The Philosophers

"
Quote :
Quote :
8. The idea of workers rights, unions and some trade protectionism is a basically politically Left position (the opposite position of “free trade” global capitalism is the neoliberal-neoconservative idea).

I disagree. The left/right distinction came from Marx, who took a perfectly pan-political English workers movement for an extra day off (weekend), and minimum wage, and made it itno some bizarre metaphysical ‘necessity’. Traditionally, working classes vote conservative, namely to keep their jobs - only when a right wing regime needs to be replaced to they sometimes go for left - but this regime now is ultra-left, ultra statist, and has all but destroyed the working class.

I am only speaking of US politics here. I understand the left/right political divide doesnt perfectly translate from the US to European countries.

Marx’s point was that the class war being fought at the economic level of labor against capital owners is indeed a kind of metaphysical necessity as you called it. That is absolutely truly the case. Marx was right about that. If you disagree, tell me why. The entire nature of labor is that we (you and I, most people) are required to sell our labor power as a commodity to a capital owner; the capital owner literally buys us as indentured servants and we sell our intellectual or physical or emotional labor, the capitalist sits around and by virtue of owning the capital is able to directly appropriate our labor to himself, and “pays” us wages that are commensurate only with the cost of this labor (again, us, you and me and most people) replacing itself over time as a flesh mass workforce.

Yes, that is a fucked up, highly “metaphysical” situation that human being is present locked in. Marx was right to call bullshit on it.

Quote :
Consider how utterly noble it is for people to fight to the right to work, to build something.

Indeed work is, all other things being equal, a noble and necessary thing. That does not at all refute the above point I just made.

Quote :
I dont believe in left and right at all, never have, by the way. Trump talks like someone who understands peoples desire to make themselves useful, rather than being urged to feel guilty for wanting to work. I dont care who is in the left, or in the right textballoon - I just know that he’s right about this, regardless of what he can ultimatey accomplish.

You’re homogenizing all “work” into the same category, a supposedly noble thing where we desire to “be useful” in some grand beautiful sense. Most work today does not conform to that standard. Most people feel like slaves, and are slaves.

Quote :
It is a very crucial thing to just have your values expressed for a person, especially when the last 20 years, your presidents have scolded you for having values, and for complaining when they give all your values away to fascist and simply incompetent regimes overseas.

Trump mostly represents normal people being fed up with being lectured by the very people that ruin their lives, towns, states, country, and planet. In this sense, at least, he represents me. He is the most dignified and honest representative politician I ever saw. Hillary is of course not elected really, so she isnt a representative politician, just a banal criminal. But she’s not the issue here.

Again, we will disagree. Which people have ruined the lives of which other people, and how? NAFTA puts manufacturing out of business but creates a ton of other jobs elsewhere, such as in service industries and traded goods, imports, small proprietors and entrepreneurs and salesmen. NAFTA also lowers prices on goods and services over time (I am not defending NAFTA, but I am pointing out that these same Trump supporters have also benefitted from it too). The only ones who really get net zero or negative benefit from NAFTA are A) if you literally really did lose your job at the steel mill and are basically unemployable now, or 2) if you are working in a third world sweat shop or jumping off the roof of Foxconn. Those people have legitimate complaints against NAFTA… these petulant Trump supporters are not seriously in a position to complain at all, they are just “disaffected” and mostly whining. Trust me, I have been to Tea Party rallies, I have seen what it is like there.

Imagine a bunch of well to do upper middle class white guys in business suits holding up anti-Obama signs about how Amerca is Tyranny now. Yeah, these fucking people have no idea what tyranny really is – do you think they give one shit about the workers in the third world, or the lower class laborers who REALLY lose their jobs due to free trade policies? Nope. They just care about their own narrow ideological, partisan feelings and getting to spout off against “them liberals”.

This is precisely my point, that most of these supposedly angry Trump supporters aren’t seriously upset by the REAL problems that we have. And neither for that matter is Trump. Mostly it is a lot of fake outrage (it is real outrage for faked reasons).

Quote :
Quote :
9. The political Right (Republican party of which Trump is a member) in the US generally supports corporations as people, money as speech and the decimation of institutions like the EPA whose task is to hold corporations to a basic standard of social beneficence toward public spaces and public health; again the notion that corporations are not people, money is not speech and companies should generally serve the public interest or at least not seriously damage it, these are all politically Left views.

As Ive said I dont see life in categories like that, what Ive seen happen with my own eyes is the Democrats under Clinton have sold out the country and planet to a few corporations, and they were enthusiastically helped by the Bush clan, for the whole thing to be extended by Obama. They are lal clearly of the same party,despite the shows they put up to pretend to be adversaries. It would be hilarious if it was acted a bit better. Now its just watching a bunch of sanctimonious Hitler wannabes seeing who can make the most pointless kills with a smile… I truly dont get what their joy is but they seem to enjoy it. Anyway - this is what I keep coming back to. The last 4 presidents were just basically American Hitlers, in terms of the disregard for human life.

There are clear differences between the left and right parties here in the US. This radically cynical view, which I also think is deliberately defeatist, that they are all the same, there is no difference, it is all shit, everyone of them is Hitler, is just nonsense to me. But then again I live here and see first hand the real, down to earth differences in beliefs and attitudes of these people based on their political persuasion. And more to the point, the ideas themselves which you seem to appreciate, namely the ones mentioned just above in the quote, are at the philosophical and theoretical level progressive ideas, namely they stem from a deeply rooted belief and value in human rights, equality, fair treatment, the rights of the individual, and social justice when it comes to caring for public spaces and not allowing private industry to run over all of it, destroying and polluting or even just privatizing it all. These are good ideas, we need more ideas like this; they are fundamentally philosophical, progressive thoughts and values. It is good that you have them implicitly, but you don’t seem to want to acknowledge from where they come or why they are really valuable at all.

Quote :
Quote :
10. Global warming does actually exist and it is actually very critically important that we address it somehow. Trump’s denial of these facts is based on his ideological need to remain ignorant here.

I think that the point Parodites has been making is the right one; nothing is worth handing over our power to a global elite. Nothing furthermore exists that count count as a reason to trust that such elites would even be remotely capable of addressing any issue with success. These are the same elites that have caused global warming - who have shaped the world of uncontrolled industry that we’re in.

Industry itself isn’t bad. Technology and science are the only ways we can fix global warming. We do not need to shut everything down, we need to keep innovating new ideas like carbon capture tech. And no, “the elites” didn’t “create global warming”, that is a weird and false way of looking at it. Global warming is a natural consequence of the industrialization of the modern world, probably every self-aware, sentient species in the universe confronts this challenge at a certain stage in its development as a species.

I of course agree that we should not just hand over our power to anyone. Obviously I agree on that. But I am saying we do not need to do that. Things like the Paris Agreement can happen if idiots like Trump get out of the way, denying the very problem itself. And why do you think big business apologists like these Republicans deny global warming? It is because of their own narrow self-interest at the level of business and profit. They do not want to have to scale back or pay for more advanced technology or pay a cost for the carbon they emit. There is heavy lobbying here in the US by the energy industry. The Republicans are basically, to a certain degree, beholden to these people and special interests. I don’t know if Trump is beholden to them or not, but the GOP in general is.

Quote :
Now we should give them more power in the belief they will act wisely and on our behalf? Hmmm… no.

Again, this is not something I ever advocated, nor is that what would be necessary. When it comes to politics and serious problems I believe in honest and difficult pragmatism, not easy hyperbole.

Quote :
Quote :
I found one point Parodites made and you just reiterated which I have yet to respond to, namely that global government would amount to giving power to be tyrannical, that in order to fight global warming we would necessarily be handing over tyrannical power to a global level government. I disagree because while yes global government could be used for tyrannical ends, this is the case with any government; it requires that we carefully craft the structure of government such as the Founders did in the US, and not just abandon the entire project. Again this falls back on the fact that I’ve already outlined my idea of how global government could work, a kind of UN like setup but with more force of law and some kind of basic shared military apparatus. Decisions would be voted on by representatives, not made by one tyrant.

That it happens with any government is precisely why it will certainly happen with something as colossal and unwieldy as a global government. Al the UN does these decennia is stand by while the chosen dictators or militias slaughter their populations. Then they extend the dictator a document.

You are arguing against a specific iteration of the UN, and not even the UN in general, much less the idea as such of a “United Nations” sort of structure. The UN indeed does condone violence and genocide, approve sanctions, sent in peacekeepers and relief supplies and aid workers, and try to organize for peace. Yes they aren’t always great at it, there needs to be a lot more work being done here. That is precisely my point, which you seem to indirectly be agreeing to: the UN is not yet good enough, we need more of this very same thing. Your very complaint against the UN, that it is not effective at its ostensible goals, is also precisely my point too.

Quote :
Quote :
Another point I found where I didn’t properly respond yet: Parodites claim that the US constitution exists as a means for the will of the people to realize itself, “The US constitution and founding documents were designed in order to provide the masses the instrument by which to express- as perfectly as possible, that will. It has been corrupted as I said by the centralized federal government. The founders also hoped we would even make further improvements to it, as opposed to fuck it up like we’ve done.” My response is that the US constitution set up a government of division of powers and representative elected leadership precisely to also prevent the “the people” from “expressing their will”. We have an entire judicial branch that is equal to the other branches; the judicial branch doesn’t work by submitting issues to popular vote. Neither are laws written like that. In fact the US constitution makes it quite difficult for direct popular vote of the people to enact any laws (amending the constitution requires 3/4 vote of all states (yes states, not even direct democracy here either). It’s diluted surrogate governance of layers of representation with checks and balances where experts positioned at key points in the system (such as judges) make critical determinations. I absolutely disagree that the will of the people is somehow the central or sole goal here. If it were, direct popular vote would have been the basic template on which decisions of law and policy are made, and that is not the case. The vast majority of the time we vote for REPRESENTATIVES, people, not on law or policy directly. This allows for compromises and for expert level thought on issues to coexist with the larger and more blind, inexpert will of the people. It’s basically a system of compromise. And that is why it works.

Edit: Disclaimer: no feelings were harmed in the making of this post.

Im between you and Parodites in this - I do believe the logos was the correct one, but as I said in this thread earlier, the logos was superimposed on a highly unequal landscape.

