Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Is the USA going over the edge as we speak?

Categories
Academic Freedom
Agitprop
Control vs Anarchy
Defending our Civilization
Geo-strategic issues
Lessons of History
rhetoric
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Scott Adams, American cartoonist and commenter on events with a particular view to persuasion and narrative dominance seems to agree. Transcript of key comments:

I think I’ve been telling you for some time the obvious way that these protests/riots/looting episodes were going to go. There was only one way that these would go under the assumption that the police would not get more aggressive and that the local government would not let the federal government come in and take care of the violent stuff. There was going to be no adult supervision and that was intentional. The local leadership decided to not have any adult leadership during the protests/riots/looting. So it was obvious that the locals would end up arming themselves because what else would happen? Could you think of any other outcome? It was obvious this would be the outcome. And this is just the beginning, not just a one-off. It’s pretty obvious that more militia or more citizens are going to bring heavier arms…and they’re going to start showing up…. There’s probably no way it’s going to stop.

The worst case scenario is if the protesters [–> further?] arm themselves…ultimately this is the way it had to go. I feel bad for anyone who gets hurt and I don’t encourage any violence but as a prediction this was the way it had to go. It will end, but with more of this.

Sobering, and familiar.

Regulars at UD will know that I have long been very concerned about a kinetic escalation/spiral in an ongoing 4th generation culture revolution style, Red Guards driven civil war in the USA, geostrategic centre of gravity of our civilisation. Events over the past few days in Wisconsin (U/D: additional, here also see background here with here, here & here, contrasting what is not seen here) underscore that concern, to the level of juggernaut– out- of- control. (The first just linked seems to be at least a good point of reference for thought on a very regrettable but all too predictable event; the second gives background on the metaphor.)

Let me hark back for a moment to my 2016 global geostrategic framework shared here at UD (after public presentations here in the Caribbean):

That is deep backdrop, as we ponder where our civilisation is in the case of the lynch-pin state, the USA.

What happens to the US over the next six to eighteen months is fraught with global consequences that the general populace is at best dimly aware of; but, bet your last cent that movers and shakers behind the scenes have these considerations (from whatever perspective) in mind.

Now, too, for twenty years, I have often used a representation of sustainability-oriented strategic decision-making tracing to/adapted from the Bariloche Foundation of Argentina, set in the context of Environment Scanning and SWOT analysis:

(This is of course precisely the decision theory model which has led me to point to a serious ethics-epistemology breakdown in managing the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and how treatments are evaluated.)

Further to such, there is a more stringent version, in effect the challenge of the juggernaut i/l/o Machiavelli’s hectic fever model of political disorders:

Warning-signs, there have been in abundance, complete with many blood-dripping lessons of history. However, in a deeply polarised polity, building critical mass . . . “consensus” is implausible and half-measure compromises will predictably be built-to-fail . . . in good time to avert going over the cliff is hard, hard, hard. Such, is the nature of problematiques.

Perhaps, the problem can be recast instructively in terms of the dilemmas implicit in the Overton Window:

What happens when the acceptable limit imposed by dominant factions and their narratives locks out good solutions? What would shift the window?

The answer comes back, pain; pain and shattering from going over the cliff.

Or, if we are lucky, enough see the signs in time to act as a critical mass towards sound change before the cliff-edge collapses underfoot.

History, however, is not on the side of prudent foresight, and the history of radical revolutions has been particularly bloody and predictably futile. Never mind the pipe dreams sold by tenured profs and promoted by pundits and community organisers. As just a warning, let us compare a fools-cap image from the 1966 Mao-backed Red Guards:

. . . and a notorious recent incident in Washington DC:

. . . not forgetting the tragedy of the man who refused to salute in 1930’s in a Germany ruled by the National Socialist German Worker’s Party (and yes, contrary to the dominant narrative, they meant the “Socialist” part and the “Worker’s” part):

We need to pause and think again, I am somehow unable to take it for granted that we cannot turn back, even at the brink. Maybe, I am being irrationally hopeful for reprieve; but, let us at least ponder a case from an often overlooked classical report:

Ac 19:23 . . . [c. AD 57] there arose no little disturbance [in Ephesus] concerning the Way.

24 For a man named Demetrius, a silversmith, who made silver shrines of Artemis, brought no little business to the craftsmen.

