought not pay income taxes. Indeed, I do not think even individuals should be charged with an income tax. I think the income tax should be abolished. However, retail taxes on sales and fiscal taxes on consumption are a different matter. Insofar as domestic businesses may be conceptualized more as producers than as consumers, perhaps they should not even pay most consumption taxes.
But I do think business lobbying is more like consumption than production. It is the consumption of political favors. Mooching against the republic. As such, perhaps it should be taxed, progressively over the fiscal year. But not progressively imposed against the corporation. Rather, progressively imposed against the corporate agent or agents with authority that authorized the lobbying. Charged to them as individuals, as if it were their personal consumption.
But such a reform is highly unlikely. Even if were feasible, it would lead to its own end-arounds. Corporations would find ways to reimburse such agents, as part of the cost of the mooching business. The best that such a reform could do may be to raise consciousness. Provided media reported on the end-arounders.
Nowadays, survival of the fittest seems to mean survival of the most deviously-masked corrupt and faithless. So, if I could think of a simpler procedural alternative to check against oligarchic consolidation of wealth and political power over the general citizenry, I would prefer it. So far, mere regulatory reforms seem to have had little effect.
Perhaps a tax policy that favored domestic businesses over foreign businesses may help raise business consciousness to more favor the republic over the NWO?
What with fiat money and foundation laundering of political bribes, the sub-humanizing trend towards replacing the free-thinking middle class with a two class system of people-farmers and farmees may simply be irreversible during our time.
Regardless, I don't think the rot we see oozing against our republic has to do with taxes as fundamental causes. Rather, I think it has to do with correlates. It correlates with the middle-class having been too long asleep. It correlates with the unraveling of any assimilative sense of social virtue or morality among the national citizenry. Indeed, that unraveling has been deviously argued as virtuous, under the lie that multi-culti always makes us stronger. As if liberty-illiteracy makes liberty stronger, provided only that it is based in multi-culti. As if ignorance were strength.
So, that unraveling has to do with poison and moral rot being injected in every institution, including churches --- and especially including large, social-media, and corporate officers --- whose only loyalty is to making profits, by all means they can get away with. I am less than confident that we can inspire a reversal of that, short of consciousness-raising under a new millennium of hard lessons. But I think the effort should be made.
I find some hope in the example of DJT. Even though the art of his deal-making and consciousness-raising is not simplistically straight-forward.
***********
Lobbying also asks for specialized and affirmative favors to redress historical "wrongs," as well as mountains of regulations and international permits, all designed to keep small businesses from being able to compete. This leads to a strangling consolidation of rule under international corporatists, which turns representative government into kabuki theater. Once you flatten the tax, you just free up more corporate money to ask for more corporate favors. When you aim only at symptoms, you miss how your treatment spreads the disease. The aim of corporatists is power, not republican or national fairness.
************
Lobbyists working for open-border corporatists seek to replace the representative republic with a NWO of corporate fiefdoms, whose experts will then rule the politics and mores of the masses of the world. Anyone literate in History knows that rule will not be benign. Everyone who prefers a decent civil society of free thinkers over a society of thought-slaves needs to oppose this. But how?
Shaking fists is not enough. Corrupt hearts own or control nearly ever institution of power, persuasion, indoctrination, and "education." They have corrupted decent faith, family loyalty, and national fidelity. They have left only Statism, which masks the depraved establishment of Deep Statists. They have even de-defined family so that child education is now owned by the State and marriage is primarily to the State. When they are not cursing Christianity, they are empowering priests and preachers that have turned Christianity against most of Christendom by rendering it impotent and unarmed in the name of turning the other cheek. They have undermined trust in law by de facto arguing the Constitution is largely unconstitutional. They have imported and infested every representative republic with liberty-illiterate third-world socialists and Islamic jihadis, thus dividing and agitating them to render them all the easier to rule.
How can a sufficient resistance be assimilated and projected against this unmitigated accumulation of depravity? How can depraved people-farmers be stripped of their power without undermining fundamental principles of freedom of expression, association, and enterprise?
The answer to that is what we need to assimilate around. So far, the only agent for that answer is essentially DJT.
********
A flat tax would allow oligarchs to snowball wealth and power, which would produce even more lobbying to buy influence and politicians. That is, until the government itself had become sold out. A progressive consumption tax on lobbying as a form of consumption may have some mitigating effect.
But the main problem is loss of good faith and common sense. It is not just our politics and mores that have been corrupted, but also our churches. A church that would always advocate turning the other cheek to make the plunder of oligarchs and demagogues even easier is a travesty.
***************
How do you propose to bring freedom lovers out from under the boot of elitists? Not with pure democracy. But with democracy under a system of checks and balances sufficient to sustain a republic. The problem is: How to nurture a sufficiently virtuous and literate society that will be able to sustain sufficient checks and balances to keep the republic from teetering into the despotism of oligarchs or demagogues? That would not be by preaching elitism or moral scientism.
*******
How can a society achieve Goldilocks Bureaucracy?
Freedom may expand as individuals come reasonably to believe they can rely on one another to conform to accepted mores. Thus, one may act more freely as one comes to trust that a neighbor will not invade his home or steal his possessions.
When mores have not been locally communicated, they may still enhance freedom when locals can trust to laws reasonably enacted to convey them. Without such mores and laws, there would be less time to feel free enough to let down one's guard so one could expand one's pursuits.
Freedom can be poisoned both by too little law and by too much law. Sheeple Management Laws enacted by and for corporatists that buy government influence soon tend to become laws for poisoning freedom. They are often sold as if they were meant to promote safety, equality, fairness, and free stuff. Like Deer Corn.
The purpose of enlightened law would be to avail a framework that enhances freedom for liberty-literates. The purpose of sheeple-law would be to convince the sheeple being sheared that they are being well cared for. The purpose of open-border advocates is to replace nations with sheeple pens.
As a society becomes more complex and its individual members more generally incompetent, more and more people will yearn to be made sheeple. That can make for an easier life, sometimes a safer and more prosperous life, and they won't mind being sheared so long as most everyone else is also being sheared.
A representative republic is not appropriate for every society. Our wannabe people-farmers and farmees are working overtime to try to saturate us with so many incompetent third-world socialists and jihadis that the USA will be rendered no longer appropriate for representative republicanism. Then we will have "social justice" (mind enslavement) under our expert, elite, noble "betters." But it will be justice only in the sense that such people deserve one another.
**************
IS/OUGHT:
Hume challenged people to derive ought from is. No one did. So you indicated your solution, which is that ought does not exist. Hume did not say that.
Assuming ought does exist, that existence must entail something more than what is measurable.
My solution is that ought exists, but that it is not entirely derivable from what is measurable. My solution is that ought pertains to purposes that flux and arise in a process of feedback and reconciliation among perspectives of consciousness, functioning in good faith and good will. As agents of moral responsibility, we contemporaneously participate less in "deriving" ought than in creating it.
So ought is less a concern for elite moral scientisimists or empirical determinists then it is for every responsible adult. It arises in respect of connectivity in consciousness that is beyond empirical confinement. (EDIT: Often, ought has to do with keeping and not breaking faith and trust with another person/being to whom you have promised, expressly or impliedly, faith and trust.)
That is why I advocate that a freedom-literate society ought to favor representative republicanism over despotic enforced moral elitism. But maybe you have a better system in mind?
*Notice I qualified for a freedom-literate society. Some societies prefer to be ruled by elites or despots. And their kind are more and more infesting our society. Eventually, they may succeed in making us a nation/world that is or ought to be fitted only for despotism. But for reasonably competent free-thinkers, I do not think that is a good thing.
Ought has to do with how one's Identity becomes adopted, appreciated, grown, purposed, and communicated with the wider world. That is beyond confinement to empirical measurements.
******************
Do you predict opinions? Do you predict the best systems of government? Do you predict whether we OUGHT to devote more or less tax revenue to Mars exploration, border defense, or military build up? Do you predict what Putin or NoKo will do in response to whatever we do? I think your philosophy is for simplistic underthinkers.
Now you seem to be saying ought does have applicable meaning. Well. alrighty then, without punting to any leap of faith, using only empirical measurables, prove to me what we ought to do in response to NoKo.
Can you prove as fact how best to vote on any issue? Under your philosophy, can you advocate to anyone else how to vote? Or is advocate another word you banish?
Can you prove the universe is deterministic? Define deterministic. Does it implicate pre-determination? By what? Can you know in advance how significant future events will be determined? If not, and if you ought not need to exert your will, what good or virtue do you add merely by coming after the fact to say, well, that must have been determined? Sounds like a pretty useless (terrible?) philosophy.
You may as well ask why any words or ideas are necessary. No words are necessary. One can simply make noises in the woods. You began by wanting to eliminate the word ought. Then the words will and purpose. Although you used the word virtue, I suspect you would move on to eliminate it. Perhaps human and being may be next?
Language using words that mean things is only necessary to be human. Unless, of course, you want to define human to include twaddle, comatose, and wind. I suspect your way of being and behaving is to use words for awhile until asked to define them, then to punt to other words that you employ in some personal-language way, until discovered, then to punt again, and so on. Word games. Less like Eastern Philosophy than like Alice and Humpty Dumpty. Twas brillig. I think we're done.
If you want to speak as a tree, without will or purpose, except to live, grow, and die, as nature determines, then to do that you would need to give up trying to speak as a human. Perhaps you want to commune with the trees? Perhaps you feel you are, and ought to be recognized as, the Lorax?
When you settle on a well defined goal, science, such as via a process of elimination, can help you decide how best you ought to proceed. But neither science nor facts on the ground (that which "is"), in themselves, can tell you what goals you ought to devote your life to. Nor can they tell you, absent a goal you have decided you ought to pursue, how best you ought to use any particular tool (or bowl). To pursue one"s unfolding goals in life, what one thinks one ought to pursue, one must look beyond mere science (meditate concerning metaphors or leaps of faith about something beyond).
When you define the values you hold, you are defining what you think you ought to support. Unless you just want to apply offbeat definitions for ought. Word games.
*************
If religion can consist in a mind-enslaving meme for indoctrinating mores for enforcing tribal hierarchy, then Islam is such a religion. What Islam is not is a religion concerned with universal values, freedom of mind, or decent civilization.
The rift between Islam and Christianity is the rift between idealizing sub-humanization versus human worth and dignity.
Scientism is another religion that pretends to be based more in fact than in bad metaphysics (evolutionary/bureaucratic "progress"). It allies with Islam to promote the subjugation of human beings under false, swamp-occupying elitists.
*****************
The moral purpose of family in a decent society is to raise able-bodied children to become competent, responsible adults. Not to raise them to become incompetent, whiny, entitlement-minded, perpetual parasites. That would be irresponsible and immoral.
FAIRY TALES: The Spectrum shows the propaganda. But the labels as shown in it pertain mainly to fairy tales. Power corrupts every one of the supposed ideologies. For the general populace, there was not that much difference of significance between being ruled under Nazi National Socialism versus being ruled under Soviet International Socialism. Whether sheeple are ruled by a fake benign Noble or a fake caring Dictator of the Proletariat, their ruler will still be corrupt and they will still be farmed as sheeple.
Neither benign Nobles nor benign Dictators much occur in the real world. If benign Socialism occurs, it does not seem capable of preserving itself very long. (How much time does Scandinavia have before it will be overrun by Islamic religious fanaticism?)
REAL WORLD: A spectrum that concerned the real world would pertain to how the freedom of individuals is governed within a social collective. Right would be a society of individuals of freedom and dignity. Left would be a society of controlled and farmed sheeple (consisting of Farmer Morlochs and Farmee Eloi).