The whole suing and countersueing culture evidently makes it impossible for a nation to be truly stable. It is absolutely prepostrous. Maybe this would be a fertile subject to investigate for us - how to construct a proper legislative system without becoming socialist or anti-capitalist or anti-wealth.

All of it comes down to how valuing is understood, how it is ranked in the episteme, from which the law is born

Yes, basically: reality is imperfect. Politics and economics especially.


“We must, now armed with such a language, realize the “transcendental unity of ideas,” through a new morality that aims, not to hypostasize experience and grasp in positive knowledge a series of particular virtues and vices, but rather to fully explicate this continuity; where philosophy exists to represent this transcendental order, morality most exist to mediate the two spheres, the spheres of experience and ideality.” -Parodites

“Was it necessary for the sense of truth that Nietzsche described as developed by the Judeo-Christian tradition that then manifested itself in the scientific methodology to turn against the symbolic foundation of that structure and demolish it… Jung’s answer was that the conflict between science and religion is a consequence of the immature state of both of those domains of thinking… it’s just that we aren’t good enough at being religious or at being scientific to see how they might be reconciled.” -Jordan Peterson
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:03 pm
" You yourself seem to clearly oppose the state of affairs where the US “steals the oil”, so why on earth are you defending Trump when he “goes along with Obama?” More specifically, in Iraq, the US did return the oil fields to the Iraqi people, which was absolutely the right thing to do. "

Obviously it wasn’t. We shouldn’t have left oil to a destabilized state where we know terrorist ideology was propagated.

“I have not seen Trump admit this. If that is true then he is basically saying “hey I am doing bad things because it is really hard to be good!” Well, that isn’t really a defense, just a pale justification and excuse. In any sense it is not a philosophical reason”

You claim we can’t rag on politicians because we haven’t read their 1,000 page tax code, but your rag on Trump’s business practice. People in his position have something called fiduciary responsibility. They must avoid paying costs that could be legally avoided, in order to maximize profits for their workers. If that means working the tax code, moving a factory out of the US, etc. then that’s what he does. His point is that he shouldn’t have to move his shit to another country, there shouldn’t be a tax code full of loop holes. The tax code reform he is going to pass simplifies hundreds of pages to a single page, making it more of an even playing field for small and larger businesses. This reform will cost Trump himself a significant monetary loss.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:05 pm
"There are clear differences between the left and right parties here in the US. This radically cynical view, which I also think is deliberately defeatist, that they are all the same, there is no difference, it is all shit, everyone of them is Hitler, is just nonsense to me. But then again I live here and see first hand the real, down to earth differences in beliefs and attitudes of these people based on their political persuasion. "

Nah, they’re both (were) globalist corporatocratic parties. The only difference is in meaningless social issues: one likes fags, the other doesn’t. On everything that matters they are the same. Bush and Obama’s foreign policy was the same. Their views on the surveillance state were the same.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:09 pm
“I found one point Parodites made and you just reiterated which I have yet to respond to, namely that global government would amount to giving power to be tyrannical, that in order to fight global warming we would necessarily be handing over tyrannical power to a global level government. I disagree because while yes global government could be used for tyrannical ends, this is the case with any government; it requires that we carefully craft the structure of government such as the Founders did in the US, and not just abandon the entire project. Again this falls back on the fact that I’ve already outlined my idea of how global government could work, a kind of UN like setup but with more force of law and some kind of basic shared military apparatus. Decisions would be voted on by representatives, not made by one tyrant.”

The cultures and national identities in this world cannot possibly ever come together in the way you describe. It is not conceivable. You would have to first get rid of the idea of the nation state and open the borders, then simmer the population in a melting pot for a few generations.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3183
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Kekistan

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:11 pm
Parodites wrote:
No hard feelings in this, just have to respond.

" To hate one is to love the other. I recall Nietzsche talking about this logic as the basis of slave morality: you are bad (evil) therefore I am good. Clinton is bad/evil therefore Trump is good. Or, as Ive been falsely accused of already many times, just because I think Trump is bad (not “evil”) must mean that I apparently think Clinton is good. "

Bullshit, nobody has intimated that you support Clinton. I recognize you do not, I have also recognized you’re not supporting the current globalist regime. Is putting words in our mouth part of your elite debating skills that you learned?

Thanks for the attitude and making it personal. Glad we can really elevate the conversation here.

Yes many times when I make arguments against Trump it has been replied that Clinton is much worse, or why don’t I also attack Clinton also? This is the false dichotomy I am taking about; “Clinton is bad, therefore Trump is good, or must be good”. It doesn’t need to be a direct “You believe X” statement to conform to that fallacy, nor for the implication to be quite clear that apparently in order for me to attack or criticize Trump I am supposed to also either attack or defend Clinton; after all, why would Clinton come up so much when I am talking about Trump specifically, if perhaps not as the false dichotomy of the fallacy of excluded middle then maybe just as a kind of redirection?

Quote :

  1. The false conflation that Trump made between protecting Iraqi oil from terrorists and stealing it for our own use.

  2. Trump ripping off contractors and American steel workers by secretly purchasing Chinese steel for his buildings and for refusing to pay contractors for work done.
    [His practice as a businessman is typical and nothing illegal was done.]

That wasn’t my point. My point was that Trump is being a clear hypocrite and apparently lying about truly caring about issues like cheap Chinese imported steel.

Quote :
3. Trump using third world sweat shops for his clothing line, and owning stock in the very companies he supposedly objects to (Ford, GM, Nabisco, etc.)
[His practice as a businessman is typical and nothing illegal was done.]

Ok, it is clear that tou are [i]deliberately missing my point.

I will be honest, this is a new low for BTL.

Quote :
4. The fact that “tyranny of the majority” is a very real concern and that direct democracy on policy issues doesn’t work very well and isn’t ideal (as I said, in no other field or line of work or policy do we take a “vote of “the people”” for policy or decide what to do).
[What does that have to do with Trump, specifically? And our process is much more complicated, it takes into account to some extent the non-homogeneous nature of ideology, it’s a representative government, etc. Are you… suggesting that Trump should be denied the presidency even if we wins the popular vote? What is the point? Is Trump a tyranny of the majority? ]

No, I am not saying that Trump should be denied the presidency if he wins the popular vote (although he could still lose anyway, thanks to the electoral college system). And the kind of fake populism and cheap religious pulpit-like demagoguery that Trump represents and cultivates in his followers is indeed flowing from the same place where the danger of tyranny of the majority resides. As de Tocqueville was referenced as saying in that news piece which you summarily dismissed without serious discussion.

Quote :
5. A democratized group of nations is a real possible form of globalism (globalism is not inherently “totalitarian” any more than government itself is).
[Government- centralized federal top down government: is itself totalitarian and fascistic.]

No it is not, not necessarily. You can define it that way if you want, but that doesn’t make it true. You could of course provide some evidence or reasoning in favor of the logical argument that federal top down government is necessarily totalitarian and fascistic… that should be interesting to see.

Quote :
6. The government should not be run like a business (for profits).
[Says who? The US government should exist to maximize American interests over those of other nations and populations. Does that mean “for profit”? Do you disagree?]

The point I made was that the nature of government is different from the nature of business. Not every thing can be capitalized upon to turn a profit, case in point with addressing polluting of common spaces (economic Tragedy of the Commons). The government in part exists to address those issues and problems which are either not capitalizable or ought not to be capitalized upon; the business world exists to generate those profits, pure and simple.

Quote :
7. Global level problems actually do require global level solutions.
[An assertion.]

What the fucking hell? Where has the honest intention for serious discussion gone?

Yes it is an “assertion”. It is also one that makes perfect sense, or perhaps you can tell me how you are going to address a problem of X scope if you aren’t going to operate solutions at the same X level? Or perhaps you can be bothered to even reply to the point I made at all, rather than dismiss it out of hand like some fucking troll.

Anyway, I am fucking pissed off now. You achieved your end. I will not bother with the rest of what you wrote.


“We must, now armed with such a language, realize the “transcendental unity of ideas,” through a new morality that aims, not to hypostasize experience and grasp in positive knowledge a series of particular virtues and vices, but rather to fully explicate this continuity; where philosophy exists to represent this transcendental order, morality most exist to mediate the two spheres, the spheres of experience and ideality.” -Parodites

“Was it necessary for the sense of truth that Nietzsche described as developed by the Judeo-Christian tradition that then manifested itself in the scientific methodology to turn against the symbolic foundation of that structure and demolish it… Jung’s answer was that the conflict between science and religion is a consequence of the immature state of both of those domains of thinking… it’s just that we aren’t good enough at being religious or at being scientific to see how they might be reconciled.” -Jordan Peterson
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:13 pm
“I of course agree that we should not just hand over our power to anyone. Obviously I agree on that. But I am saying we do not need to do that. Things like the Paris Agreement can happen if idiots like Trump get out of the way, denying the very problem itself. And why do you think big business apologists like these Republicans deny global warming? It is because of their own narrow self-interest at the level of business and profit”

And why do you think others push it so vehemently?

Could it be- perhaps, that the gravity of global warming falls somewhere in the middle between “it doesn’t exist” and “it’s our gravest existential threat,” and that both parties are using it- as they use everything, to profit themselves?


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:20 pm
"Thanks for the attitude and making it personal. Glad we can really elevate the conversation here. "

No, no, no. You’re the one who made it personal. At no point until this thread did I ever exhibit hostility, you are the one who has done so repeatedly.

I’m pissed that you lump several million Trump supporters into the “irredeemable asshole” category. As I support him, that is personal. You explicitly stated that one cannot like Trump “and have any heart”, etc.

" No it is not, not necessarily. You can define it that way if you want, but that doesn’t make it true. You could of course provide some evidence or reasoning in favor of the logical argument that federal top down government is necessarily totalitarian and fascistic… that should be interesting to see. "

I’m not defining it, it’s called a principle. The federal government draws its authority through force- it can legally dispense force; it does not draw it from our volition. Perhaps to some extent it will always be necessary, but this federal government has gone far beyond the scope of powers originally afforded to it. If you read the constitution as granting implied powers, there is no limit to the number of additional capacities you can add to the federal government. The only way to read it, is: if the constitituon does not explicitly define that power, it does not exist.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:22 pm
You’re the one in general that has allowed political discussion to become personal, when you began levying insults all over the place at Trump and anyone who likes him.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:23 pm
" That wasn’t my point. My point was that Trump is being a clear hypocrite and apparently lying about truly caring about issues like cheap Chinese imported steel. "

What I said about fiduciary responsibility applies. Or instead of that explanation for the variance in his business practice and his politics, you could just call him a liar.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:29 pm
“Global level problems actually do require global level solutions.”