25 These he gathered together, with the workmen in similar trades, and said [–> behind the scenes manipulative plotting], “Men, you know that from this business we have our wealth. 26 And you see and hear that not only in Ephesus but in almost all of Asia this Paul has persuaded and turned away a great many people, saying that gods made with hands are not gods. 27 And there is danger not only that this trade of ours may come into disrepute but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis may be counted as nothing, and that she may even be deposed from her magnificence, she whom all Asia and the world worship.”

28 When they heard this they were enraged and were crying out, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”

29 So the city was filled with the confusion, and they rushed together into the theater, dragging with them Gaius and Aristarchus, Macedonians who were Paul’s companions in travel. 30 But when Paul wished to go in among the crowd, the disciples would not let him. 31 And even some of the Asiarchs,5 who were friends of his [–> they had charge of the very Temple in question; obviously, Paul’s lectures in the Hall of Tyrannos and his reaching out to people had won him respect and even friendship], sent to him and were urging him not to venture into the theater.

32 Now [in the unlawful assembly] some cried out one thing, some another, for the assembly was in confusion, and most of them did not know why they had come together. 33 Some of the crowd prompted Alexander, whom the Jews had put forward. And Alexander, motioning with his hand, wanted to make a defense to the crowd.

34 But when they recognized that he was a Jew, for about two hours they all cried out with one voice, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”

35 And when the town clerk had quieted the crowd ] –> doubtless, sent by the Asiarchs], he said, “Men of Ephesus, who is there who does not know that the city of the Ephesians is temple keeper of the great Artemis, and of the sacred stone that fell from the sky?6 [–> apparently a meteoritic object turned into an idol] 36 Seeing then that these things cannot be denied, you ought to be quiet and do nothing rash. 37 For you have brought these men here who are neither sacrilegious nor blasphemers of our goddess. 38 If therefore Demetrius and the craftsmen with him have a complaint against anyone, the courts are open, and there are proconsuls. Let them bring charges against one another. 39 But if you seek anything further,7 it shall be settled in the regular assembly. 40 For we really are in danger of being charged with rioting today, since there is no cause that we can give to justify this commotion.” [–> in effect he hinted of the regiment doubtless camped not too far away; cf. the Nika riots under Justinian]

41 And when he had said these things, he dismissed the assembly. [ESV]

How easily, the democratic impulse deteriorates into the raging, out of control, manipulated, riotous, destructive mob!

And if there was no excuse for rioting under a lawful oligarchy (what the C1 Roman Empire had become, after failure of the Republic through envy, selfish ambition, assassination and civil wars leading to the rise of Octavian as Augustus), how much more so, is it inexcusable in any reasonably functional modern constitutional democracy?

I give a bit of context:

U/D: context:

U/d b for clarity, nb Nil

Further U/D, Sep 5, context of the seven mountains model for mapping society/culture/ civilisation and its main pillars of influence:

Governance is visibly failing, some think the mob will be appeased (it cannot), we are at cliff’s edge, with alarming cracks.

Can’t we stop before we go over the cliff?

Please . . . ? END

F/N, Sept 4: FTR, here is a clip of the actual transcript in the context of an incident where Mr Trump is routinely and falsely said to have endorsed Neo-Nazis etc as fine people:

It is obvious that this is precisely the sort of condemnation of neo-nazis that it is suggested Mr Trump has failed to give. That such tainting misrepresentation continues to be routinely promoted speaks volumes on disregard for truth and fairness. Notice, too, how he anticipated the progression from attacking statues of confederate leaders to American founders, with the obvious extension that cancel culture has no limits.

F/N2: Anatomy of a Red Guards Brigadista hit team/swarm in action, Portland USA:

(I add, Sep 6, while the above photo is already demonstrative of a coordinated murderous ambush, there is a video analysis here, UD can only embed YT. This event likely shows that both major front groups involved in the Red Guards brigadista insurgency are joined at the hip. For instance, the shooter had a BLM fist tattoo on his neck and declared himself 100% Antifa. His later suicide by shootout likely shows commitment to not be taken alive, i.e. he had knowledge of key information he judged worth guarding at the cost of his life. Modern interrogation techniques will credibly eventually “break” anyone.)