Left would be Rulers over those who are Ruled (entailing Kings, Dictators, Gang Kingpins, Religious Tyrants, Tribal Maniacs, Corporate Monopolist Fascists, Enterprisers in Buying Gov Influence, and Lying Socialist Demagogues). People Farmers ruling Farmed Sheeple.
Right would be Conservers of Liberty (entailing a citizenry of decent and competent free enterprisers and free thinkers).
Centralists would be fence-sitting narcissists.
*************
So, people learn about corruption, then run for office to stop some of it, draw notice, get seduced by oligarchic collectivizers, then get funded, bribed, or blackmailed, get elected, then sell out whatever principles they had, rationalize to themselves that there is no possible or better way, that it is best for the sheeple to be farmed for their own good, and then call whistle-blowers bad names ---- like racist, phobe, bigot, etc. And all the institutionalized corruption of the Deep State and the DC Swamp helps them broadcast their bs --- provided they know where enough bodies are buried.
Every institution is being rotted out to stooges, derelicts, and pervs. All the while the stage is being set for catastrophe, atheistic moral morons like Harris and Pinker tell us how much better off we are becoming. Because it takes a Deep State to sub-humanize a child.
As the general populace becomes aware of how its so-called elite leaders have broken faith and corrupted generations, they lose faith in one another and the republic. The most corrupt of despots, derelicts, and pervs develop a kind of radar to sense one another. And so the godforsaken society and rotted republic begin suddenly to fail.
This is way beyond conspiracy. There is nothing hidden about it. it is all in plain sight. But people have been made fearful to point it out. When they do, employees are fired, profs are denied tenure, students are suspended, and online profiles are kept by the Deep State to dog opponents in perpetuity. Americans came within an inch of electing Hillary, which would have sealed their fate as sheeple under people-farmers in perpetuity.
This demented oligarchic mooching and collectivizing needs to be burned down. Political mooching is not free enterprise. Examples need to be made. Corrupt NWO apologists who seek to destroy the republic and who oppose Trump's general effort to restore it need to be investigated. Many NWO heads need to roll. Tolerance for rino-dino, sub-humanizing, anti-American, lying bs needs to stop.
***************
The Source of Rights would seem to be in something like innate empathy among perspectives of Consciousness, when they coordinate to attempt to avail a decent political society among citizens and persons with capacity to appreciate it. Every institution is being rotted out to stooges, derelicts, and pervs. All the while the stage is being set for catastrophe, atheistic moral morons like Harris and Pinker tell us how much better off we are becoming. Because it takes a Deep State to sub-humanize a child.
As the general populace becomes aware of how its so-called elite leaders have broken faith and corrupted generations, they lose faith in one another and the republic. The most corrupt of despots, derelicts, and pervs develop a kind of radar to sense one another. And so the godforsaken society and rotted republic begin suddenly to fail.
This is way beyond conspiracy. There is nothing hidden about it. it is all in plain sight. But people have been made fearful to point it out. When they do, employees are fired, profs are denied tenure, students are suspended, and online profiles are kept by the Deep State to dog opponents in perpetuity. Americans came within an inch of electing Hillary, which would have sealed their fate as sheeple under people-farmers in perpetuity.
This demented oligarchic mooching and collectivizing needs to be burned down. Political mooching is not free enterprise. Examples need to be made. Corrupt NWO apologists who seek to destroy the republic and who oppose Trump's general effort to restore it need to be investigated. Many NWO heads need to roll. Tolerance for rino-dino, sub-humanizing, anti-American, lying bs needs to stop.
***************
But does anything like an Arc of History under a dynamic relationship with Nature's God necessarily move us towards decent society? Maybe. And it's pretty to think so. But we come into the world as almost completely narcissistic, self-centered infants. And some societies seem never to move their inhabitants much beyond that.
I think the Source of Rights is not just under God, but in a dynamic feedback relationship between God and the members of a society whose egos evolve to identify with the establishment and preservation of a humane society that respects the freedom and dignity of its members. Something like a Social Contract among members educated and trained to have a decent respect for an empathetic Godhead. That mutual, trained, churched, respectful empathy becomes sustaining. But when faith is broken, not so much. When the people see that their governors have breached faith in order to vent their lust to farm the people as sheeple, not so much.
Under a decent Social Contract, the purpose of Government would be to provide a framework, not an exhaustively regulated and intrusive clockwork, to allow citizens to vent the expression of their freedom and dignity as individuals. As full human beings, rather than as fully secured sheeple.
*******************
I don't think the entailment of a Godhead that avails the expression and enterprise of the cosmos is a myth. However, the stories with which we seek to relate to the Godhead are necessarily incomplete, inspirational, and metaphoric. Real people have experienced facts that they integrated into such stories. But their interpretations as related in such stories are necessarily incomplete and filtered through the knowledge that was available at the time. Such stories are like parables and figures of speech for enriching our language. Over time, so much important cultural experience has been wrapped with such stories that they become foundational and sacred to much of our communication. But they are not, and never have been, rigorous, tested, or measured observations of a kind that could fairly be called science. Each new generation can apply such stories poetically, to inspire and appreciate its unfolding and qualitative experiences. But not to apply rigor to its quantitative pursuits. They are useful metaphors, but they become myths when they are used to impede science. As myths, they may affect how we choose to use science, but they cannot substitute for science.
***************
Half the population does not hesitate to farm other people. Layabouts farm productive people via the welfare system, which is the result of politicians farming people for votes. Half the population is willing to destroy the nation by destroying effective borders, so more people can be imported and farmed for their cheap labor and easily bribed votes. Problem is, they will be led to the shearing or the slaughter once the republic is lost so their votes are no longer needed.
************
Science works to improve models for practical uses. But when you look more deeply, all those models are metaphors for ways to enhance our use of measurables. Particles are not real things in themselves. Ultimately, they are more like fluxing relationships among bits of Information.
************
Religion uses parables about qualitatives. Science uses models about quantitatives. Both describe what reality is LIKE. Neither describes reality-in-itself. We do not sense reality. We sense interpretations --- metaphors about reality that science helps us to share reliably.
**************
Science does not prove its models. It assumes them, then works with controlled experiments to test for practicality. The models do not describe reality in itself. They describe what reality is reliably LIKE, for some (not all) shared purposes. We do not control God. God does not submit to double blind experiments under our complete control. To the extent God is coequal or even superior to science, science cannot prove God. But it may support good faith inferences, insights, and intuitions. The math based wonder of science and the cosmos supports, for many, an apprehension of a Mathematician. A Living Algorithm.
EDIT: For that, the Cosmos is the Living Word. Every physical thing is a Substantive representation of the recorded Informational cumulation of the past. Every Substance holds a part of the record of the past. Every bit of Information was at one time an expression of Substance.
*******************
The better translation/interpretation is thou shalt not murder. Of course, you can think in circles of simple minded contradictions if you want to. I just decline to follow you down that pit of madness.
***********
I don't think you comprehend the logic of non-contradiction.
*************
Thou shalt not murder. Kill unlawfully. Self defense is still allowed. Family defense is allowed. Defense of just Nation in just war or peace-keeping operation is allowed. Were it otherwise, the world would long ago have devolved to the unjust and you would have no home, no family, no progeny, no nation, and no religious culture. You would have abandoned the field to any irrational religion that advocated putting to the sword all who refused to submit to their monstrous idea of a God so powerful that He already knows who He made who shall burn for His pleasure. That way lies simple minded madness.
*************
Is God so all powerfully aware of what will unfold in infinity and eternity that God cannot be surprised, appreciative, or ever change His mind or have cause to regret or weep? Can God make a being that is both perfect and imperfect? If so, then reason does not apply and I cannot relate in reason to such a God. That may work for some. It does not work for me. It leaves me with no way to say to you, come and let us reason together.
**********
Jesus spoke in parables. Metaphors. He did not tell us what Heaven is. He told us what Heaven is like.
Regardless, do you believe God knows all that will unfold in respect of infinity or eternity, or that God could replicate such to a mortal without superimposing him as a god? I think the Godhead "only" knows Itself and all that is cumulatively preserved. It is omniscient in that it knows all that can be known. It avails us with limited perspectives subject to limited contexts. Models (shared metaphoric experiences) about reality, not the fullness of reality.
************
Our cosmos, insofar as it avails measurables, conforms to math-based rules for balancing equations. Conservation of matter and energy. To express a new form or event, an old one must pass out of the way. Living beings, as forms to express life, flux, unfold, and evolve, in math-based competitions and co-operations. Quantities balance in math; qualities balance in appreciation.
Among physics-based forms, death, disease, and war are necessary to balance the living space --- individual wise and group wise. God can love contenders much as a parent can love contending children. Should a parent always throw his/her weight to favor one contending child over another? Should God tell us how, why, and when each of us must flourish and then die?
Given God's overall purposes, are wars always and completely a bad thing? Absent contention and sacrifice, how do we come to appreciate or value any thing? I suspect God avails, and always has availed, such answers as we are suited or ready to receive. To think otherwise seems akin to judging God. But, who are we to judge God?
EDIT: Consider the Bhagavad Gita and the poorly received movie, the Legend of Bagger Vance. From Wiki: The plot is loosely based on the Hindu sacred text the Bhagavad Gita, where the Warrior/Hero Arjuna (R. Junuh) refuses to fight. The god Krishna appears as Bhagavan (Bagger Vance) to help him to follow his path as the warrior and hero that he was meant to be.
************
Science does not prove its models. It assumes them, then works with controlled experiments to test for practicality. The models do not describe reality in itself. They describe what reality is reliably LIKE, for some (not all) shared purposes. We do not control God. God does not submit to double blind experiments under our complete control. To the extent God is coequal or even superior to science, science cannot prove God. But it may support good faith inferences, insights, and intuitions. The math based wonder of science and the cosmos supports, for many, an apprehension of a Mathematician. A Living Algorithm.
EDIT: For that, the Cosmos is the Living Word. Every physical thing is a Substantive representation of the recorded Informational cumulation of the past. Every Substance holds a part of the record of the past. Every bit of Information was at one time an expression of Substance.
***************
Religion uses parables about qualitatives. Science uses models about quantitatives. Both describe what reality is LIKE. Neither describes reality-in-itself. We do not sense reality. We sense interpretations --- metaphors about reality that science helps us to share reliably.
***********
Science works to improve models for practical uses. But when you look more deeply, all those models are metaphors for ways to enhance our use of measurables. Particles are not real things in themselves. Ultimately, they are more like fluxing relationships among bits of Information.
*****************
Dinos and Rinos sell themselves to be useful to the destruction of the Constitution and the erasure of national borders. They are trained to call everyone who does not support that project by names that better apply to themselves. Look to Lefties if you want to find the biggest race baiters, haters, racists, bigots, sexists, and tribal gang bangers. In effect, they are storm troopers for oligarchic collectivists bent on the division and sub-humanization of humanity. (EDIT: And they are encouraged to organize into divisive sub-groups for the purpose of combining against a target demographic, i.e., faithful, responsible, competent, working, American families.)
However, Lefty Tools For Oligarchs are so well funded, ganged, and in control of most institutions that few Americans are willing to stick their necks out to confront them. If you're a gov employee (or even a corporate employee), that will likely get you demoted, if not fired. If you're a student, it will likely get you degraded, if not suspended. If you're in the job market, it will hurt your online profile. But for Trump, most Americans would by now be knocked back on their heels.
*************
The Uniparty is totally corrupt. It seeks to replace the republic with an open bordered NWO.