The reason I didn’t address it seriously, is the following: for the reasons I mentioned about national identities being too different to cooperate effectively, that global level of cooperation will never appear organically. China is never going to quit fucking up the environment in some spirit of human fraternity with us. You might get Russia to dismantle a couple bombs, if you’re lucky: but they’re never going away. So we must rely on less than global solutions.

Last edited by Parodites on Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:43 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:30 pm
And I am still irritated that you claim: I am the one making it personal. My debate skill comment was a fucking joke, dude. Your comment that I’m an irredeemable amoral heartless asshole because I like Trump- that wasn’t a joke.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:34 pm
Honestly, what the fuck are you talking about?

[Just to be clear, if we’re still on the topic, here is your standard of taste:

giphy.com/gifs/fun-trump-donald-cEb1tO6Xvn0DS]

That wasn’t a personal insult?

So go be pissed off, just understand: you’re the one who made it personal first.

The fact that you won’t support Trump never became for me a signature of defect or malice in your person, I just took you as having got caught up in the spirit of Trumpenhate, as we may have perhaps got caught up in the opposite. But you have quite clearly allowed the fact that a person likes Trump to override your rationality. You could have even voted Clinton and I would have never read you a list of the dictators she’s received money from and said to you: that’s your standard of taste, you’re basically soul-less and heartless for supporting this cunt, you’re just a rabid racist spellbound by empty demagoguery, etc."

" I could be converted into a Trump supporter if the facts, evidence and sound philosophical reasoning requires it. I’m happy to go that route if anyone would like. Otherwise we have mostly stated our positions and our values, and that will have to be enough for now. "

I explained his fiduciary responsibility, and his dealings as a businessman have nothing to do with his politics. Especially when the very tax reforms he has proposed would cost him significantly. I have explained my position on the global state and the fact that a politics based on national identity cannot coexist with it. The global structure you want does not exist. The one that does, has cost us gravely, and Trump at least claims to stand against it. I have explained that his support is coming from a transition into a new political paradigm, and that the parties are reformulating; while Trump openly embraces that reform, Clinton has stuck to the old dying axis- that’s where Trump’s support is coming from. It isn’t because he’s just a “populist, a demagogue.” I have explained the material danger of a Clinton presidency. There is nothing else I can do. A few of his little gaffes, like the t-rex arm guy, I explained as well, but for the most part I thought them insignificant. I could throw my hands up and say you’ve ignored all my arguments just as you say we’ve ignored yours. Clinton is: we’re definitely fucked. Trump is: maybe we’re fucked. If you can’t honestly see enough of a reason to vote one way or the other on that, fine. Honestly your entire line against Trump revolves around petty gaffes and drudging up random blurbs he made without any context, insulting his supporters; comparing his business practice with his politics without any apparent understanding of his fiduciary responsibility, comparing him to Hitler, insinuating he’s a racist, (he’s simply not) etc.

I’ve brought this thread into page 9, but one gets carried away sometimes.

We’ve been friends for about 10 years at least, you want to tell me to fuck off because I committed the egregious crime of poking fun at your “I learned how to debate bit”, (you can’t go on a rant about how great you learned to debate and expect nobody to say anything) especially after all the insulting shit I pointed out that you’ve hurled at people on Trump’s side, (which I obviously am) it’s your prerogative. You can’t say shit like “If you like Trump you have no heart, no taste, you’re not a thinker anymore you just want a Fuhrer,” and not expect me and anyone else on Trump’s side to not take that personally, as you know I definitely like him. I let it go at first though. What if I said: you can’t support the centralization of federal government and a global state without being a soul-dead conformist pussy retard? What if I said: If you’re a leftist, you’re a tasteless douche with no credibility as a human being. Would that not be insulting? I didn’t do that shit to you. But you can do it to us. I wouldn’t do it either, because I don’t believe it.

But hey, maybe I just need to read some more Washington Post, it will all make sense to me then. That’s called levity. Now you’re supposed to say: and maybe I can just pop a couple dozen pain killers and probably fall right on the Trump Train too. Or ignore everything, then tell us we’re ignoring you; insult anyone who likes Trump repeatedly and then get pissed off when I take one jab at something you said, riding off into the night on your cloud of moral superiority. Don’t post that bullshit fucking gif and tell me you’re here for a serious debate or what my taste is and then get mad when I make fun of one thing you said. I explained why it was a ridiculous image.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 9:51 pm
I think by now the title of the thread has been revealed to not be hollow.

VO prescribes irreconcilable value-differences. That is what being is.

This election is of absolute significance. So we are being valued in its terms. Our resources, powers, are being drawn out into this battle.

I agree with Parodites on every point.

Also, I didnt even know it wasnt some kid in a wheelchair he mocked, but a reporter with a fucking paying job.

That is pure wretchedness and ill will, to use that incident as such. The people who framed this story are indeed heartless, soulless, and if that word has any meaning at all, evil people -

as I see it. I’d imagine this fabrication to be very painful for the actually disabled.

Ive also had no choice but to feel offended as someone who likes Trump, for being called all these things. I figured I didnt need to take too seriously, as obviously the working premise of our forum is a deep mutual valuing.

It is only natural that this critical time (with Saturn on Antares, the ancients would be hiding in caves) the most violent valuings find their way out. Valuings that apply to the future of the west, which is being decided.

I would propose that we agree that none of us could possibly be seen as heart- or tasteless, but I’ll wait until after the elections.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:01 pm
Yeah, without VO it’s all doomed to stay in the middle ages - at least the bottom line. Without the formal appreciation of irreconcileable value differences among humans and creatures in general, and a system of reconciling them indirectly by employing the very logic that commands this rugged individuality of being, the world will continue to burn and produce bullshit dichotomies over which friends and family will kill each other.

Divide and conquer… the US election circus has divided us here on BTL… which really is quite proper, under the circumstances. We can suffer a bit for this.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:05 pm
" All of it comes down to how valuing is understood, how it is ranked in the episteme, from which the law is born"

"Yes, basically: reality is imperfect. Politics and economics especially. "

I dont know what perfect means if not reality - (how can reality be more ‘perfected’?) but perfection doesnt imply the absence of friction.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Parodites
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:08 pm
It’s obvious what you’re doing Capable. You’re going around on random news sites trying to find the dirtiest shit on Trump to make us all feel guilty about supporting him, because the incident in the gif happened months and months and months ago. You didn’t for five fucking seconds google the t-rex arm guy incident and find out what actually happened. I know you haven’t listened to Trump himself much or you’d know that he had made that very gesture numerous times before the incident- he makes that absurd hand gesture to everybody, to signify that they’re being too sensitive or babyish or girly, that’s what the gesture means when you raise your hands up really high and flap them around: he did it to Jeb, did it to Rubio, etc. It’s obvious that you simply believe we’ve fallen into a mind trap over Trump. And I believe you’ve simply fallen into the media’s mind trap over despising Trump, the media which de-contextualizes every-last-fucking-thing the guy does or says, as was the case with Mr. T-rex hand. Anyway, I still don’t have any personal malice toward you, I just thought the debate thing was funny: my view of you is not lessened. I just think your politics is fucked. But I understand that politics can only ever be an application of a philosophy, to the world. The same philosophy can be applied numerous ways. Your philosophy may be sound, and your politics can still be fucked.

One great thing about Trump, he’s made a line. There’s not many lines left in the world. A bit of a living strike against old Hegel: synthesize this shit. And it is good that there are still some lines, some separations.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:11 pm
"Industry itself isn’t bad. Technology and science are the only ways we can fix global warming. We do not need to shut everything down, we need to keep innovating new ideas like carbon capture tech "

In fact, no one is stopping anyone from developing such technology. Governments are entirely free to do this. But they don’t. Globalism is a moot point here. Nothing more is required to start attack this problem than the gigantic scientific apparatus the US has at its disposal. That they arent doing this, and trying for globalism first, is evidence that they have no intention of solving it.

" I of course agree that we should not just hand over our power to anyone. Obviously I agree on that. But I am saying we do not need to do that. Things like the Paris Agreement can happen if idiots like Trump get out of the way, denying the very problem itself. "

A formal agreement and promise to do something without having anything close to sufficient means to do it, is certainly not hope-giving. It is rather a statement of being entirely unfit for the task, of completely lacking seriousness. Which hardly came as a surprise.

The best thing for a scientist now is not to wait until his government gives him an order, but to start thinking for himself.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Parodites
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:33 pm
Oh yeah, Capable, you also mentioned I was behaving like some kind of religious nutjob or cnn correspondent because I- predicted things that might take place should Clinton or Trump be elected. Fuck off with the personal shit like you haven’t gotten personal yourself, before I ever did.

“In fact, no one is stopping anyone from developing such technology. Governments are entirely free to do this. But they don’t. Globalism is a moot point here. Nothing more is required to start attack this problem than the gigantic scientific apparatus the US has at its disposal. That they arent doing this, and trying for globalism first, is evidence that they have no intention of solving it.”

Yes, I would add: All higher level science is a government affair. (Schooling is also a government affair and they fucked that up too.) The government funds all the fucking research projects. Instead of trying to pass laws for us with the alliance you’ve made with other governments, just fund some solar technology or something. Oh yeah, you have to spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year to maintain that alliance, this globalism- because our so called allies demand we give them all our military resources, defend their boarders, relinquish our assets to foreign aid, etc, out of the goodness of our heart, for the sake of the noble project of a global state, so your budget for science projects is likely pretty limited. If the globalization had never commenced, our country would have had the funds to get us to Alpha Centauri by now and none of this would matter.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 10:56 pm
Parodites wrote:

Yes, I would add: All higher level science is a government affair. (Schooling is also a government affair and they fucked that up too.) The government funds all the fucking research projects. Instead of trying to pass laws for us with the alliance you’ve made with other governments, just fund some solar technology or something. Oh yeah, you have to spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year to maintain that alliance, this globalism- because our so called allies demand we give them all our military resources, defend their boarders, relinquish our assets to foreign aid, etc, out of the goodness of our heart, for the sake of the noble project of a global state, so your budget for science projects is likely pretty limited.