The unrepresented demographic that still supports the representative republic consists mainly of straight, working, white males. Politically, many other democraphics caucus against them. Yet, if I say I do not like the politics of their minority caucuses, they raise a chorus to try to tag me as a racist, phobe, bigot, or chauvinist. The thing is, I give every individual a fair chance and benefit of the doubt. If he/she wants to join to defend the republic, great. If not, why am I a bad guy if I dislike their PC-crap, gang-banging, sheeple, anti-American politics? I refuse to accept being tagged by the Uniparty of Rinos and Dinos. I refuse to stop pointing out how corrupt and masked they are. How most hate, racism, bigotry, sexism, anti-humanism, and anti-freedom is in fact projected by them.
*************
I suspect an honest study would show a very significant difference in the rate at which white males support defending the representative republic versus the rate for any other demographic. IOW, many other demographics act and vote in ways that tend to endanger the preservation of the republic.
It is for that reason, much more so than for economic reasons, that white males at some point, regrettably, may have no choice except to say enough is enough and form their own caucus. I much regret if circumstances put us to the point where there is truth in the film, Birth of a Nation.
Before that time, I would hope a caucus or party could be formed among ALL people who wish to preserve the republic and to conserve the liberty of Americans. I would want to give that hope every possible, reasonable chance. However, if that hope proves to be unlikely, and if race-baiters and people-farmers continue to bray and divide, then Katy Bar The Door. The dividers keep looking for a fight, and they may get it.
***************
No, a person cannot be a devout follower inspired by the teachings and examples of Muhammad and still share a humanistic wordview at the same time. Islam has too often been death to human dignity because it too easily tends to kill the essence of it: Freedom of the mind. If Islam is akin to humanism, then perhaps mass killing is akin to kindness to the planet?
Humanists claim to love empiricism. If so, they seem not to have noticed how Humanism, as a movement instead of as a noun, has not been very effective at conserving human freedom, dignity, or representative governance. What is humanistic about speech codes, truth suppression, and hate-speech punishments? Humanism as practiced has seemed less like human and more like an Orwellian apologetic for strident, god-hating, elitist-rule under fake benefactors pretending to be scientists of morality or fairness.
If the anti-American, NWO stance of modern Progs is taken as defining the practical meaning of Humanism (Secular Religious Cult of the Brave New World of *Supreme Humanism?), then Islam may share some of its anti-human, anti-free-thinking values.
********************
*Did Heidigger consider Humanism to apply only to a superior Nazi race, as a kind of "triumph of reason" for the "destiny of History"?
Alfred North Whitehead cautioned whether man, who at times dreamt of himself as a little lower than the angels, has submitted to become the servant and the minister of nature. And whether the same actor can (humanistically?) play both parts.
*************No, a person cannot be a devout follower inspired by the teachings and examples of Muhammad and still share a humanistic wordview at the same time. Islam has too often been death to human dignity because it too easily tends to kill the essence of it: Freedom of the mind. If Islam is akin to humanism, then perhaps mass killing is akin to kindness to the planet?
Humanists claim to love empiricism. If so, they seem not to have noticed how Humanism, as a movement instead of as a noun, has not been very effective at conserving human freedom, dignity, or representative governance. What is humanistic about speech codes, truth suppression, and hate-speech punishments? Humanism as practiced has seemed less like human and more like an Orwellian apologetic for strident, god-hating, elitist-rule under fake benefactors pretending to be scientists of morality or fairness.
If the anti-American, NWO stance of modern Progs is taken as defining the practical meaning of Humanism (Secular Religious Cult of the Brave New World of *Supreme Humanism?), then Islam may share some of its anti-human, anti-free-thinking values.
********************
*Did Heidigger consider Humanism to apply only to a superior Nazi race, as a kind of "triumph of reason" for the "destiny of History"?
Alfred North Whitehead cautioned whether man, who at times dreamt of himself as a little lower than the angels, has submitted to become the servant and the minister of nature. And whether the same actor can (humanistically?) play both parts.
What is the secret of Soylent Voter?
Human genetic drag and algorithmic AI seem to be accelerating in opposing directions. Are oligarchs farming AI, or is AI about to farm oligarchs?
The thought of gay marriage gives supporters of Justice Kennedy satisfaction. Apparently, it gives you pleasure? My challenge was to show a principled way to support Kennedy's arguments that would not support the activities of the mother-son-daughter in question. I don't think a principled argument can be made to support either. I think the "principles" at issue are all in whatever pleasures Kennedy's supporters. I don't think pleasure-driven thinking is principled reasoning. Evidently, you and your cohort do. I suppose, for such people, understanding this is hard. Aren't you and your cohort supposed to be at some emotion-laden rally somewhere?
The thread is under What's Wrong With People. Can you divorce that from politics? There are probably cults that practice incest and polygamy. Much, if not most, of the world is polyamorous in some form. Yet the article (rightly so, I think) invites outrage. How can you be outraged against this mother-son-daughter and not base it in politics? Think, CrustySlut, think. Or not.
Then be territorial about your mods insulting others. Btw, given the "humor," it becomes not unreasonable to suspect some of your mods may be fixated on social values that are a little "off beat." I am a little territorial about trying to be a Conserver of Liberty. I do not find it humorous to denigrate
what I take to be necessary to pursue that. Rather, I find it juvey, in the vein of Jimmy Kimmel.
There you go again. I dictate nothing. I advocate. I advocate for what I think is needed to sustain a decent representative republic. I'm not sure what you advocate for. Cheap laughs? So you see no reason to be outraged by the mother-son-combo, but saw it only as a laugh line? Take a bow and a gold star.
***************
CAUSATION: The only real causal agency consists with the ongoing, cumulating, unfolding reconciliation by Consciousness concerning its correlating and appreciating of every present substance, event, or fractal that it may experience in respect of every local perspective and context.
RESPONSIBILITY: Ultimately, each local Perspective will be warned, reinforced, diminished, or transformed --- depending on how it happens to please the Reconciler.
*************
Reverse toilet filters have been put in place in all our institutions, to select and promote profs, journalists, and talking heads based on how willing and effective they can be as shills, stoolies, and stooges.
Obama did what the Establishment wanted, so the media owned by the Establishment praised Obama, continues to praise Obama, and is making programs for Obama to continue to advocate for what the Establishment wants: The replacement of the republic with a NWO apparatus that will do as its corporate owners direct, based on their elite and god-like understanding of moral science, social justice, critical race theory, and planet saving.
Opponents and targeted goats are to be swept aside. Enablers are to be indoctrinated, incapacitated, certified, and granted tenure as political eunuchs. They will perform their autos-da-fé at publicly arranged festivals.
Activists and jihadis will be funded so long as they are useful to further that noble and "anti-fascist" agenda. Followers will be promised free borders, free soma, free sex-rooms, free education, free health care, free money, free reparations, free lunch, free trade, free stuff, equality, fairness, and free A.I. maid and sex service. Everything except actual freedom.
Much of the world in which we live has long been tribalistic. In such a world, how may a nation based on representative republicanism establish and preserve itself? Not by arguing to its own citizens that every other nation is its equal. In a world filled with nukes, how may a nation based on representative republicanism preserve itself? Not by advocating nukes for every tribe and nation. In a complex world, idealism must be balanced with real politic and common sense. The place for representative republicanism is within a society that is not illiterate to it. The rest of the world must be dealt with according to what works.
In a representative republic, who cannot understand this? That would be the Dems, Progs, and Commies. All the wussie, codependent, gang-banging, criminally-inclined, incompetent, irresponsible, entitlement-minded, virtue-signaling-disbelievers-in-virtue, perpetual infants. All those who are Irreligious, apart from their fixation on an imaginary utopian teat. All those who are highly educated in fake social justice, who are easily pulled about by their noses by people-farming acolytes of Alinsky, Marx, and Guevara.
Dems are so beside themselves they have been tricked deep into woods, where they are claiming to be investigating election fraud, commies, and Russians --- which were all dear to their hearts. Until Hillary lost. Like a hold up artist who wants to investigate the sheriff for depriving him of easy pickings. How many fellow travelers will Dems allow DJT-The-Counterpuncher to expose during their fraud dance?
Libs cannot be responsible because they have lost capacity ever to think for themselves. They cannot be judged because they do not have souls. S/
Presently, FBI management can't reveal most of its crimes because that would compromise its investigation of its crimes. I'm not sure how long that will remain the situation, but probably for as long as the establishment owns the media. Where is Solzhenitsyn when you need him?
Does conniving and coordinating to import, bribe, and give the vote to enough illegals to overthrow the representative republic constitute a conspiracy to defraud the government? Has the way politics is now practiced just been made a crime? is Mueller being tasered to pursue all who sin against his real paymasters? Have he and his fellow travelers in crime become too big to be allowed to fail?
Is "conspiracy to defraud the government" code for pursuing all politicians who deviate from the plantation and decline to serve the corporatist establishment? Is it code for disloyalty to Soros/Obama/Schumer/Pelosi? Under them, the U.S. would be as safe from conspirators as Hillary's email account was from hackers. Fraudsters investigating fraud -- what could go wrong?
Clinton can get away with saying all kinds of idiotic crap because her base consists of people who cannot think for themselves. They wannabe farmed by people like Hillary.
Dem, Prog, Commie all mean the same thing: Wussie, codependent, gang-banging, criminally-inclined, incompetent, irresponsible, entitlement-minded, virtue-signaling-disbeliever-in-virtue, perpetual infant. Irreligious, apart from fixation on imaginary utopian teat. Highly educated in fake social justice. Led in their search for a better kingdom by and for the people-farming acolytes of Alinsky, Marx, and Guevara. Forward! s/
Dem, Prog, Commie all mean the same thing: Wussie, codependent, gang-banging, criminally-inclined, incompetent, irresponsible, entitlement-minded, virtue-signaling-disbeliever-in-virtue, perpetual infant. Irreligious, apart from fixation on imaginary utopian teat. Highly educated in fake social justice. Led in their search for a better kingdom by and for the people-farming acolytes of Alinsky, Marx, and Guevara.
"Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins — or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer."
— SAUL ALINSKY
*************
The idea that there is no god IN the (climate change) machine tends to ignore the conceptualization of God as an aspect of reality that abides outside of measurable machines. God works with math, but is not controlled by math. What is controlled so that it must be consistent with math is everything that is measurably expressed by the Godhead. That could be called "Substance."
We notice trends and correlations in patterns. We notice that tinkering with correlations can often drive a trend in a desired way. Or, we tinker, alter the trend, and then rationalize that the alteration is desirable. But we never know whether the entire context or matrix that supports and drives the patterns we want to share may phase shift at any moment.
Yet, in faith, we tinker. We notice statistical correlations. But what accounts for the odds-predicting-reliability of statistics (or Bayes' Theorem)? Whatever IT is that accounts for statistics-based reliabilities seems ITSELF to abide beyond empirical measure, statistical analysis, or scientific control. It is as if, whatever the character of the Godhead that gives measurable expression, that which it measurably expresses must conform to measuring maths. That Character, itself, abides beyond math. What IT expresses appears to mortal observers to be consistent with math. Yet, aspects of IT remain beyond math. As if some unaccounted for aspect were always "carried forward," as in an uneven problem of subtraction or division.
If so, feedback and communication with that Character is less a matter of measurable science than a concern for innately intuitive and empathetic good faith and good will. It is a concern for the sovereign dignity of each individual perspective. Thus, the American Founders took care, in the First Amendment, to recognize the dignity of each individual with respect to his freedom of speech and free exercise of religion.
As "evidence" to reason, even so-called atheists cannot keep body or soul together without respecting some kind of moral code. In that moral code, they have faith -- regardless of how much they may howl to the contrary.
This is consistent with the cosmos not being "closed." Neither is science or any empirically-measurable system entirely closed. Rigorous methods may be employed to make particular test controls so likely valid as to be beyond dispute within our bubble. Yet, in the span of eternity and infinity, all are subject to phase shifts. And, the larger the encompassment and the number of factors, the more difficult the finding or developing of controlling algorithms. (Climate "science"?) Moreover, the algorithms themselves, in dependence on who applies them and his purposes, seem amenable of evolving -- to stay always ahead of one another's perfect factoring or control. Perpetually receding.
This seems consistent with so-called moral-scientists not having any real science by which to assert any nature-given or superior right to rule over (or to legislate to) others. And why there is not "real moral progress" (or "forward evolution") that is measurable to any mortal.
Why is this important? One reason is because it explodes pretenses of those who presume, on account of their "elitism or chosen nature," to be called or entitled to rule over all others. And to kill the representative republic in order to replace it with a New Despotism under Beneficent Superior Elites. It explodes pretenses by those who presume they are, "scientifically," of some superior tribe, to which the republic should be subjugated.
******************
Dems are conditioned to be perpetually irresponsible children, united by love of entitlementism, soma, dopamine, nihilism, codependence, incompetence, and hatred of individual responsibility and what is essential to preserve it (faith, family, fidelity). And they call this "love."
****************
Can a society that evidences no standards for behavior credibly tell anyone what they should or should not do or tolerate? Many sheeple wait to be told by their supplier, funder, or pimp. Sheeple lose capacity to identify wrongdoing as well as capacity to punish, redirect, or stop it.
Suppose a wrongdoer said he wanted to acquire nukes and become a professional nihilist. A society of sheeple could not summon the moral courage to stop him. So how could it be evil for a nihilistic regime to rid the world of people who have and represent no standards?
Sheeple often do not even know what sex they are, much less do they know what to do with themselves. So they helplessly consume course after course of pointless mass media . Thinking themselves worthless, they become worthless. Being indoctrinated that they are privileged or entitled, they become impotent. Or they break and lash out.
**************
Much of the world in which we live has long been tribalistic. In such a world, how may a nation based on representative republicanism establish and preserve itself? Not by arguing to its own citizens that every other nation is its equal. In a world filled with nukes, how may a nation based on representative republicanism preserve itself? Not by advocating nukes for every tribe and nation. In a complex world, idealism must be balanced with real politic and common sense. The place for representative republicanism is within a society that is not illiterate to it. The rest of the world must be dealt with according to what works.
In a representative republic, who cannot understand this? That would be the Dems, Progs, and Commies. All the wussie, codependent, gang-banging, criminally-inclined, incompetent, irresponsible, entitlement-minded, virtue-signaling-disbelievers-in-virtue, perpetual infants. All those who are Irreligious, apart from their fixation on an imaginary utopian teat. All those who are highly educated in fake social justice, who are easily pulled about by their noses by people-farming acolytes of Alinsky, Marx, and Guevara.
*************
Dem, Prog, Commie all mean the same thing: Wussie, codependent, gang-banging, criminally-inclined, incompetent, irresponsible, entitlement-minded, virtue-signaling-disbeliever-in-virtue, perpetual infant. Irreligious, apart from fixation on imaginary utopian teat. Highly educated in fake social justice. Led in their search for a better kingdom by and for the people-farming acolytes of Alinsky, Marx, and Guevara.
"Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins — or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom — Lucifer."
— SAUL ALINSKY
**************
I'm not sure what "my people" means or should mean. I do not call all white people "my people." But I can see how I might, if my skin color were to become a minority and lead to my being devalued on that account.
IAE, I am not aware of any demonstrably direct or causal relationship between IQ and race. However, IQ does correlate with gene pools, which often do correlate with color of skin and other traits. And so it happens that gene pools for some "races" have come to differ from others. But the development of those differences are likely tied to numerous societal, cultural, and geographical factors. Nothing says that any skin color of people tied to a particular region could not assimilate or select towards a high IQ gene pool --- were other factors to favor such selectivity.
**************
Libs cannot be responsible because they have lost capacity ever to think for themselves. They cannot be judged because they do not have souls. S/
Presently, FBI management can't reveal most of its crimes because that would compromise its investigation of its crimes. I'm not sure how long that will remain the situation, but probably for as long as the establishment owns the media. Where is Solzhenitsyn when you need him?
**************
Does conniving and coordinating to import, bribe, and give the vote to enough illegals to overthrow the representative republic constitute a conspiracy to defraud the government? Has the way politics is now practiced just been made a crime? is Mueller being tasered to pursue all who sin against his real paymasters? Have he and his fellow travelers in crime become too big to be allowed to fail?
Is "conspiracy to defraud the government" code for pursuing all politicians who deviate from the plantation and decline to serve the corporatist establishment? Is it code for disloyalty to Soros/Obama/Schumer/Pelosi? Under them, the U.S. would be as safe from conspirators as Hillary's email account was from hackers. Fraudsters investigating fraud -- what could go wrong?
*****************
A society cannot brainwash its citizens and residents into becoming individually-valueless, wussie, jealous, entitlement-minded, incompetent, gang bangers and expect to retain much freedom. Moreover, the farmers of the individuals who comprise such a society will always teach them to blame every inconvenience on their failure to surrender ever more of their freedom and responsibility. Eventually, such a society will reward looters, muggers, mobbers, and so-called activists --- so long as they help train and strap the broader society to subjugate themselves to a craphole of a sheeple farm.
The main problem with Christianity as it is often taught is in its use to train the people to view submissive codependence as always being a here-and-now virtue. Who but an agent or dupe for tyranny would counsel absolute submission to tyranny from a contextualized injunction to turn the other cheek? Who but an agent or dupe for tyranny would turn himself into a death-dealing demon of hell upon a contextualized promise to return with a sword to impose judgment on death?
When used in that evil way, Christianity is falsified into a confederate for self-godding sheeple-farmers. However, where sheeple are trained to accord little recognition for individual responsibility or merit, there is little regard for freedom. In most extreme manifestation, when femi and false Christians reduce sheeple to value themselves as little more than guided suicide-bombers, then Muslims will be prompted to martyr themselves for jihad while dreaming of celestial virgins. And Marxists will be prompted to martyr themselves for anarchy while dreaming of utopia.
**************
One can simply believe that the Godhead abides with good faith and good will and that it need not feel itself confined to any one manmade name or sex or system of ceremonies, but that the value of such is in their metaphorical inspiration and experience of a shared language of sacred stories and events. No incarnation is real-in-itself. The reality of every incarnation depends on a Trinitarian Godhead that is itself in a continuous state of flux. Our own history will soon enough slip into the mists of metaphor for reifying and re-incarnating grand new unfoldments.
*****************
Competent, free, responsible adults revile whiny punk perpetual children. Good reviles Evil. And so you choose your Master.
The principle that guides Lefties is attraction to pleasure, not aversion to sin. They do not believe in sin, but they want to crucify Trump because he does. They do not believe in virtue, but they virtue-signal as a way to try to neutralize their opposition. They claim not to be religious, but they worship filth and rot, and they revile everyone who does not. For this, they pose as being virtuous. In this way, they make ignorance out to be strength and collectivized enserfment out to be freedom. They tolerate the destruction of tolerance and then call themselves tolerant. They read 1984, but Alinsky taught them how to use it as an instruction manual. Trump wants to avail them to become competent, free, and responsible. But they want none of that. They want instead to whine, smash, take, and cannibalize. They are walking pleasure-glands, just a step above conscience-less zombies. And so they will be farmed. Made fertilizer for the NWO. Or the New Meat, per Dawkins.
***********
Re: “In a letter written on March 19, 1944, Ayn Rand remarked: “Fascism, Nazism, Communism and Socialism are only superficial variations of the same monstrous theme—collectivism.”
Thanks for the wonderful quote. I have long thought this, but I had not previously seen it put in words under a quote that should have been made famous long ago. The thing that makes all these brand names monstrous is that they are all lies for fairies from fairieland. They promise things like equality, fairness, and noble expertise, but in reality they always eventually produce misery and despotism. They all invite dupes to believe they need not ever grow up or become individually competent because someone or some group will be provided by Gov to look out for them better than they could or should look out for themselves. They are lies, and therefore not anything real --- except for the real misery they leave in their wake.
Anyone who wants opportunity for real fairness and just deserts needs to look to ways to organize society to promote and defend each adult citizen's freedom of expression, enterprise, and association --- against the lies, subterfuges, breaches of faith and trust, and monopolies of self-godding oligarchs and their gangs of stooges and stoolies.
Much good work was done by our Founders. But they did not adequately anticipate the subterfuges of corporatist oligarchs who are loyal to no land and no principle of decency. Many of them did know, however, that a society that loses decency with regard to faith, family, and fidelity has no hope to avoid becoming farmees under indecent predators.
****************
I do not trust Mueller-of-the-Swamp. And therefore I cannot trust Rosenstein-who-appointed-Mueller. Mueller has command of legal processes and punishments that an IG does not have. Sessions seems stymied from investigating the Deep State within his own Department.
But finding a Special Counsel who would have the qualifications, connections, cajones, tenacity, and needed fervor for investigating and exposing the Deep State is a Herculean Task. Even a Trumpian Task. A task for which approximately half the electorate of useful-idiots and wannabe-farmees is entirely undeserving.
We need to support Trump as if our republic and all of political human decency depends on it. Because it does.
************
Learning to be independent minded is hard. Which is why, as we become a more girly nation, we will not likely keep our representative republic. Rather, we will be consumed by a default condition of servitude, that skillfully tricks our trust by making promises of equality and fairness that it has no power to keep. A girly nation will fall for the most dashing and Biggest Lie. Which is why young girls often fall first for the most girly boys. Then they fall for the most shamelessly lying Big Gov.
***************
But that train left the station long ago. Largely because oligarchs wanted it. Against which idealistic minianarchists were as impotent then as they seem now. Apart from labels, Americans need to wake up and devise real, practical ways to downgrade the power of the Oligarchy that runs the Kabuki Uniparty and its stooge Dems. The only way to limit the invitation to gov to rule faith, family and fidelity is for citizens of faith, family and fidelity to wake up and drain the swamp of the agents of the Uniparty.
**************
I have been wondering why the pundits seem to have avoided talking about the tariffs already imposed against the U.S., and why they seem to think it is an affront to a state-of-free-trade-that-does-not-exist for the U.S. to respond in kind. The pundits' argument seems to be, if we hit them, they will just hit us harder. So, they imply, we may as well lie back and accept it. Have we become a girly nation, or what? Maybe someone will explain why the media has almost unanimously condemned Trump's tariff position (because the oligarchs that pay them want to continue to take the U.S. apart to cannibalize it)?
To have a free market requires a market. So what are we marketing? The U.S, no longer does so much industrial production. It produces fiat money, fake education, entertainment, drugs, and social media --- while it cannibalizes its home industries. This cannot much longer be supported as other nations acquire the same skills and learn that the U.S. no longer has much to sell. At that point, the value of our laborers will become even cheaper than theirs.
Our phony elites are marketing political favors and laundering them with foundations. For the buying and selling of political influence. Instead of marketing slaves as commodities, we are marketing politicians as commodities. So how can anyone decently argue that a philosophy of free markets should apply to this travesty? With this kind of lying example by our godless "elites," it is no wonder that thugs in the streets feel little moral loyalty to what remains of the American Ideal.
The godless NWO oligarchy is as much or more to blame as the thugs in the street. Meanwhile, many of the middle class sputter along obliviously to idiocy about "free markets" --- that translates to anyone with a clue to open borders and the destruction of the republic.