True. A single percent of the military budget solves all hunger too. The real priorities are evident only by what is actually happening, not by what politicians are saying and formally agreeing on.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:03 pm
Essentially the larger structures get the blinder their will to power unless they are integrally regulated by the self-valuing principle proper; usually this happens as the cost of parts of the environment. Kissingers post-political confession is the final political logos, I think - curb unifying ambitions and tread in deference around great historical powers - above all ones own. Postwar USA equals a globalized politics; Trump understands well that all that is needed now, is boldness, which requires independence.

Your definition of globalism as “concentration of power away from the people” is not a necessary definition at all, it totally rejects my definition of cooperative globalism among democratically participating nations in structures such as the UN; but worse, your definition other than being quite simplistic and black and white is basically just the definition of government as such. By definition to have a government at all is to concentrate some power a distance from “the people”, and as I’ve already pointed out and which I believe has so far gone unanswered is that the political power of “the people” is largely the negative power to throw out bad leaders and is also the smaller positive power to abstractly ground political leadership in the populace at large, through voting and consent of the governed.

“The people” did not write the US Constitution. A very small group of highly educated and dedicated people did. This whole hypostasizing of the category of “the people” into some kind of political God is troubling to me, to say the least.


The political elitism is troubling to me. The Fathers wrote the Constitution to give the people a voice, not to command them. The constitution grants very few powers- very few legitimate commands, to the central government. This political elitism reaches it greatest formulation in the global state: you believe the masses cannot learn to take care of themselves, that they must be administered to.

" A democratized group of nations is a real possible form of globalism (globalism is not inherently “totalitarian” any more than government itself is)."

Yeah your democratized group of nations is possible if those nations tell their populations to fuck off in order to cut deals between each other, because otherwise difference in national identity and interest will cause nations to drop out of the arrangement. As our government has told all of us to fuck off- and essentially giving hundreds of billions of our dollars away to other countries in the form of military aid is in fact telling us to fuck off.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:16 pm
I am still troubled by your bit about how politics is like engineering, we can’t let Trump in because he doesn’t know politics. More political elitism.

These political elites and lawyers- they’re fucking useless: their skill, their equivalent to engineering, is working through hundreds of pages of over complicated legalese like our 1,000 page tax code. True, Trump doesn’t know that. But he knows how to throw that fucking tax code in the trash and write one about a page long, which would level the playing field and prevent corporations from amassing their inordinate wealth. The State- I made this point pages ago- got involved in the Braudelian stage of capital through this process: they make it so that you need massive amounts of cash to hire the lawyers necessary to figure out how to get you out of paying so much in tax. A smaller buisness cannot afford that. So the big business just keeps getting bigger. And this is possible because of the bullshit politician crafted piece of brilliant fucking engineering we call the tax code. These politicians are really good at doing something that’s fucking really meaningless, managing a 1000 page tax code that shouldn’t even fucking exist and which we can just throw out when Trump gets in. It’s like being a professional at- what’s as useless as a politician, I don’t know; it’s like being really good at something really inconsequential and unnecessary.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:25 pm
Parodites, what do you think about a synthesis of on the one hand the will to reduce US government to bare essentials as the fathers intended, and on the other the will to implement a US type constitution as a default code for nations that are pining for a sane form of government?

Rule by example conquers in the best way, it commands excellence simply by the fact that only an excellent being attracts exemplification. Excellence isn’t a qualitative but a quantitative one, as excellence applies in potential to all proper qualities, it is merely the full (quantity) explication of them. At least, this is a way of arriving at the convenient truth that all men need to be free to be excellent, and that we can never convince someone by logic, but only by example.

Capable simply refuses to be convinced by a man who gives this example; I respect him for that, it is also an aesthetically righteous resistance to the most convenient path. The price of this is apperently a misunderstanding of our intentions; Capables philosophical mind is set against relativizing and taking opportune routes unless they can be made with the full being. I imagine he has met a great deal of people in person both who vote for Trump and are abject, and on the other hand those who are decent and compromised by Trumps rhetoric. This is democracy, the true battle to the death for values. If Clintons vices are less pertinent to his experience than Trumps vices, then at least I must concede that Trump needs to alter certain things. I do trust Capable as an instinct. His political ideas are incomplete simply because he has not seen the necessity of my scheme, which needs a Trumpian victory (small dissolution wars) or a Hillerian defeat (a large failed unification war ending in renewed chaos, possibility, remaining of the lucky nations who are rich but have no nuclear arsenal) I would not have been so bold in the title had I not figured out the line of the best prospect from value ontology. There is going to be a global agreement, but it is not going to be of a political nature, rather a purely juridical one; the court in the Hague. Global Justice must be done to the worst criminals - to set an example. That is all. For the rest, all private and national agencies across the globe have all the resources to do what they need to do.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:37 pm
The US must formally agree to some conditions for the Tribunal (the work of which has not been without hypocrisy, but has still inspired fear in the right type of people - a unique feat) - it must admit to some responsibility for its actions abroad. If it does this, a league of world leaders will have emerged in the US first, then China and Russia, then Europe (nuke-alliances are regional), India/Pakistan/Iran/Israel, the whole axis of - as well as Japan/Korea (I assume the Northern half will either go to China or to the Southern logos, which is a supremely privileged US vassal state where life is quantitatively much better than in the US (but infinitely more monomanic), Brazil, and whatever rising nation is exploiting its population or resources cleverly and according to the standard of self-valuing so as to produce true power, which is vitality. All nations are led both in foreign politics and self-cultivation in example by the virtues of the supreme nation, the United States of America, which will find, in this role, in all its American fellow nations happy second-equals. America as a continent has never seen its pride compromised, so it is robustly fit for the task, and I can’t see any other historical necessity than that some axis from Washington to Sao Paulo will come to take the world in a grip that will become its spine over the course of the next centuries. Formally all nations are equal, and Russia and China are giants by all measure, but the sort of agreement by rapport that can be formed along that ten thousand mile mountainrange is invincible by its pure aesthetics.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides

Last edited by Fixed Cross on Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:40 pm
… US type constitution as a default code for nations…

Yes I agreed a while back in the thread that American constitutional philosophy should first: be perfected in a true independent US free from intrusion by foreign interests, cultures, and governments. (the Constitution was only the first brick in the edifice) Then: exported to the rest of the world. But that first part has never been allowed to happen, due to globalization. We must re-assert our independence politically and economically with a Trump victory, strip the central government, and continue working out our political system until we are satisfied with it for our own populace.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:43 pm
Sounds like a plan.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Parodites
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:44 pm
We simply do not yet possess the political scheme required to bring about the global system Capable envisions, (I recognize it is not the same as the current globalist regime) for our constitution itself has failed us in this country, that’s why the central government has been able to overstep its sphere to this extent. Until we develop that scheme, acting on the intention for a democracy of nations- however noble that intention may be, will likely prove disastrous, at a time when there is no more room left for disasters of the global variety.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:57 pm
And one other thing about the fact that Trump is not a politician or legal expert, and that isn’t the worst thing in the world- some would say it is good:

Our first president was a general. He killed guys. Not a politician or lawyer. With an equivalent of an elementary school education.

He seemed to do alright.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 12:50 am
“We simply do not yet possess the political scheme required to bring about the global system Capable envisions, (I recognize it is not the same as the current globalist regime) for our constitution itself has failed us in this country, that’s why the central government has been able to overstep its sphere to this extent. Until we develop that scheme, acting on the intention for a democracy of nations- however noble that intention may be, will likely prove disastrous, at a time when there is no more room left for disasters of the global variety.”

Here Heideggers virtues comes in, the bridge concept, the self-midwifery of mankind, mastering-emerging, physis; detail through scope.

To have seen which mechanisms must end up ruling is literally to speak from the future. Science speaks from the future of objects. Philosophy from the future of man. God is a cheap philosophical trick; globalist unificationism is a result, we now break up the scheme into gods - and multiple futures. Man is writhing in clasutrophobia, the idea of a unified, shared destiny of all is as terrifying as hell has ever been to the subconscious psyche; it knows what madness that entails, and is reminded of the primordial chaos of drives…

What I means practically is that the principle has to be conceived simultaneously as a project for the US and for the world, because this is the most reliable way of honing it to perfection. Simplifying dramatically; Only in this sense is it bold enough to be American, which means ‘not silly’.

Simultaneously conceived, or conceived to apply universally, but not implemented anywhere before it is verified in its effectiveness at home. Prudence in boldness, boldness for prudence; the Doric spirit of the US.

Expand minimalization [myhth - Zeus subduing Kronos/time (and by implication liberating Ouranos/potential)]; philosophy commanding being-as-time, bringing about the powers of value. To value power here - value the cycles, ‘the way things go’ - affirmation of recurrence - not feverish and idealistic but calm and empirical. Real cycles, clockwork.

To begin with, what we can actually accomplish globally as Nietzsche’s favorite men, forgers of myth and morality,
‘Eternally’ recurring feasts.
We wont be able to organize shit without them. This the Fathers knew and implemented well.

A feat in the sense of Halloween or Thanks giving or Christmas is a formal and symbolic recognition of valuing, in terms of the self-valuing of the entire nation. It is a true institution of love, and it cultivates what I will plainly call the good. The more festivals the better - the Romans had one nearly every day.

These arent coincidences in the normal sense of the word; they are engineered co-incidences, producing this Heideggerian emerging, the Greek physis.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Parodites
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 2:42 am
I don’t entirely go along with Nietzsche’s conception of the affirmation, but the idea that the dialectic literally makes the negation of Being the essence of Being, is my starting problem with it. The dialectic is entirely re-active. It does not touch the ground of Affirmation. Because it is entirely reactive, the dialectic is concerned with change- it is the essential formulation of change and incorporation. But:

[ The eudaemonia
of man, the perfected happiness of humanity, must lie in what Aristotle deems
pure activity, that is, activity outside of time, activity that is not passive before the goad
of any other kind of activity, rather such exogenous re-active forces are located in the
poetic compulsion toward beautiful forms or in the religious instinct, and we have only
philosophy to turn to for this perfect activity. A timeless, motionless activity is simply an
activity that does not cause change, that does not influence any other activities into
becoming reactive to it: philosophy is this perfection. ]

By my definition, dialectics is simply not philosophy. In fact… it seems to be the opposite. The dialectic makes all concepts become reactive to it, absorbed into it, and submitted to its process. It needs other concepts to become reactive to it in order to function, and thus it seems to be a diminishing force, a force exhausted by its own strength, a force incapable of affirming its own positive being.

True philosophy does not require the reactive submission of other powers to itself, in order to exist.

Not only does philosophy not force other powers to become reactive to it, true philosophy forces other powers to become active, affirmative of themselves and their own positive being: (this is why I can support Trump and delight in things contrary to my own philosophy- my philosophy has liberated all powers within myself to establish their independence and affirmative character, their plurality rather than dialectical synthesis)

[ Once freedom is set into motion its tendency is to communicate itself as Schelling says,
to induce everything that it touches to exercising its own liberty and, just as the stars
begin to appear in the firmament, so the stars in the moral heavens rouse themselves one
by one, each seemingly as a champion to every other, to finally annunciate that perfected
eutaxy of powers over whose image we are set upon ourselves in capitulant deliverance- to
a philosophy, if we but light that first star, that is, the urge for immortality, for
continued Being, for existence. ]

This is what I want VO to be: and dialectics seems to be literally the opposite.

And this perhaps not coincidentally fits what I want politics to become as well, with a return to independent nation states.

As you said above: "we now break up the scheme into gods - and multiple futures. Man is writhing in clasutrophobia, the idea of a unified, shared destiny of all is as terrifying as hell has ever been to the subconscious psyche; it knows what madness that entails, and is reminded of the primordial chaos of drives… "


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 3:02 am
The whole point of the dialectic is that two things, like Being and Nonbeing, are opposites, because each contains within itself the seed of the other. So when you combine them in synthesis, what you’re doing is eliminating their difference: difference here is only an existent quality, not essential. The culmination of the dialectic in absolute spirit lies in the extinguishing of all difference and identity from thought, a full enclosure of the logos from the mythos: it lies in extinguishing everything that life is, for life is identity, self-valuations, self-determinations, boundaries, difference.

If every thing contains within itself the seed of its own opposite or negation, and thought itself- should thought be dialectical, can only synthesize them by eliminating their difference, when we are left with absolute spirit with no identity, how can there possibly exist self-valuation?

" Not only does philosophy not force other powers to become reactive to it, true philosophy forces other powers to become active, affirmative of themselves and their own positive being… "

This is what I mean by reification.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 3:17 am
In my system, two datums enter into conceptual opposition, not by expressing the seed of their own negation in the other, but in mutually affirming Being in its purity, from two independent vantage points (epistemes*); thus Luther talked about how the evil man affirms the being and potency of god but in an inverted way, while the good man affirms it just the same. Then there is a stage of negative reflection in which that basis of mutual affirmation is negated, namely Being in its pure affirmative character, thus both the good and evil man sin they simply respond to it differently, and sin is the negation or absence of the divine potency. Then the good and evil man atone for their sin and reincorporate that purity of Being’s affirmation which they both were grounded in, though now it enters into the world through their atonement in a new form- it has been reified. And so the history of thought is the history of this constant withdraw and re-participation of the divine, Being, in the material world, as it changes forms with each reification.

" Instead of ascribing the imperfect core of Nonbeing to Being, its opposite: we ascribe everything to Being. Being contains, not the core of its own conceptual opposite or nonbeing, but the plenitude, the pure Affirmation. Then when it externalizes itself, this process, instead of producing the paradoxical negation of the negation, produces an infinitude of Being(s.) Being becomes surrounded on all sides by innumerable other(s), not just its own “conceptual opposite.” Then two of these other(s) reify their conceptual tension through a stage of negative reflection, which destabilizes them by reincorporating the original affirmative Being: they reify Being in its otherness as a new term born of their negation, they internalize the externalization of Being’s plenitude as otherness, for the other- as pure otherness- as consciousness or spirit, as humanity specifically: that is what human consciousness is. This is how the infinite God creates the finite consciousness of man in which he participates like one solitude within another solitude, ie. love, without ever diminishing the duality of god and man, of solitude and solitude. My process of reification describes not change, but generation; not transformation into something’s opposite, but how Being in its pure affirmation, setting behind the universe and history, finds a way to constantly participate in that universe it is conceptually isolated from, participate in the very plentitude it itself generated; how the infinite Being of pure affirmation re-submerges itself in its universe and re-emerges within it through the reification as a guiding episteme to continue driving history forward, to continue generating the expressed plenitude of other being(s) we see around us."

In other contexts I refer to the episteme alongside the passive ground:

" The perfect, timeless activity of philosophy is that which supplies the passive ground of
value or meaning, it is in other words the creative act, but philosophy is not constituted by
the value it creates."

The timeless perfection of philosophy, which acts without causing change- without forcing other things to become reactive to it, instead prodding them with Being’s affirmative content to become activities themselves, to express their self-valuation, is accomplished in that it supplies the passive ground of a value upon which these things can begin actively expressing their own affirmative being to Being. But it is this very passivity or ground, which allows being(s) to express their affirmative content to Being, that prevents being(s) from ever fully ridding themselves of their identity, of becoming their opposite, or dialectically synthesizing and re-unifying with their source in Being. Thus:

[ Politics is in essence the
organization of imperfect activities upon the innermost passive ground, upon a meaning,
a value, an aspiration- a ground that is supplied by philosophy but does not constitute
philosophy. In Nietzsche this passive ground as is supplied by philosophy is called simply
Power, for every moral and philosophic value constitutes a quanta of power, a certain
specification of potential energetics. The actualization and configuration of this power
and potential with other quanta of power, with other values, is Will, which takes the form
of politics both in external society and inwardly as a rank ordering of our evolutionary
drives: the Will to Power specifies the dimension within which these configurations are
made, within which the imperfect reactivity of forces exogenous to philosophy are
organized on the passive ground of philosophy, whose highest realization is the eternal
return, a complete re-action and involution. Insofar as kinesis is a movement of the
imperfect toward the perfect, following Aristotle’s definition, the kinesis of the polis is a
movement from present material conditions toward eudaemonia or happiness, from
reactivity coordinated within an organism toward the timeless perfected activity of a soul,
but since this movement takes place on a passive ground it can never arrive at its object,
for the polis, in its organization of re-active forces, creates the very dimension of time or
kinesis which it wants to escape from- a dimension we call history. History is the
reckoning of its own end. Thus Nietzsche proposes transvaluation as the form of this
reckoning, whereby the circle of time is turned back around in the vicious circle of God.]


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Parodites
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 4:08 am
So the relation between a (b)eing and (B)eing can never be negative in this scheme, which is the central anti-dialectical core. That relation, of being to Being, is pure difference, after Deleuze. It can only be positive, generative, irresolvable. It is the excess. What Kierkegaard called: qualitative disjunction. What N. called Will to Power- each philosopher had a name for it: being strives toward that Being, strives to destroy itself and overcome itself to shed its identity and become the All, the Affirmation itself. … To become the Affirmation itself… That is what self-valuation is in my terms. Yet, it cannot succeed: the very kinesis this will institutes condemns it to its identity, to the passive ground, which Nietzsche grasped as the eternal recurrence. So in my philosophy Nietzsche is absorbed and reinterpreted: the Will-To-Power is simply the fact of this asymmetry between being and Being, which urges each being to affirm its being as Being and become the All, the Affirmation.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 4:28 am
Yes this is Beings nature as I also see it, a violent glory bursting into tragedy, which is the sap of culture, but this history of philosophy is superseded here - in this particular philosophy where pure affirmation is embodied as difference; where a paganism comes out of the affirmation both of god, pure affirmation, and Being, pure difference; instincts are born here that can endure this condition of asymptotic approach to perfect self-valuation to the point of discovering a new bliss, which is an order created by the continuous presence of also asymptotically rising wills - my mind had instantly connected this to the notion of the Doric order, which was always the chosen structurality of aesthetics to guide my intellectual politics towards a world. Somehow my mind works like that, with stone and light and iron, materials.

In this light Capable and I did design the Pentad; to separate pillars in the most separating form. (The path of Venus as seen from the Earth happens to have that structure - I don’t know why. Well I do, valuing, maximization of difference — exaltation is the backbone of all dynamis.)


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Parodites
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 749
Join date : 2011-12-11

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 6:47 am
Really I’d love a debate on the merits of Trump where the following terms are banned for all involved: racist, sexist, bully, Hitler, fascist, egomaniac, megalomaniac, demagogue, I could think of a few more. Then we’ll see where we’re at.

" I found one point Parodites made and you just reiterated which I have yet to respond to, namely that global government would amount to giving power to be tyrannical, that in order to fight global warming we would necessarily be handing over tyrannical power to a global level government. I disagree because while yes global government could be used for tyrannical ends, this is the case with any government; it requires that we carefully craft the structure of government such as the Founders did in the US, and not just abandon the entire project. Again this falls back on the fact that I’ve already outlined my idea of how global government could work, a kind of UN like setup but with more force of law and some kind of basic shared military apparatus. Decisions would be voted on by representatives, not made by one tyrant."