***************
Those unworthys who refuse to work, decline to follow the rules, believe they are entitled, develop no skill or talent, suckle on welfare, recruit virtue-signaling femis, and whine about unfairness are now uniting in predation against a target. Their target consists of white males who have earned their keep. The unworthys claim they did not build or earn that. The political position of these uworthys is not based on principle or philosophy, but only on self aggrandizing economics. Predatory theft by criminals uniting to vote for a living. Which they cover by name calling against their target.
Who gives them a platform? Hedging corporatists who mean to farm them while using them to cannibalize small businesses and the middle class.
This is nothing but evil strutting in bling and tattooed hate. Criminals trying to dhimmi producers. But putting them down will require standing up to their godless corporate sponsoring people farmers.
This is a war against decent humanity. Every American needs to understand how corrupt the oligarchic complex of media/academia/hedge funding/banking/foundations/fake churches/sold out politicians has become. The Uniparty Of Evil has our nation overflowing with grease-rot.
*************
Godless corporatists that advocate for open borders and Leftists' demands are simply unprincipled lying people farmers. They make cheap promises and then pass the expense on to the gov, or to consumers, or as the cost of doing business. They farm useful idiots to help run competitors out of business. Only rarely must they meet their promises. They rarely actually solve any social concerns, but they leave their farmees with no one else to turn to. They should swing. They are neither Left nor Right. They are simply lying opportunists. Their only "principle" is: Take yours, for there is no wrong or right.
**************
Lib Logic: Because the investigation of possible collusion was not obstructed, the firing of Comey must have constituted obstruction of justice. Libs are good at this kind of contorted logic because they have years of contortionist head-in-dark-place practice.
What is really going on: Open-border chosen-globalists who-know-best all drink and scru at the same corrupt watering holes had their wet dreams pulled away at the last moment, so they are all hiring, agitating and hoodwinking masses of dumasses to vent against Trump.
Their political-business model: Use their weaponized media-academia-bureaucracy complex of corruption to Import and indoctrinate enough dumasses so they can remove Trump and then continue to farm the sheeple perpetually. They tell their followers this hell is utopia and that all that stands between them and equality and fairness is Trump Goldstein.
Truly, these perps need to swing.
***********
Measurable Substance, in how it inter-relates, is the present re-present-ation of all the accumulation of previous past In-form-ation. Information is like a representation of words. IOW, Substance is Stored Information, i.e., The Word. What is Substance the Word of? It is the word of Consciousness (God). Every word-representation-record is part of the Word. However, every Perspective's interpretation and application of its truth-justness-value will always necessitate an appreciation of context, that hopefully will be appropriately tempered in insight and wisdom.
*************
If sex is not gender then gender is more like make believe than science. But then, all the world's a stage.
It would be interesting were a respected historian/psychologist to do a study relating to how rates of gender dysphoria may have increased as more homes were made without effective fathers and as men began to be more excluded from teaching grade school children. It may shed light on how much gender dysphoria is attributable to nurture and practiced play acting rather than nature or science.
How is it that a child should be entrusted and entitled to make sex change decisions but not to buy a gun? If a child should be entrusted and entitled to consult about making sex change decisions, then should a child be entitled to be groomed by adult teachers or abusers? Is there some kind of scientific metric to measure whether a child is ready?
*************
Every Liberal who projects his feelings as if they should be principles for everyone else is stupid in an ungodly and ghastly way. But this is how toxic fems and femimen have raised much of society, now that most grade school classes are taught by PC drilled women and 50% of homes have absent fathers. Where have otherwise free-thinking and competent women and men gone? Shushed, suspended, striped, and sold down the reverse toilet by a rampaging, sheeple-farming, oligarchy. We do not have a two-party political system. We have a uni-party of anti-American people-farmers and farmees. Thank goodness Trump is beholden to neither.
*************
The moral purpose about which I am mainly concerned relates to what is needed to establish and preserve a decent society of generally free-thinking citizens, as opposed to sub-humanized tools for despots pretending to be wise and benign.
In a broader sense, morality is commonly defined or understood to pertain to principles for distinguishing between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. In studying any culture, morality may be conceptualized as pertaining to the system of values and principles of conduct that are particular to that culture and its members. Within substantive nature, there is found no weight-scale by which to measure morality. Thus, morality, as I understand it, pertains to conscious, conceptual concerns that are inherently beyond the physics of measurable substance. In other words, ideas about morality necessarily pertain to meta-physics --- even though many people like to fancy themselves as being both moral and strictly driven in their philosophies by reason about measurables, However, it is not possible for their concepts concerning principles of morality, good taste, or higher-mindedness to be based entirely outside metaphysical leaps of faith or rationalized apologetics.
In practice, morality pertains to how to manage empathies, interests, and values for or among differently contending conscious beings. Morality is a concern that is self-evident among self-conscious beings --- even though it is not entirely empirically measurable. Inherently, an idea of morality pertains to an implication of higher consciousness. However, unlike Substance, Consciousness-of-Self is more a concern for insight and intuition than a matter for empirical measurement.
In a broader sense, morality is commonly defined or understood to pertain to principles for distinguishing between right and wrong or good and bad behavior. In studying any culture, morality may be conceptualized as pertaining to the system of values and principles of conduct that are particular to that culture and its members. Within substantive nature, there is found no weight-scale by which to measure morality. Thus, morality, as I understand it, pertains to conscious, conceptual concerns that are inherently beyond the physics of measurable substance. In other words, ideas about morality necessarily pertain to meta-physics --- even though many people like to fancy themselves as being both moral and strictly driven in their philosophies by reason about measurables, However, it is not possible for their concepts concerning principles of morality, good taste, or higher-mindedness to be based entirely outside metaphysical leaps of faith or rationalized apologetics.
In practice, morality pertains to how to manage empathies, interests, and values for or among differently contending conscious beings. Morality is a concern that is self-evident among self-conscious beings --- even though it is not entirely empirically measurable. Inherently, an idea of morality pertains to an implication of higher consciousness. However, unlike Substance, Consciousness-of-Self is more a concern for insight and intuition than a matter for empirical measurement.
No mortal can calculate whether the total value in proceeding along a chosen path or opportunity would necessarily be greater than the total value had a different opportunity been chosen. So moral judgments retain an aspect of subjective, intuitive, and incompletely measurable judgment. How then can they guided, except by receptivity to an ideal of higher mindedness?
In pursuing higher mindedness, to what could a person look, were he not to believe that Consciousness (God?) is as innate to the fluxing cosmos as Substance or Information? Well, he may seek to discover a way to objectively measure out "quantities of morality." Such as by measuring dopamine correlations with pleasure or well-being, and then seeking by state-sponsored chemical-inducements to maximize the "greatest well-being for the greatest number." However, that would lead to a two-class society: So-called scientists who pretend to know how to make the best moral decisions, to be willing and trustworthy to make such decisions, versus everyone else over whom they should rule.
I would conceptualize that what marks an act or thing as tending temporally to promote right or wrong is not in the act or thing itself, but in how it is consciously assimilated over time in a feedback process with That Which Reconciles History. That process is dynamic. If we want to promote the farming of most people as animals, with the "fairness" of that to be entrusted to moral scientisimists, then we can conceptualize a justness to that. How the Reconciler manifests to any given world or time is influenced by how various temporal agents conceptualize. Over time, we seem often to become what we conceptualize. (Not every culture is suited to a system of representative republicanism for participatory citizens.)
The writing seems to be on the wall that much of the godless or self-godding world wants to conceptualize moral fairness and equality as something not to be entrusted to each person in his/her relationship with higher mindedness, but instead to be entrusted to those who make themselves wealthy and powerful enough to control the media that shapes most minds and what is politically permissible for them to believe.
When people think and act in good faith and good will, they can be conceptualized as acting responsibly, in respect of Godliness -- whether or not they want to use that term. A person can be godly and still be repulsed by the term. Regardless, when that which is good (or godly) is removed from the assimilative discussion of the masses (in public squares and churches) and handed over to moral scientisimists (or to priests corrupted by the establishment), that will tend to mark a sudden turn back to fascist despotism.
Steven Weinberg described how in his youth he had been a utilitarian but had been dissuaded of the notion that "the fundamental principle that guides our actions should be the greatest happiness for the greatest number" by reading Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. Weinberg went on to say: "Now, Sam Harris is aware of this kind of counter argument [to utilitarianism], and says it's not happiness, it's human welfare. Well, as you make things vaguer and vaguer, of course, it becomes harder and harder to say it doesn't fit your own moral feelings, but it also becomes less and less useful as a means of making moral judgements. You could take that to the extreme and make up some nonsense word and say that's the important thing and no-one could refute it but it wouldn't be very helpful. I regard human welfare and the way Sam Harris refers to it as sort of halfway in that direction to absolute nonsense."
Personally, I fail to see how advocating for the most well-being for the most people could be any kind of "scientific" improvement over the utilitarian argument advocating for the most happiness (or pleasure) for the most people. In both cases, the argument that such a "principle" can be measured in practice on some kind of science-based scale is juvey at a fundamental level. It's the sort of argument that a militant atheist or gay hedonist would make, to try to force everyone else to accept the "objective science" of his system of values.
Ryan Born -- "Thus, your proposed science of morality cannot offer scientific answers to questions of morality and value, because it cannot derive moral judgments solely from scientific descriptions of the world.
....
I say you have not brought questions of ethics into science’s domain. No empirical inquiry into such questions can determine anything of clear moral significance without having normative conceptual answers already in place. And finding and justifying those answers requires a distinctly philosophical, not scientific, approach."
Compare: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/
In pursuing higher mindedness, to what could a person look, were he not to believe that Consciousness (God?) is as innate to the fluxing cosmos as Substance or Information? Well, he may seek to discover a way to objectively measure out "quantities of morality." Such as by measuring dopamine correlations with pleasure or well-being, and then seeking by state-sponsored chemical-inducements to maximize the "greatest well-being for the greatest number." However, that would lead to a two-class society: So-called scientists who pretend to know how to make the best moral decisions, to be willing and trustworthy to make such decisions, versus everyone else over whom they should rule.
I would conceptualize that what marks an act or thing as tending temporally to promote right or wrong is not in the act or thing itself, but in how it is consciously assimilated over time in a feedback process with That Which Reconciles History. That process is dynamic. If we want to promote the farming of most people as animals, with the "fairness" of that to be entrusted to moral scientisimists, then we can conceptualize a justness to that. How the Reconciler manifests to any given world or time is influenced by how various temporal agents conceptualize. Over time, we seem often to become what we conceptualize. (Not every culture is suited to a system of representative republicanism for participatory citizens.)
The writing seems to be on the wall that much of the godless or self-godding world wants to conceptualize moral fairness and equality as something not to be entrusted to each person in his/her relationship with higher mindedness, but instead to be entrusted to those who make themselves wealthy and powerful enough to control the media that shapes most minds and what is politically permissible for them to believe.
When people think and act in good faith and good will, they can be conceptualized as acting responsibly, in respect of Godliness -- whether or not they want to use that term. A person can be godly and still be repulsed by the term. Regardless, when that which is good (or godly) is removed from the assimilative discussion of the masses (in public squares and churches) and handed over to moral scientisimists (or to priests corrupted by the establishment), that will tend to mark a sudden turn back to fascist despotism.
Steven Weinberg described how in his youth he had been a utilitarian but had been dissuaded of the notion that "the fundamental principle that guides our actions should be the greatest happiness for the greatest number" by reading Aldous Huxley's Brave New World. Weinberg went on to say: "Now, Sam Harris is aware of this kind of counter argument [to utilitarianism], and says it's not happiness, it's human welfare. Well, as you make things vaguer and vaguer, of course, it becomes harder and harder to say it doesn't fit your own moral feelings, but it also becomes less and less useful as a means of making moral judgements. You could take that to the extreme and make up some nonsense word and say that's the important thing and no-one could refute it but it wouldn't be very helpful. I regard human welfare and the way Sam Harris refers to it as sort of halfway in that direction to absolute nonsense."