Yes but a new world order- an actual shared military apparatus over the earth: that would be a lot harder to overthrow, should things sour. And my point will continue to be: the national identities in play are too different to reconcile their populations with the interests of the respective nation-states. I have also pointed out how the EU will never be like the US for geographic and economic reasons. In order for it to function, one nation will end up having to compromise the interests of its own citizens on the behalf of a foreign nation: outside governments will be able to influence us, etc. I don’t want any outside force to influence the US government. I don’t want a vote cast in Brussels to have any effect on anything in the US, as it once effected Britain, because the culture of Brussels isn’t the culture of the US. It doesn’t make sense. Someone in Europe doesn’t understand the situation and culture of someone living in the US, these populations are completely separate from one another, why would we want to pool their political force into a few common representatives who could not possibly consolidate the differences in these populations? In the US, ideology is not consistently spread out: if we take a consensus of the whole population on rather gay marriage should be legalized, it will probably come out yes, but there are many states where, if that vote was taken from their sole consensus, the result would be no, as the populace there has a different culture and they’re more religious: this dis-empowering at the level of local communities would be magnified a thousand times in the system you’re describing; a thousand-thousand times. Entire small nation-states would have their political force cut to nothing, and lose their sovereign right to self-determination. This is why mandating a federal legalization of gay marriage is an unjust execution of central authority; the states have a right to self-determination. Without an amendment, the Constitution does not grant the power to define marriage to the central government. And this is the way it should be, to preserve the integrity of national ethos at the most fundamental level, local community. Do you not see, even if you think gays should be able to marry as I do, that if we do not follow that course, and we allow the central government to magically produce these “implied” powers, that there is nothing to limit it? It will continue growing and growing, expanding its power, as it has done so.


A sik þau trûðu

Nisus ait, “Dine hunc ardorem mentibus addunt,
Euryale, an sua cuique deus fit dira cupido?”

Have the gods set this ruling passion in my heart,
or does each man’s furious passion become his god?

  • Virgil.

It is not opium which makes me work but its absence, and in order for me to feel its absence it must
from time to time be present.-- Antonin Artaud
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 06, 2016 8:13 pm
Increasing military strongholds and centralization does not seem the best way of moving away from fascism to me either.

However, reducing US leverage in the world is unacceptable as well, as the system will collapse. What needs to happen first is increasing the leverage, by electing a strong politician, a man with an actual love for his country, and the experience of building things by bridging ideological gaps, a restoration of the areas that have been made into less than humane by the post cold war chaos politics by inserting working economic infrastructure, opening markets - so as to eventually ennoble the populations so as to actually want a secular minimalist government.

Truth will triumph either way, it is just a matter of how far the attempt to circumvent it is stretched, and thus how much will be destroyed in the path towards it.

Truth is local.
Any attempts to organize the world as a whole are insane - there is no “the world”, except indeed as a monster of energy.

There are realms.

The US is a portal-realm, a beginner-stage, but it is an advanced realm, an endgame as well. It is not much in between.

As a superior nation isolated on its own continent, the US can reign for thousands, and determine nature for millions of years. It is the first global hegemon, and if it plays its cards right (which means to stop bluffing (acting superior to ones position) against weaker enemies, who grow stronger and stronger, but simply “call it” before they catch up), then the world belongs to the US simply by its superior human self-valuing stronghold. Trump is the archetypical American. Americans are known to be blunt, bold, sexual, unapologetic, straightforward and effective. They are also known to be weak minded, cruel, self-ignorant, sanctimonious, backwards about the rest of the world, hypocritical and inhuman. All nations have strengths and weaknesses. Russia has been looking more human than the US for a decade now - electing Clinton will tilt the scales for good, as the US will have lost its bluff, shown a much weaker hand than we all figured it to have.

Electing Trump is simply cutting your losses. They’re big, but not bigger than your gains. Clinton would be turning all gains finally into loss - initiating the stage of global, fully unaccountable “Capital” (deadly force - lets drop the deeply receded semantic euphemism) - and thus, anarchy, and rise of totalitarian nations, predominantly China, which will not hesitate to start killing all muslims, taking some Pakistani missiles for granted, I reckon.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:55 pm
The US and France created its current form, and the British empire protected Islam for the longest time, but the Chinese and Indians perceive them as vermin. In China, a muslim uprising is shot down to the last man. No beheadings, you dont torture vermin. (these views arent my own)

Our culture has set off a lot of shit in Asia, and China aint taking kindly. If you look at what they are capable of doing to themselves, then really, just imagine what they would do if the west didnt stand in the way, to purify their continent of Abrahamistic and Alexandrine perversions of the true state of Being as they figured it out under the Yellow Emperor. The Russians will be all too glad to help them, as will the Indians.

This is fact: Chinese engineers and politicans speak of their project as ‘ah, around in a thousand years, this will begin to produce its intended rendement.’

A Somali generals son who lived in a house we shared with the Zen painters zon, who taught me a part of what I know about Islam and related cultures, told me this prophecy: when the men with the narrow eyes in the east will grow stronger, the end of times is upon us.

I naturally approach this within the framework of the ontological status of perspective alone; the end of times for a certain Realm.

We best not stand in the way of that end too much, unless we want to be reincarnated muslim girls… kek. But really, if valuing coherence could perpetuate in spin configurations alone, I could see it work quite like that. Value-consequence, ‘karma’, is pretty obvious always, if all systems are dropped - the greatest art to me is to think directly, to See True Relation.

What this requires is the absolute absence of neutrality - it requires a veritable self, to be valued into being. Which, since it is a fiction, I had to construct - and I am among fellow marblesmiths. We need a Pericles now with Athenian sophists around him but a Trump with a staffer who occasionally does a clever search online will do.

Trump is preferable even for this reason alone: he will listen to us, if it happens to be opportune for him. All true leaders look directly to the ground. If I look at his daughters pure adoring and at the same time perfectly reality-grounded loyalty, I see a leader of some capacity.

And from the get-go it was ridiculous of the US media establishment to ridicule Trump for his a reality tv program - at least he ran his own show! You need a president like that, who runs the show he’s in charge of. Not one who just turns grey as the machine reaps his years in human blood.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:25 pm
I continued posting in another thread -
beforethelight.forumotion.com/t732-marx

To clarify this

" the end of times for a certain Realm.

We best not stand in the way of that end too much"

I continued:


"Genocide of muslims is not implied here- just the fact that Socialism would long have absorbed Islam if it hadnt been for the West.

Parallel to my absolute rejection of Marxism as a valid enterprise-related theory, I have seen it also as the empirical resolution to Islam. Afghanistan is the example, a perfect hippy state until Mr Brzezinski decided to use it to kill the USSR."

and further

"All Russian leaders after Stalin have expressed themselves well about the American people. All they tried to defeat was the banking system. N one ever came closer to defeat Russia than Gorbachev, who of course was just a shadow of Stalin, a conscience. But the bizarre magic of the old land produced Yeltsin as an absolutely irreducible “Always Close Russian” -

this “Always Close Russian” is required on our Eurasian continent. It is the depth that is deep enough to be unfathomable, therefore fearsome to nations like India and China, which dont much give a shit about nukes, much more about the actual proximity of a magical adversary.

Magic just refers to the capacity to do what the other cant, by mechanisms that the other cant see.

The US media’s magical mechanism is just pure low-ness; because people are in general decent and quite honest, it is literally impossible for the large majority to imagine the degree of deceit that defines their media - no man ever fully believed a newspaper at face value, but hardly any man would have suspected a paper like the New York Times to be entirely used to spread perfect lies for perfectly vile political ends.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Thu Oct 13, 2016 5:14 pm
Constitutional Law
Mathematics
Semantic Structure
Game Theory (entities aren’t ontically closed off from each other, as more of them take part, identification dynamics change underneath the frozen episteme)
Subatomic Coherency (replacing Quantum Physics and String Theory)
Macro-Probabilistic Mapping (combining Relativity with Quantum Mechanics)
“Sciences of Sanity” (integrating all western psychological theory, before exploring the East from a solid Occidental vantage point )
Supranational Politics (value ontology of nations and peoples; a lot of the Earths poor or unfortunately mineral-rich regions are still entirely unpolitical, living in arbitrary borders under arbitrary regimes, disconnected from large flocks of their own who live across these arbitrary borders)

etc etc

what I can not see myself doing is intervene in penal law. It’s the area I have absolutely no philosophic idea about except the pure evolutionary logic of being driven to ‘punish’ someone who causes harm - I have the idea that the standards can not be set here, that this is where excess must find a very clean and direct path, that should not be absorbed for to long by the system. I think the system is never dead - the institution is always as Pezer says up close and personal - and thus that it actually suffers of the misdeeds it is asked to process, and can come up fairly quickly with appropriate punishments if only wrong/right are set in stone, and degree all due to context.

Capable and I used to disagree penal law, and again it is not my strength at all, the best I can do is rationalize my will to leave it locally whereas I know full well that this would lead to lynchings. So, in effect, I am at loss - because once a self-valuing is violated and the state interprets this as a violation of it, of its laws, then both the perpetrator and the victim are absorbed in a ‘sinful state’ - which then through the theory of law, philosophy, attempts to attone for itself.

There is something to be said for the Iranian model, which is not strictly Islamic, but simply an eye for an eye, when it comes to violent crimes - they allow the victim or the victims kin to execute the payback. I know that it sounds barbaric, but it will at least be infinitely more sensible than what the US has now, where a good part of its most vital population has been legally entrapped at the age of 18-22 into a petty drug deal to be imprisoned simply so the owners of these prisons can take their daily couple of hundred taxdollars for each inmate… capitalism is worse than religion in the illusions it is able to spin - that is precisely its power, probably. And why it now is running seemingly inevitably into an abyss of impossible necessary return. But since it is all a figment of the imagination the worthy of all money (none of it can be eaten or used as a tool, other than a coin as a screwdriver) it will be possible for to whomever the debts are outstanding to just dissolve the whole problem. the economy itself cant really crash, it can just happen that too much misplaced money gets between the wheels and it slows down for a bit, which in turn causes poverty and that may case violence, which in turn has some power to hinder production - but the original cause is simply an idea, which can be let go off quite easily - as I see it, which may be wrong - it’s only an idea that occurred just now.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:08 am
Okay, so I started to scatter some seeds of political self-valuing among The People of ILP. Im going to water this and see if it takes root. Here is my OP - a zanyness is always required, - or as Parodites would never say: a romantic irony to ward off cynicism and have style become reality-generative meme - let the stars follow their course and the gods scatter along its path, pouring the water of life as the Hades conquers the house of our birth.

trash:

These elections are the first ones of the people. No matter who wins, the people will have elected now. All have been able to see the truth and fraud will be difficult to pull off. Whatever happens is the will of the people. Now we begin to see what that actually means.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides

Last edited by Fixed Cross on Tue Oct 18, 2016 12:33 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:22 am
the essential question of Nietzsche is what the truth is worth.