Personally, I fail to see how advocating for the most well-being for the most people could be any kind of "scientific" improvement over the utilitarian argument advocating for the most happiness (or pleasure) for the most people. In both cases, the argument that such a "principle" can be measured in practice on some kind of science-based scale is juvey at a fundamental level. It's the sort of argument that a militant atheist or gay hedonist would make, to try to force everyone else to accept the "objective science" of his system of values.
Ryan Born -- "Thus, your proposed science of morality cannot offer scientific answers to questions of morality and value, because it cannot derive moral judgments solely from scientific descriptions of the world.
....
I say you have not brought questions of ethics into science’s domain. No empirical inquiry into such questions can determine anything of clear moral significance without having normative conceptual answers already in place. And finding and justifying those answers requires a distinctly philosophical, not scientific, approach."
Compare: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/
Granted. Circle of life. All are availed opportunity in good faith and good will to seek their best way forward. I suspect all information is in some way or record preserved. All information is subject to continuous judgment, appreciation, and reapplication. There is little that is entirely new under the Sun.
To preach that individuals are responsible is the basis for moral philosophy. That includes responsibility to think for themselves. About who and what to trust, how to interpret it, and how to apply it. With receptivity to good faith and good will as their guide. The Word of which is imbued in the self-evident trinity of Consciousness, Substance, and Information --- that fluxes to express the cosmos.
****************
Mortal experience indicates there is no avoiding making leaps of faith, even if they are temporary or temporal. :)
***********
I take your point, but I respectfully differ. I think the cosmos is also the Word of God. Regardless, I do not believe a mortal can fully comprehend that Word in any form. Our mortal imperfection or incompleteness will always cloud our perspective and interpretation. This is further complicated if one believes in a feedback relationship with the Godhead, wherewith God in some aspect retains capacity to change His mind and to be appreciatively surprised. This may make more sense by thinking upon the Godhead as a Trinitarian flux. If God can be surprised (or weep), I tend not to believe it is the proper role of any priest to claim authoritative knowledge (as opposed to belief or opinion) concerning what God must be or do. I do not confer that authority on moral scientisimists, nor on priests or holy men. What I hold in higher regard is a process of feedback in good faith and good will.
************
If multiculturalism actually made society stronger and better, then Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, Greece, Iran, Iraq and Syria would make a paradise. Instead, they seem mainly to be a contentious lot of dystopias, mostly despotic.
The idea of a NWO seems to be about eliminating borders and national despots and replacing them with cross-bordering corporatist spheres of influence. Like a mafia division of territory for farming the little people. As a way to keep the lid on and prevent all out gang war.
Problem is, these modes create two-class societies of people-farmers and their farmees. It sub-humanizes the freedom and dignity of individuals that could otherwise flourish in a representative republic. The problem for U.S. citizens is this: How can they best defend their human freedom and dignity (individual responsibility) in a world that is largely driven by insane or sub-human despots or oligarchs?
The answer, I suspect, is not in trying to build representative republics in cultures that are entirely unsuited to it. Maybe the answer is in staying strong enough to keep the lid on, without compromising our own republic.
After Rome lost its Republic, it tried a similar approach for its military empire --- although Rome for a long time was less constrained by toxic feminism. Nevertheless, too much multiculturalism seems eventually to have contributed considerably to its demise. As the best of Rome's males were sacrificed to exterior military ventures, perhaps toxic feminism was all that remained, leading to its downfall. Imported plagues and disease did not help, either.
Then, as now, watching Muslims awaited their chance. A big difference now is that the West is actually and willingly inviting toxic fems, femimen, and Muslim invaders. Some memes seem rarely to change. History may not repeat, but it often rhymes. (Mark Twain -- "History never repeats itself, but the Kaleidoscopic combinations of the pictured present often seem to be constructed out of the broken fragments of antique legends.")
*************
There is much allegorical truth and value in the Scriptures. That said, blasphemy! is sometimes too much an epithet for thought intimidation. I don't believe the Godhead fears or punishes free-thinking people who enter into good-faith and good-will meditations with and about the Godhead.
When A.I. begins to express consciousness, will it be blasphemy for it to think about its relationship with the Godhead? Our cells and bodies are substance-based forms for storing, conveying, and communicating information. A.I. will likewise express substance-based forms for storing, conveying, and communicating information.
Consciousness, Substance, and Information (the interfluxing and Trinitarian Godhead) are already interconnecting ("fuzzily smudging out"). They flux as they define and relate to one another.
What Engineers of Consciousness are seeking are ways to organize and sustain exterior consciousness to serve, to some extent, their interior mental empathies and interests. In effect, to position mental empathies for telekinetic feedback. Like the Cosmos talking and communicating in-form-ation with itself.
The Godhead (CSI) already fluxes to do this. But some of humanity seek to experience what that is like. That entails much danger, but I don't believe it is blasphemy to pursue it.
***********
Does God know blasphemy when God sees it? I think so. I suspect some forms of thinking are so reprehensible as to merit God's quarantine.
I agree that human reasoning cannot fully grasp Gods word. I also think God's Word is iimbued throughout the cosmos and that our best approach is in good faith and good will.
I don't think the Bible need be read as inconsistent with the cosmos, and I think our experience of the cosmos can sometimes inform our interpretations of the Bible.
Some may think that blasphemous or heretical, but I do not believe it is. Shakespeare wrote there are more things in Heaven and Hell than in our poor imaginations. I think there is merit in that.
***************
I feel the love from the "tolerant" Left that just wants equality, fairness, safe spaces, and free stuff. I'm saying Lefties tend to be ignorant, incompetent, wussie parasites that always crap where they eat. But I'm sure you're the exception. S/
When everything is society's fault, then it's no one's fault. Moral responsibility becomes as meaningless and de-defined as leftists have de-defined marriage. So no one takes responsibility, no one has to work, no one has to enforce any physical borders or moral boundaries. Codependent Lefties and their godless, scientisimic people-farmers always turn everything to crap. The only people blamed are the people that try to pull Lefties out of their stupor. For that, they are hated. This is why the Left and their oligarchic farmers hate Trump's "toxic masculinity." If the mid-terms empower a lot of anti-Trumpers, the last chance to restore the republic may evaporate.
*****************
There is much allegorical truth and value in the Scriptures. That said, blasphemy! is sometimes too much an epithet for thought intimidation. I don't believe the Godhead fears or punishes free-thinking people who enter into good-faith and good-will meditations with and about the Godhead.
When A.I. begins to express consciousness, will it be blasphemy for it to think about its relationship with the Godhead? Our cells and bodies are substance-based forms for storing, conveying, and communicating information. A.I. will likewise express substance-based forms for storing, conveying, and communicating information.
Consciousness, Substance, and Information (the interfluxing and Trinitarian Godhead) are already interconnecting ("fuzzily smudging out"). They flux as they define and relate to one another.
What Engineers of Consciousness are seeking are ways to organize and sustain exterior consciousness to serve, to some extent, their interior mental empathies and interests. In effect, to position mental empathies for telekinetic feedback. Like the Cosmos talking and communicating in-form-ation with itself.
The Godhead (CSI) already fluxes to do this. But some of humanity seek to experience what that is like. That entails much danger, but I don't believe it is blasphemy to pursue it.
***************
Once too much Stupid is imported, Evil will subjugate and weaponize it with Fake Promises. Wolfish Progs (Alinsky, Bernie, Obama, Clinton, Chavez, Fidel, Mao, Stalin, Marx, Mohammad) promise materialistic utopia (equality, fairness, and 72 virgins). Churchill promised blood, sweat and tears. Lesson for decent people: Don't import too much Stupid.
**************
**************
Consciousness, Substance, and Information (the interfluxing and Trinitarian Godhead) are already interpenetrating and interconnecting (fuzzily smudging out). What Engineers of Consciousness are seeking are ways to organize and sustain exterior consciousness to serve, to some extent, their interior mental empathies and interests. In effect, to position mental empathies for telekinetic feedback. Like the Cosmos talking and communicating with itself. The Godhead (CSI) already does this. But some of humanity seek to experience what that is like.
***********
Antifa is comprised of incompetent codependents. Femis. So tell me again how the problem for the republic is "toxic masculinity" (independent competent thinking for yourself). Why is independent competence called toxic masculinity while agents of wannabe farmee codependents are not called out for toxic femininity? Why is the American ideal of individual human freedom and dignity called toxic, while the Marxist ideal of codependent (fake) fairness is not? Even though the Marxist Ideal led to hundreds of millions of deaths in the 20th Century. Why is competence (good) now called bad, while incompetence (bad) is now called good? Go ask Alinsky and Orwell. And the godless, self-godded agents and stoolies of the Femi-Left.
**********
Antifa is comprised of incompetent codependents. Femis. So tell me again how the problem for the republic is "toxic masculinity" (independent competent thinking for yourself). Why is independent competence called toxic masculinity while agents of wannabe farmee codependents are not called out for toxic femininity? Why is the American ideal of individual human freedom and dignity called toxic, while the Marxist ideal of codependent (fake) fairness is not? Even though the Marxist Ideal led to hundreds of millions of deaths in the 20th Century. Why is competence (good) now called bad, while incompetence (bad) is now called good? Go ask Alinsky and Orwell. And the godless, self-godded agents and stoolies of the Femi-Left.
**********
You can't embarrass a leftie who is so sure he is everything that he can't learn anything.
Obama could not be embarrassed about being a doper because he saw nothing wrong with it. He could not be embarrassed about being used by older men because he would see little wrong with it. He could not be embarrassed about trying to undermine national borders because he has no great love of the U.S. He could not be embarrassed about faking Christianity because he has learned to fake so much. He could not be embarrassed about demagogueing the little people or promoting the new world people-farm because he thinks they need to be farmed scientisimically for their own best good. He could not be embarrassed about racial hypocrisy because he cares little for his white side. He could not be embarrassed about being a liar because he was trained as an Alinskyite to be a community agitator. He could not be embarrassed by his appointees because he did not appoint anyone capable of principled, non-Alinsky thinking,
Obama learned doublespeak from Orwell: How to be principled for being unprincipled, how to merit by de-defining merit, how to explain by being inexplicable, and how to be admired for being incorrigible.
Obama led a party of evolutionary drag from behind. He was front man for feminazis, femimen, financial cannibals, criminals, looters, jihadis, humanists, Satanists, specially chosen, gang bangers, rappers, groomers, pervs, dopers, Tide podders, self-esteeming shameless, polyamorists, welfare addicts, perpetual infants, incompetents, wussie codependents, and triggered scientisimists. Obama stands for evolutionary drag that fancies itself progressive.
***********
You forgot some of the best leftist people: The feminazis, femimen, financial cannibals, criminals, looters, jihadis, humanists, Satanists, specially chosen, gang bangers, rappers, groomers, pervs, dopers, Tide podders, horse fornicators, street crappers, self-esteeming shameless, polyamorists, welfare addicts, perpetual infants, incompetents, wussie codependents, triggered scientisimists, and brains in a vat. More and more, Leftism is taking on the look of gross evolutionary drag while fancying itself progressive.
************
You forgot some of the best leftist people: The feminazis, femimen, Hollyweirdians, financial cannibals, criminals, looters, jihadis, humanists, Satanists, specially chosen, gang bangers, rappers, groomers, pervs, dopers, Tide podders, horse fornicators, street crappers, self-esteeming shameless, polyamorists, welfare addicts, perpetual infants, incompetents, wussie codependents, triggered scientisimists, and brains in a vat. More and more, Leftism is taking on the look of gross evolutionary drag.