The people of America will now decide that among themselves. They will also bear the first consequences, but the results will shape the will to power more than any decision so far since Caesar passed his power along to Octavian.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile
    Sisyphus
    Path
    Path

Posts : 1281
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:32 am
Please keep in mind that “We the People”, at the time of writing, was referring to “landed white men”. Little has changed.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sisyphus
Path
Path

Posts : 1281
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 4:42 am
Fixed Cross wrote:
the essential question of Nietzsche is what the truth is worth.

The people of America will now decide that among themselves. They will also bear the first consequences, but the results will shape the will to power more than any decision so far since Caesar passed his power along to Octavian.

Yes, this upcoming election is a very important one. Sad that the Republicans could do no better than Trump. But then, Trump may be what my country needs right now.

Truth is the most important asset a person has. I believe Nietzsche tried to express this in his own way.

I also believe that the “will to power” is rooted in the individual’s desire to live one’s own life the way (s)he sees fit (without violating the same right of others).

We Americans will soon be making a choice. Continue on the same path (most people don’t like and can’t handle change) or start walking a different path.

Just letting you know that I have read the post, that I’m basically in agreement with what you said but have nothing to add at the moment.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:23 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Maybe I should add that all my commentary on the US is extremely ironic - all the facts I state are true to my knowledge but the paradigm I sketch is naturally very far from an American psyche.

BUT THAT IS THE POINT.

The US has imposed itself on the world through the selective values that the world is now holding back up to it. It is not hamburger culture, it has no claim to food in such a dramatic way - it is violent sanctimoniousness. The error Freud spoke of, that he feared could bring a great catastrophe upon mankind.

Trump is the least sanctimonious man ever to run for president, and yet the first candidate of which the Americans are ashamed. He is the first one who behaves in a way that is clearly the same as the behavior the US has been selling as cool, and as how it’s done. But apparently Americans dont actually believe in what theyve been selling us.

So we I am giving back now some impressions - it is always insulting if ones country is defined by a foreigner, especially one that has some stake in it - I am aware of the ugliness of mistakes precisely if they are rare but structural. But so here it goes.

America is a stupid country, it has had stupid sanctimonious barbarians as leaders. Leaders who had no clue as to who they were leading… and who were being led by a large oligarchy of capitalistic interests that were the true benefactors of our age. Your presidents have been arbitrary men, puppets of a clunky evolution that brought about a regime of douchebags utterly unnecessary under the umbrella of free value exchange. Clinton is sort of the decision that douchebaggery now needs to be the iron rule of the planet. It wont co ‘click’ like the previous times.

Someone actually managed to tell me that it was sort of rational for the NATO to be mobilizing in Ukraine because Russia is. People think that. I realize that most Americans must have no clue that Ukraine borders on Russia. Ugly ugly ugly. And as the world is self-valuing, it truly will very likely come to an end when this motivation comes to be the dominant one.

So fuck it. Im posting some shreds of your constitution with Betty Boop. Pop culture is the highest pronunciation of the US in any case - it is the lightness that did not exist before.

This lightness has gone to its head…

Philosophers are of course not tied to their national ethos and worth, even though they may determine it.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:34 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Sisyphus, are you American? If so from which state?

It would be nice if we dont go to war, I still have much to see - as do we all.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:41 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Of course there is the Third Possibility we need to be talking about - or not - probably not -
what the establishment will do if Trump wins.

You have to offer them jobs. Maybe you can give them Australia.

Now this is how a Amsterdam kid saw your country in the 90’s.

youtube.com/watch?v=mY0TcSrt8os

(to ‘understand’ … lol… one must first see part 2, the first part. youtube.com/watch?v=3mgZLTzuVxw )


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Sisyphus
    Path
    Path

Posts : 1281
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:58 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:

America is a stupid country, it has had stupid sanctimonious barbarians as leaders. Leaders who had no clue as to who they were leading… and who were being led by a large oligarchy of capitalistic interests that were the true benefactors of our age. Your presidents have been arbitrary men, puppets of a clunky evolution that brought about a regime of douchebags utterly unnecessary under the umbrella of free value exchange. Clinton is sort of the decision that douchebaggery now needs to be the iron rule of the planet. It wont co ‘click’ like the previous times.

I can’t argue with that. The last president we had that I actually respected was Ike.

So fuck it. Im posting some shreds of your constitution with Betty Boop. Pop culture is the highest pronunciation of the US in any case - it is the lightness that did not exist before.

I was surprised to see Betty Boop. I have a few of the original black/white graphics of her.

Philosophers are of course not tied to their national ethos and worth, even though they may determine it.

In truth, my ideal is that all humans can become cosmopolitans. This was inspired by Albert Camus. There is much philosophy in Camus’ writings but most people miss it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path

Posts : 1281
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:07 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Sisyphus, are you American? If so from which state?

It would be nice if we dont go to war, I still have much to see - as do we all.

Yes, I am an American. A proud one. I served twenty years in the Army.

I was born/raised in northern Ohio. Retired from the Army to Florida where I still live.

My philosophy while in the Army was to preserve the peace, not to make war.

As the warrior’s code states: I will help you if I can; I will kill you if I must.

My country is involved way too much in the affairs of other countries. The new president of the Philippines is the only person recently who has had the balls to talk back to dictates from America when after Obama attempted to counsel him on how to rule his country the newly elected president told Obama to go to hell. I fell he was right and just in doing so.

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sisyphus
Path
Path

Posts : 1281
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:16 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Fixed Cross wrote:
Of course there is the Third Possibility we need to be talking about - or not - probably not -
what the establishment will do if Trump wins.

You have to offer them jobs. Maybe you can give them Australia.

Now this is how a Amsterdam kid saw your country in the 90’s.

youtube.com/watch?v=mY0TcSrt8os

(to ‘understand’ … lol… one must first see part 2, the first part. youtube.com/watch?v=3mgZLTzuVxw )

Yeah, a lot of negative things can be said about America and most of them are likely justified.

However, there are still people who come here on visitor’s or education visa and after their visa expires they just stay here in the USA. And there are many who come here to find work and never go back home.

My nation still has great potential for millions of people but big industry, big banking, and my government keeps screwing up the “American Dream”.

I have no idea where my country is headed but I don’t like the indicators I have seen over the past 50 years.

Trump may be what America needs to get back on track. I don’t know. I don’t like the idea of Trump being president but that doesn’t matter if it would bring positive changes.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:57 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Im honored that someone with all that experience find sense in my analyses.

It has always seemed me as well that Eisenhower was the best president of the post war era. I suppose this means that indeed for an imperial nation, generals can very well make good presidents.

De Gaulle was one of Frances best presidents and George Washington was of course a general.
Military men have the knowledge of necessity and sacrifice that no state can do without.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower
    avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Tue Oct 18, 2016 5:59 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Can you imagine a military coup in the US? The thought never occurred to me before now.
It would require an absolute chaos among the Agencies.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Sisyphus
    Path
    Path

Posts : 1281
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Tue Oct 18, 2016 9:00 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Yes, military people have had to opportunity to view things from the outside and most try to stay out of politics.

Powell was a good General. Too bad he accepted that job with Bush.

McArthur was feared by the politicians and that’s why he got fired.

I think a military coup in the US would be almost impossible. The various commands are too separated. Yes, it would require chaos at the top levels of government.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3862
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Tue Oct 18, 2016 9:15 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
With a knot in my stomach I remember Powells face like I just saw it. As he presented the aerial pics of the supposed facilities, his soul broke.

I dont know how they coerced him but it may simply have been with dishonorable discharge due to some woman he saw or something.
It seems to be the way leaders are generally being discredited.

You can see my issue with puritanicalism - it doesnt mix well with militarism.

The Roman Mars was an absolute servant to the central state-goddes Venus.
No nation ever rose to power without gods except the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and Maoist China.

We must discuss this - because we need to look at consequences, not ideals.

Go visit the Temple of Zeus in Athens (it is not on the Acropolis, but down amidst the dirty traffic), and tell me if you do not understand why I say that gods exist.
Fictions that cause cultures into being, whole sciences, these are existing things. Even though I feel that Zeus is far more than a fiction, as purely a fiction he already is more real and tangible than most things.

The World is Will to Power, Zeus is an image of power that compels my psyche into ecstatic creative downpouring. Odin is a god that guides my path to beautiful girls. I live with gods since a while, since Ive discovered which ones are both relevant and real enough to me, their presence comes alive through valuing their attributes.

The psyche is more powerful than it strictly needs to be - this is the human problem. It is my experience that to hold on to a supreme but non absolute value, which is to say a great love, is in general the best way of getting things done in the long run. If a god serves such a purpose, then belief is justified ( granted that it does not get into the way of other values, such as science or common sense, that it does not restrict, but only discloses.

Hence - N’s question about the value of truth.
And since it can be questioned at all - if value does not take prevalence -
if value, furthermore is not Truth itself.

And what is a god if not a Value… the truth about truth is its value, which first of all is determined by its pertinence. And value is per definition pertinent.

ᚨᚨᚨ
ᚨᛇᚨ
ᚨᚨᚨ

Because I dont accept any limits set by authority figures, a god who is totally indifferent to human affairs except when they produce supreme beauties or virtues like the Greeks had their Gods is a perfect catalyst of life, for a forcefully imaginative type like me. Zeus is not an authority, nor is lightning an authority, not that it knows anyway - it does not even notice us.

I wonder if it is possible for you accept the gods existence to me, as I accept his non existence to you. Not that I care to convince, I just like to explicate - and I psychologically wonder about the thresholds that values put in the human mind.

Truth is great, but it has too many wings to fly.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Sisyphus
    Path
    Path

Posts : 1281
Join date : 2016-08-06
Location : Florida

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Tue Oct 18, 2016 9:55 am Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
I can’t question beliefs no more than I can question faith or a person’s religion.

Those are personal and I have no right to question them.

But I will, on occasion, point out reality to another if appropriate.

A story about the Buddha: it is said that a disciple asked Buddha if the gods answer a person’s prayers. Buddha replied that there are no gods but if you pray to them they will answer you prayers.