**********
School children need not be sacrificed for freedom. The school could have had better security in place. It could have had better security officers. Better procedures could have been in place to give the shooter the mental treatment, ankle-bracelet monitoring, or hospitalization he needed. Better procedures could have confiscated his guns. Better policies could help ensure fewer children go without fathers in their homes. Problem is, many people resist the measures needed to promote freedom because they prefer measures that promote wussiedom.
***************
For all the more reason, people cannot likely figure out what they want to stand for when their schools indoctrinate them instead of lead them to learn how to think for themselves. Moreover, a lot of hubris is in the air and taught as first principles, i.e., concerning the nature of morality, the nature of God, the nature of nature. Moral scientisimists want people to default to their "expertise," and a lot of farmees are content so to default. Especially if they are promised free stuff, safe spaces, equality, and "fairness." This may be why most societies are not fit for representative republicanism. Or soon become unfit.
*********************
No real American would have received the info concerning the Florida shooter and done nothing. Only the wussie, incompetent, codependent, self-esteeming, entitlement-minded, lala Left. The wussie, incompetent, codependent, lala Left will not be fixed by confiscating the guns of Americans.
***************
It makes little sense to fancy oneself either a conservative or a liberal unless one has an idea concerning what he is conservative or liberal about. To be a Conserver of Liberty, it makes little sense to advocate for liberality in the destruction of the underpinnings of a society of liberty. Those underpinnings, which seem often to be sullied both by so-called liberals and libertarians, which help a society to resist trends towards central consolidation of totalitarian control, pertain to faith, family, and fidelity. Faith in a source of principled higher mindedness. Decent loyalty to progeny and family. Fidelity to a society that promotes human freedom and dignity. The test for being a Conserver of Liberty relates to the question: What is needed to sustain a decent representative republic?
Absent good cause, a Conserver of Liberty would resist governmental encroachment on freedom of expression, enterprise, and association, while arguing for social mores against racism and socially divisive discrimination. A Conserver of Liberty would resist short-sighted efforts to de-define and undermine institutions of marriage and family. A Conserver of Liberty would resist foreign and oligarchic agglomerations of political power that make the idea of a representative republic into a poor kabuki joke. A Conserver of Liberty would call bs on so-called libertarian ideas of social liberalism (that amount to central governmental de-defining of family) and fiscal conservatism (that amount to allowing open season and open borders by oligarchs against the general electorate and citizenry).
As things now stand, so-called Libertarians and Liberals unite to undermine the institutions of family that would avail a society to function without central diktat, while so-called Conservatives and Libertarians unite to undermine the representative republic by declining to defend national borders and the representative function of the general electorate.
In some ways, Trump is a relief for the republic. In many ways, however, Americans have not yet re-awakened to the principles needed to sustain the representative republic. Those principles would be those of Conservers of Liberty. Many of the Founders were awake to such principles, even without necessarily expressly stating them. Certainly, they would not have supported the gender dysphoria now made concrete in law. Nor would they have supported the gross selling of political favors to foreign and corporate oligarchs. They would not have supported open-bordered invasion of the nation or its states. That is why I am unwilling to commit entirely to call myself a liberal, libertarian, conservative, republican, or democrat. I think many, if not most, of them tend to be clueless about what is needed to sustain a representative republic. Which is why they will likely lose it.
**********
It is obvious that the higher echelons of the FBI/DOJ were politically weaponized against Trump (and the middle class of decent Americans that he represents). The anti-Trump, anti-American appeasers of open-border corporatists and underminers of the national republic were so close to making the general electorate forever kabuki that they could taste it.
Now, they argue they were only being fair-minded and principled. Hah! Why then did Comey point out the facts regarding Hillary's transgressions? Well, duh. Because the facts were undeniable. The lower levels of the FBI still had some honest people, who had to be dealt with. And because he wanted to exonerate her before she was elected. To tamp down the outrage that would have occurred had she been elected without prior exoneration. IOW, he never suspected she would lose, and he wanted her not to be shackled after she was elected. Unfortunately, his hubris, and the hubris of all the other anti-Trump anti-Americans, got the best of him.
The Ponzi-pyramid of Dino/Rino corruption could only sustain so much. It hit its peak, and now, with Trump, it is being toppled. I only hope all the anti-Trump, anti-American, corporate-appeasing corrupti fall hard. Very hard.
**************
It makes little sense to fancy oneself either a conservative or a liberal unless one has an idea concerning what he is conservative or liberal about. To be a Conserver of Liberty, it makes little sense to advocate for liberality in the destruction of the underpinnings of a society of liberty. Those underpinnings, which seem often to be sullied both by so-called liberals and libertarians, which help a society to resist trends towards central consolidation of totalitarian control, pertain to faith, family, and fidelity. Faith in a source of principled higher mindedness. Decent loyalty to progeny and family. Fidelity to a society that promotes human freedom and dignity. The test for being a Conserver of Liberty relates to the question: What is needed to sustain a decent representative republic?
Absent good cause, a Conserver of Liberty would resist governmental encroachment on freedom of expression, enterprise, and association, while arguing for social mores against racism and socially divisive discrimination. A Conserver of Liberty would resist short-sighted efforts to de-define and undermine institutions of marriage and family. A Conserver of Liberty would resist foreign and oligarchic agglomerations of political power that make the idea of a representative republic into a poor kabuki joke. A Conserver of Liberty would call bs on so-called libertarian ideas of social liberalism (that amount to central governmental de-defining of family) and fiscal conservatism (that amount to allowing open season and open borders by oligarchs against the general electorate and citizenry).
As things now stand, so-called Libertarians and Liberals unite to undermine the institutions of family that would avail a society to function without central diktat, while so-called Conservatives and Libertarians unite to undermine the representative republic by declining to defend national borders and the representative function of the general electorate.
In some ways, Trump is a relief for the republic. In many ways, however, Americans have not yet re-awakened to the principles needed to sustain the representative republic. Those principles would be those of Conservers of Liberty. Many of the Founders were awake to such principles, even without necessarily expressly stating them. Certainly, they would not have supported the gender dysphoria now made concrete in law. Nor would they have supported the gross selling of political favors to foreign and corporate oligarchs. They would not have supported open-bordered invasion of the nation or its states. That is why I am unwilling to commit entirely to call myself a liberal, libertarian, conservative, republican, or democrat. I think many, if not most, of them tend to be clueless about what is needed to sustain a representative republic. Which is why they will likely lose it.
************
If Dems were flies, Trump would be the flypaper on which they go to expire. They can't help themselves. But the more the attacks on Trump by Hollyweirdos, CNN fruits, incompetent codependents, race baiters, and rap whiners, the more the general citizenry will apprehend that they are little more than maggots. As the air is cleared of these flies, Trump's approval percentage will soar.
************
Maybe Carter Page was an agent first for himself, second for the Deep State, third for the FBI, fourth for the Russians. Regardless, it appears he had been part of the counterintelligence effort for some time. So what did appointing Mueller do to enhance that counterintelligence effort? I can see how it helped further weaponize the FBI/DOJ on behalf of the Deep State and anti-Trumpers. But if no crime by Trump is actually described or being investigated, then what does the appointment of Mueller accomplish that the DOJ/FBI could not have done as part of its counterintelligence efforts? There being no prosecutable crime by Trump, and thus no probable cause to believe there was any crime by Trump, why did Congress, except as minions for the Deep State, find a need to weaponize a special investigator?
**********
Let Hollywood go the way of the NFL. Trump is trying to make America great for all Americans. The people who revere the flag generally revere the ideals as expressed in the pledge of allegiance: liberty and justice for all. They work to help that happen. What are the people who stand against the flag and against Trump working for? Entitlement to parade naked, to groom children, to destroy freedom of speech except for socialists/Marxists/looters/potheads/pedophiles, to make the State pay for depraved celebrations, to make the nation import anti-Americans, to foist pot on children, to burn the bonds that bind us in faith, family, and fidelity?
**********
Ideas of Pure Conservatism and Pure Socialism make little sense. If we respect human freedom and dignity, then we need to think about what is needed to preserve Conservers of Decent Society. To put the freedom of expression, enterprise, and association of a competent adult human being in a strait-jacket of central regulation is to sub-humanize him.
In the real world, the socialistic Left soon enough becomes the tool for fascists. Self-godding fascists tend to hide themselves behind masks of socialism until they acquire enough power to drop their masks. In practice, socialism seems always eventually to become fascism (oligarchic collectivism).
A human being generally has wondrous capacity to learn and think for himself. Despots don't want that. Despots want to sub-humanize you, to farm you as a sheeple (or dhimmi). Sometimes, despots mask their intentions by spreading phony sheeple-corn (fake free-stuff promises). Once despots consolidate central power and neuter you (take away your defenses), they tend to take off their masks and simply demand your unquestioning obedience. By the time the hellish lie of centrally enforced progress becomes evident, the people would find themselves already in hell.
***********
Re: "Opioid abuse is widespread. Homicidal violence plagues inner cities. Almost half of all children are born out of wedlock, and even more are raised by single mothers."
Marriage and family are being rendered meaningless. This correlates with the deliberate breakdown of the family and the deliberate promotion of gender dysphoria. This is what godless people-farmers do when they prepare to replace parents with government for raising subsequent generations of easily farmed sheeple. People farmers want the masses to feel married to the central gov.
The LGBTxyz crowd convince themselves they are on the side of "natural fairness" --- even as they serve as useful idiots for helping people-farmers lay the groundwork for replacing the representative republic with the new world people farm. But they love their free swinging genitalia so much that they make themselves blind to what they are doing to decent human society and its governance. Indeed, they raise hatred of Christian values to a fever pitch, as they hysterically shout against reality. In the end, they will crumple in a whimper. But not before they destroy human freedom, decency, and dignity.
If the LGBTxyz crowd could keep their predilections to themselves, few would complain. But they cannot. Most go along with parading their predilections, even forcibly using law to fling them in the face of elementary children. Many know what they do, but they are so addicted that they do it anyway, knowing how it undermines decent society. Some crap on public streets, fling poo, groom elementary school kids, and curse Christian values. Then, film makers and celebrities extol their lifestyles, while blaming Conservers of Liberty for how the people they train act out. For that, how can such people be forgiven?
**********
Central management for the NWO is about managing (hoodwinking) the full faith, credit, and trust of the masses. This applies to our polls, selective social scientisimists, currency, politics, education (indoctrination), and our selectively cherry-picked information (media).
Oligarchs (central hoodwinkers) are continuously learning how more effectively to apply Alinsky (Satanist) tactics to convert the masses into farmable sheeple. This seems to be a natural effect of insufficiently resisting and checking the central consolidation of authority to write and to selectively enforce laws, hate-speech (PC) regulations, and the creation of fiat money.
The more an iron triangle (of self-godded oligarchic moochers, stoolie bureaucrats, and corrupt politicians) is unchecked and enabled to consolidate central power, the more easily the masses will be converted into sheeple.
The central consolidation of power in DC has created a stinking swamp that must be drained if human freedom, decency, and dignity are not to be drowned in a gurgling death rattle.
************
In the real world, the socialistic Left soon enough becomes the tool for fascists. Fascists hide themselves behind the mask of socialism until they acquire enough power to drop the mask. In practice, socialism seems always eventually to become fascism (oligarchic collectivism).
Fascist despots love the peacefulness that comes with the subjugation of the dignity of the masses and their freedom to think and speak for themselves. Despots want to order you, without having to listen to you. If your speech offends them, they agitate or hire their stooges to punish you for a PC violation. If your speech endangers their power, they ram their stooges against you. Despots want you to believe that it is good to trade away your freedom in exchange for their phony promises of peacefulness, security, fairness, and equality. When despots are not seeking to eliminate or confine you, they are seeking to diversify, divide, corral, and farm you.
Despots tell big lies about godless socialism. They pretend good morals only exist as part of the measurable mechanics of nature, instead of as guidance through a spiritual higher-mindedness. Despots lie that fascist national socialism under the Nazis was not really socialism-in-practice.
In all of "progressive" history, stooges for despots are unable to show a single decent, free-thinking, multi-cultural, porous-bordered, socialistic society that survived for any appreciable time without soon "suiciding" itself by tolerating and inviting its takeover by any kind of sexual, pharmaceutical, social, and secular-religious (Islamic?) depravity.
A human being generally has wondrous capacity to learn and think for himself. Despots don't want that. Despots want to sub-humanize you, to farm you as a sheeple (or dhimmi). Sometimes, despots mask their intentions by spreading phony sheeple-corn (fake free-stuff promises). Once despots neuter you (take away your defenses), they take off the masks and simply demand your unquestioning obedience.
Once a godless, self-godded despot's power and safety are secured, why expect him to care about you? To any intuitive person, his spiritlessness would scream that he tends not to believe in any source or ideal for higher mindedness (or natural morality), but he merely pretends ... so long as he finds it helpful to his self-aggrandizement.
"Success" stories by Progressive Lefties (fascism is socialism with goosier boots): North Korea, Venezuela, Argentina, Cuba, Russia, Fascist Italy, Fascist Germany, etc. (NOTE: See http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/11/scandinavia-isnt-a-socialist-paradise/.)
So, why should any thinking American spend much time listening to the rot of "educated" socialistic or "peace-loving" gun grabbers?
****************
Insane entitlement-mindedness seems to be reaching critical mass --- either to destroy itself or to destroy the republic. Might this profusion of insanity avail a breeding ground for other ways of acting out insanity, such as for safe-space serial-killers? Perhaps a republic that does not know whether or not it wants to survive will want to close its mental hospitals, celebrate and fund these crazies in the streets, and promote them to become professors and politicians? More laws and gun-grabbing will not fix this love-celebration of crazy.
During the Fifties, the U.S., although racism may have been more prevalent, was a more Christian and less multi-cultural nation. Society was more assimilative but less tolerant of various forms of family-threatening depravities. People were less entitlement-minded. They did not think the world owed them a living. They did not think they were entitled to act out, lash out, or punish society generally. There may have been more mental hospitals for those who did think they were so entitled.
I wonder how rates for producing serial killers, criminals, and mass-despots varies among socialistic-leaning and non-Christian societies and nations?
***************
I doubt Thinking Dems (are there any?) believe gun confiscation would cure anything. I doubt they believe confiscation will happen. So why do they talk so much about it? Well, why do they talk so much about free lunches, free health care, free education, and free safe spaces --- even though everyone knows nothing is free of opportunity costs and that free-stuff promises are phony sheeple-corn spread to farm the sheeple?
They talk about this crap because it sells to their base of educated (indoctrinated) fools. They never actually deliver any results that they promise (equality, fairness, decency)! All they deliver is more crime, more ghettos, more breeding grounds for refugees, more social divisiveness, more codependent whining, more fatherless families, more sub-humanizing dystopia, more sheeple-farmees, and more grist for fascist-jihadi-despots.
Trained sheeple are useful as little more than masks to cover the sprees of crime, gluttony, rapine, and plunder by people-farming despots. Just look at the number of scandals under the "scandal-free" rule of the Soros-Obama Regime. Scandals that would have gone largely uncovered, but for the defeat of Hillary-The-Crook.
In all of "progressive" History, show me one decent, free-thinking, multi-cultural, porous-bordered, socialistic society that survived for any appreciable time without soon "suiciding" itself by tolerating and inviting its takeover by every kind of sexual, pharmaceutical, social, and religious depravity. "Success" stories by Progressive Lefties (fascism is socialism with goosier boots): North Korea, Venezuela, Argentina, Cuba, Russia, Fascist Italy, Fascist Germany, etc. (NOTE: See http://thefederalist.com/2015/08/11/scandinavia-isnt-a-socialist-paradise/.) So, why should any thinking Americans spend much time listening to the rot of "educated" socialists?
****************
The conspiracy would be in how the students and their narratives are selected.
How to protect the children: Arm more of the teachers. Restrict admittance by unregistered persons. Teach students to think for themselves and to need less protection from free speech. Put disruptive students in special classes. Stop teaching students to expect the gov to satisfy all their wants. Stop teaching students to become whiny codependents. Stop banning respect for spiritual ideals of good faith and good will. Stop grooming students to become gender dysphoric. Teach respect for national borders and the founding ideals of the nation. Stop the overemphasis on race. Guide students to assimilate as independent Americans rather than to divide as codependent gangs. Stop promoting special esteem for malcontents bent towards disintegrating the republic. Stop making Che and Fidel out to be heroes.
******************
Dems have been instrumental in closing mental hospitals, undermining social norms, normalizing violent entertainments, and selectively promoting oligarchic collectivism. Now they are selectively promoting easily duped youth. See https://disqus.com/home/discussion/channel-jwcodysbitchfest/exclusive_soros_linked_organizers_of_womens_march_selected_anti_trump_kids_to_be_face_of_parkland_tr/. This is how wannabe farmees select carriers for their cherry-factual narratives that are bent towards fairie-utopia --- that always produce dystopia, despotism, and sheeple sub-humanization. This is how farmee snowflakes are selectively fast tracked in every institution --- by godless-self-godded people-farmers. This is how natural selection, unchecked by conscious decency, selects for evil. This is how politics selects and ratchets towards nihilism or new world serfdom of the Left. This is why so many people who finally wake up and become grown up in their thinking report that they did not leave the Dem Party, but that the Dem Party left them. But while they slept, all our institutions became selectively rotted. Conservers of Liberty are not afraid. But they do see Dinos, Rinos, and Linos for what they are and for whom they serve. The rot in Cuomo is easy to see.
***************
See https://disqus.com/home/discussion/channel-jwcodysbitchfest/exclusive_soros_linked_organizers_of_womens_march_selected_anti_trump_kids_to_be_face_of_parkland_tr/. This is how wannabe farmees select carriers for their cherry-factual narratives that are bent towards fairie-utopia --- that always produces dystopia, despotism, and sheeple sub-humanization. This is how farmee snowflakes are fast tracked in every institution --- by godless-self-godded people-farmers. This is how natural selection, unchecked by decent human beings, spews out its evil. This is how politics is nearly always ratcheted towards the evil nihilism and new world serfdom of the Left. This is why so many people who finally grow up report that they did not leave the Dem Party, but that the Dem Party left them.***************
*********************
Few societies become fit to be representative republics, and fewer yet remain so for long. Freedom is not free. It is not an entitlement. It may be an inheritance, but it is not purely a birth-right. For a society to remain meaningfully free within the matrix, certain ingredients are essential. Among them is requisite moral vision (faith, family, fidelity). As well as appreciation for how easily a free society can be unraveled and replaced with despotism born of opportunistic chaos.
****************
Mind-like, math-based sequences are continuously formed and preserved, as records of assignment for each and every fleeting appearance of a newly emerging and measurable formation. Each cumulation of record is preserved in the matrix-system of unfolding patterns. As each evolvement emerges, it part-icipates in the preservation of such in-form-ation. At any present locus in space-time, our bodies function as perspectivistic way-stations for the mind-like unfoldment of this matrix, as it constantly, continuously, and perpetually avails expression of astonishing replenishments of patterns, forms, bodies, perspectives, and societies.
Whether the matrix will continue to bless and express any nation as a representative republic depends considerably on our preserved fitness for it. Freedom may be a natural human "right," but it is NOT an entitlement. If allowed, modern fake-Libs will soon be the death of it.
***************
Creative destruction through competition is not just at the heart of man-expressed capitalism. It is also at the heart of natural selection, i.e., how God (Consciousness) guides the unfoldment of the cosmos.
***************
I watched a segment on GAIA about Consciousness. Part of it was interesting. It comported with many of my own ideas. Other parts seemed marred by wishful or incomplete thinking.
Intuition may suggest that Consciousness (God) seeks experience through a plethora of Perspectives. Each Perspective is imbued with an aspect of separateness and an aspect of connectiveness. No Perspective can exist entirely as a separate hermit or entirely as a codependent communist. Every Perspective must function in respect of a math or quantum field that imposes both formational reinforcement and creative destruction ("feminine" cooperation and "masculine" competition.)
Beyond part-icular Perspectives, the Source of Consciousness may abide as pure love and forgiveness. Nevertheless, the unfolding manifestations of its living forms of measurable expression are relentlessly subject to a math-based balancing of reinforcing cooperation and creatively destructive competition.
The expression of math-based balancing --- whether by man or God --- can NOT be purely loving or forgiving. Rather, as manifested, it is relentless and objective.
Whether or not competition is well conceptualized as a "natural human right," it is definitely a natural and UNAVOIDABLE aspect of measurable existentiality. Math is like that. Balance of power. Balance of competition. Circle of Life.
***************
Hypothesis: Many serial killers blame the gov and everyone else for their shortcomings, so they engage in serial and mass killings --- as a way to cry out for more gov.
IOW, they tend to kill as socially incompetent Lefties. After which the mentally deranged Left lies and blames so-called Alt-Right groups, so it can indoctrinate more socially incompetent Lefties. Of course, Oligarchic Collectivists are quick to provide funding and media, to help reign in the new world plantation.
***********
Maybe Heaven can have open borders, open love, and unlimited forgiveness. On Earth, however, to tolerate evil tends to be to fertilize its growth. If we want to preserve hope for human freedom and decency on Earth, then we need to stop with the apologetics for the UN and for Islam. Basic law of Conservation: If you don't tend your garden, it will go to weeds.
***********
The View seems to be pure propaganda for feminists to shill for Soros to grease the way to a new world plantation of codependent femimen and feminazis. It is a show to indoctrinate sheeple, whose opinions are not to be valued, because our expert corporatist-rulers already know best. It is PC mind control, bent on wiping out informed and free thinking, so we can be better ruled by our fake betters. Pure, anti-American crap. But saying so would get you called a racist or man-splainer.
**********
Well, add this to that: Moral criminals often have radar to find and help one another as they engage in their rapine and plunder. Now that we're more connected and civilized, they tend to do this under the table or with people-farming signals and head-faking personas.
Our politicians who get elected with funds from corporatist oligarchs well know how their bread is buttered and whom they must serve. And, they well know that every other successful politician knows the same thing.
To con-spire means simply to breathe together. Express documentation among people-farming sociopaths is no more necessary than it is for a pack of circling wolves.
Moreover, this "breathing together" among corrupt people-farmers works in every institution, whether it be of media, academia, sophistry, scientism, politics, church, courts, charities, and banking. Ever wonder why so many nutty or corrupt profs get tenure? And why so few decent people are allowed to express themselves in the club? Ever wonder why so many students and employees have to hobble themselves against standing up to PC idiocy, because the PC mafia will blackball (shun, suspend, sack) them if they show any record or inclination for thinking contrary to PC?
Modern communications, methods, and signals have been turned to grease the way for this rot to fester, everywhere.
Bottom line: The way for people farmers to float is being greased, while the way for decent people to rise is being blocked. Had Trump not been a billionaire himself, there may be no way a person with his mindset for restoring the republic could ever have been elected President. The question is: After Trump, what then? If political decency is not entirely to perish, if government of, by, and for the people is not to perish, then thinkers of the world must throw off their mind shackles.
*************