I did read some Greek mythology during my mid-teens but that was so very long ago. Hardly any recall.
Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail
Thrasymachus
Tower
Tower
avatar

Posts : 3183
Join date : 2011-11-03
Location : Kekistan

PostSubject: Re: The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law Tue Oct 18, 2016 12:51 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
You might like the novel American Gods by Neil Gaiman, Fixed. It’s not bad. Odin makes an regular appearance if I remember right.

Trump mostly represents normal people being fed up with being lectured by the very people that ruin their lives, towns, states, country, and planet. In this sense, at least, he represents me. He is the most dignified and honest representative politician I ever saw.

:laughing:

I don’t know who it was doing the talking here but that is one of the saddest statements I’ve heard lately.

I voted for this lesser-of-two evils and wish that I hadn’t voted at all, which isn’t me.

Define dignified?
Define honest?

He’s a demagogue!

I pity you. Its great to have Trump. You should not be seduced into feeling bad about a human running your nation for a chance, Arc.

you wouldnt happen to read mainstream media, would you???

Trump uses the means of the people… this makes him a demagogue in the eyes of elitist. Yes, we know this. But are you elitist, Arc?

Compassion might be a better word to use.
Define human.
Would you like to have him? Take him.

Do I listen to the news? Yes, I do. But I also read him, I listen to his so-called rhetoric. I see his narcissism and his insecurities. I do not trust him. Thankfully, hopefully, he will not run this country as he did his own businesses.
He’s like a fascist.
Do I have a bias against? I sure do but I also see that he is not good for this country…only for a chosen few.

No, I am not. I am rather surprised that you would have to ask me that question.

I cant even begin to imagine why someone with a heart would think of Trump as bad. I only see fascistic media and idiotic beliebers lying and crying, for the rest I just see Trump making miracles happen domestically and abroad to save mankind.

Defeating isis, repealing Obamacare, getting out of tpp, just a few world class savior acts he pulls off in the first year. But there is so much more that he does that is better than I ever expected Americans to be capable of doing, politically.

Trump began a process of healing, but the disease is close to terminal already. If he can bring the debt down somehow that would be most useful. But the Fed Reserve always retains the ability to crash the economy at moment notice, which power they have acquired since 2008 by loading up their balance sheets with over 4 trillion dollars (almost 1/4 the whole GDP) of bad debts. If they start selling those debts, it’s all over.

I don’t know if they would use that as a threat or not. But I wouldn’t put anything past them.

Regardless, the disease was so massive that the healing simply had to start, somewhere, anywhere. Doing nothing (electing The Shill) was not an option. And the deep earthy wisdom of Americans understood this.

And the Federal Reserve is run by…???

The Fed Reserve is a private company owned by the major US banks, with its governors being appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate.

Alan Greenspan, Ben (Shalom) Bernanke, and Janet Yellen being…?

I’ve already addressed that issue. More than once. Now you need to tailor your comment to what I’ve already said on the subject.

You haven’t addressed a damn thing.

None of that is a done deal as of yet, Jakob. He hasn’t defeatest isis. Also, is it he alone who would be defeating isis?
About Obamacare? What would he do but rush in where angels fear to tred. I agree that health care needs changing but what does he want to do? Swoop in like a terrible tsunami and wipe people out, healthwise. I do not trust him, the way he operates.

I think that you have some Halo Effect going on, Jakob.
He is not the Savior of the World. On the other hand…

I didn’t say that he was all bad. Most people are not all bad ~ most. But I do not intuit that he is good for this country. Pay very close attention to him, the things which he says and the things which he doesn’t say. They are not in good harmony ~~ for me.
Franklin Roosevelt used to have his fireside chats.
He has his so-called tweets. How harmonious are they? How deserving of the office of the President of the United States?
Has he ever been called on the carpet so to speak for his actions and reactions on twitter?
Do you think that it would behoove lol the P of the US to be rational and balanced when it comes to his tweeting albeit he is a human being – but still, could he not exercise intelligence and walk away?
How much better in a person’s eyes he might at least appear to be, instead of being no different than many who rant?
Does he have carte blanche when it comes to tweeting?
Ought he to say the first thing which comes to his mind, because he has felt insulted?
Ought the P of the US fight back verbally when insulted or do you think that he must exercise some form, some kind of civility?
After all, he is not admonishing or insulting one of his employees from the past.
Where is the intelligence and decorum when it comes to the way in which he relates to many people?

I don’t know if he can in reality be dangerous but the way he exericses his right to speak to people can sometime in the future make for danger.
Behavior in one venue I think carries over to behavior in other venues.

Trump is the first non-fascist, non genocidal president you’ve had for at least half of a century.

But he uses twitter.

:astonished:

I can’t even begin to argue with you, Arc. The lives Trump is responsible for bettering already count in the billions.

Its fine by me if you don’t see this. But your life has been drastically improved as well.

Arc - this applies in my world just as acutely as your own standards apply in yours.
If you can read this without giving in to the impulse of wanting to “correct” me here, then you will be able to better understand my position - without taking it, of course, without sharing it. I do not expect nor desire that - it is impossible. It would be a miracle just for you to understand the basics of the standards Nietzsche describes below.

I can assure you that this applies in my world with perfect consistency, and always has.

"A great man — a man whom nature has constructed and in-
vented in the grand style — what is he?

First: there is a long logic in all of his activity, hard to survey
because of its length, and consequently misleading; he has the
ability to extend his will across great stretches of his life and to
despise and reject everything petty about him, including even
the fairest, “divnest” things in the world.

Secondly: he is colder, harder, less hesitating, and without
fear of “opinion”; he lacks the virtues that accompany respect
and “respectability,” and altogether everything that is part of the
“virtue of the herd.” If he cannot lead, he goes alone; then it
can happen that he may snarl at some things he meets on his way.

Third: he wants no “sympathetic” heart, but servants, tools;
in his intercourse with men he is always intent on making some-
thing out of them. He knows he is incommunicable: he finds it
tasteless to be familiar; and when one thinks he is, he usually is
not. When not speaking to himself, he wears a mask. He rather
lies than tells the truth: it requires more spirit and will.*’ 1 There is
a solitude within him that is inaccessible to praise or blame, his
own justice that is beyond appeal." [Nietzsche, The Will to Power]

Mind you, this is not meant as a description of Trump. It is a description of a type of man that may hep you understand why Trump is being valued over all the other US leaders before him. Trump is a step in the right direction.

Fixed Cross

Perception is everything. This I am aware of. You do not see his fascist leanings?
I will take a better look if you will. But… :evilfun:
As I said, I did vote for him but I see no real changes but many grandiose statements/promises.
But Rome wasn’t built in a day.

If you place a particular vowel and a consonant before the word uses Jakob, you might be more on the mark.

.

Sure you could but you would win insofar as arguing goes but not convince me otherwise ~~ since you are a far better opponent than I am.
But do you want to know something? I would love nothing better than to be convinced of his effectiveness in actually making America great again.

What have you been drinking, Jakob, and I ask you this with affection.
Show me where so I don’t think that this is just so much propaganda.

I think that there is a halo effect going on there.
My life is just as it was before he became president.
But please tell me ~~in what way has my life changed. I do not see it at least not as yet.

This might appear to be your projection, Jakob, but I’ve been known to be wrong and that is not coming to you as an insult, not at all.
But I really do think that there is a strong halo effect going on with regards to how you view him.
But don’t worry about it. We all have them but we have to see them.

So I do not see most of this pertaining to him but certainly some does lol . … probably more to you.
But I am curious about what the historians will have to say about him when the time comes. I only hope that it is far better than what I intuit. i realize that I am more than a bit biased here but who is it who sees more realistically, the one who has the halo effect or the one who might be a bit biased? That question does not pertain to just you and me. Perhaps they are simply the opposite side of the coin. Who knows?
But let’s not count our chickens before they are hatched and let’s not put the cart before the horse.

lol What?! Has Trump written a book called Notes to Myself (an actual title of a book) and have you been reading it?
You would first have to prove a statement like that, Jakob and who is it that would do this valuing of yours at this stage of the game?
Don’t people have to prove their selves first?
Is that from one of those so-called polls which would favor him? It would certainly have to be at this stage of the game.
You can’t see the bit of hero worship going on here?

You have me all wrong. I am far too cynical about human nature to have human heroes.
I see in trump the first somewhat honest, somewhat transparent, somewhat human US leader of my time.

I think it is rather the halo-effect of the previous leaderships that has you fooled.

They were all absolute monsters, and yet they were presented as humans, and people voted for them and let them do their monstrous business while talking about them as if they were any less horrible than Hitler. That to me is the halo effect which Trump breaks.

Anyone who liked Hillary Clinton is, and I mean this literally, easily as deluded as anyone who liked Hitler. But the same to an extent goes for Obama, and Bush, and Clinton, and Bush – not to speak of the ones that came before. All of these folks are mass murderers. Thats no reason to dismiss the USA, or the West, but it is a reason to rejoice in a more honest and human type of leadership.

Humans will always be offensive to humans. That is why ultra sensitive humans vote for robots like Clinton and Obama, who do their killing with a big grin and tell you its all for the good of mankind.

People actually believe that Obama did al his mass murdering for some moral purpose. That is the halo effect. That is the hero worship. Obama and Clinton fans are literally exactly the same as Hitler fans. That is the halo effect. Trump has no halo, he is crude, like the USA is at heart. He doesn’t have it in hi to pretend he is something he is not. The US is being revealed to itself. That is what hurts you about Trump - you are being made to see yourself as an American.

Americans are being made to see that their country is not some moral vanguard, but a human all too human power that has to make a decision about whether or not it likes itself. Trump shows you for what you are. Take it or leave it.

:-"

If you have real rouble seeing my perspective, just take a look at the viciously obscene cowardice of so many people on this site, and realize that this is a kind of running standard for politically motivated humanity - it is all entirely subhuman. In this subterranean climate of behaviour, this absolutely ugly standard of comportment that people like Wendy and Joker represent, the absolute cowardice and leechery of it amidst all of that, a leader like Trump is pure deliverance. An actual human.

Humans are not exalted beings, but they are better than Clintons or Obamas, Ottos and Autsiders, better than the memetic froth on genetic waste that these trolls represent.

Absolutely, yes.