Let’s clip:

Portland Police are seeking help to identify a possible accomplice pictured here in the Portland Patriot Prayer member shooting. Here is a picture of the moments before the shooting. Notice the shooter is beginning to move as he draws his weapon, even though he does not have a sightline to the targets yet, and his position behind that cover would seem to be far enough back he could not otherwise have known his targets were hitting that position at exactly that moment. How did he know his targets were about to enter the killzone right then, and he needed to draw and begin moving? Even more interesting, in the criminal complaint on page 17, it points out he was initially walking with a woman in a white T-shirt, coming from one direction to that corner, and both were staring down the street at the targets who were a ways away, coming from a completely different place, as if the shooter and his partner had been told over the air to go there, and the targets they were about to shoot were coming from that direction, and they were identifying them. Once they got a bead on the targets, the woman stopped at the corner and loitered as he continued on and took cover in that alcove. Taking a corner gave her sightlines up and down all streets there, which would be second nature to the trained surveillance operative. And yet not having a sightline to the shooter, how would she communicate with him?  They were linked by radio. Look up behind the targets in the picture above, and you will see a lone guy who looks like the guy they are looking for. Notice his hand is covering his mouth just as the shooter begins to move, and the shooter is not holding a walkie talkie to receive any broadcast. It looks an awful like the guy behind the targets had taken surveillance command of the targets, he was trained enough that casually covering his lower face as he whispered into his chest was second nature, and he was radioing to the shooter who had an earpiece to receive, and probably a chest mic to transmit, triggering his movement at that moment, coordinating it to the targets. Also interesting, this new character may be surveillance aware enough he turned away from the surveillance camera as he came into view of it.

It takes a lot of time, recruitment effort, ideological motivation/desensitisation to morality, tactical training by experienced experts and rehearsal to run a complex hit like this. (For sure, this is no hothead running up to someone they hate and shooting in a rage, the surveillance cam shot demonstrates an orchestrated hit of the type used by Intel agency wet work teams or sophisticated terrorists. “mostly peaceful” and “protest” are off the table.)

That has to have a significant, years-long logistics trail, with face to face and communications networking, yielding traffic patterns.

So, this one case may be a break into what is now clearly a terrorist network.

Take it as a yardstick indicating the extent and depth of what is going on, a full-orbed 4th generation war insurgency backed by years of organisation and serious logistics, with carefully laid plans and organisation.

F/N3: And yes, “NAZI” lives don’t matter:

Clear intent to slander, brand and rob of right to life. Instead, we must recognise that life is the first right, without which there are no other rights. Therefore, we start with mutual respect and go on from there.

F/N4: U-Haul a Riot, Sept 2020

Comments
213 Seversky
Physicalism is the thesis that everything is physical, or as contemporary philosophers sometimes put it, that everything supervenes on the physical.
Physical meaning? 1. __________Truthfreedom
September 4, 2020
September
09
Sep
4
04
2020
02:49 AM
2
02
49
AM
PDT
211 DaveS
I don’t know, maybe none of the above? Perhaps a quale (if that’s the right term)? My actual experience is that of seeing a printed page.
But you = the brain that is doing the perceiving. So Mr. Brain :) , I ask: How can you do your work ("seeing") without knowing how the process you are carrying out works? Truthfreedom
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
11:17 PM
11
11
17
PM
PDT
F/N: It seems that the assassin from Portland has been killed in a police shootout involving reportedly dozens of shots. One can take no pleasure in violent death. Given signs of a team based assassination, it is hoped that a thorough investigation will be undertaken. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
10:04 PM
10
10
04
PM
PDT
PS: Heine:
Christianity — and that is its greatest merit — has somewhat mitigated that brutal German love of war, but it could not destroy it. Should that subduing talisman, the cross, be shattered [--> the Swastika, visually, is a twisted, broken cross . . do not overlook the obvious], the frenzied madness of the ancient warriors, that insane Berserk rage of which Nordic bards have spoken and sung so often, will once more burst into flame [--> an irrational battle- and blood- lust]. … The old stone gods will then rise from long ruins and rub the dust of a thousand years from their eyes, and Thor will leap to life with his giant hammer and smash the Gothic cathedrals. … … Do not smile at my advice — the advice of a dreamer who warns you against Kantians, Fichteans, and philosophers of nature. Do not smile at the visionary who anticipates the same revolution in the realm of the visible as has taken place in the spiritual. Thought precedes action as lightning precedes thunder. German thunder … comes rolling somewhat slowly, but … its crash … will be unlike anything before in the history of the world. … At that uproar the eagles of the air will drop dead [--> cf. air warfare, symbol of the USA], and lions in farthest Africa [--> the lion is a key symbol of Britain, cf. also the North African campaigns] will draw in their tails and slink away. … A play will be performed in Germany which will make the French Revolution look like an innocent idyll. [Religion and Philosophy in Germany, 1831]
kairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
09:59 PM
9
09
59
PM
PDT
Seversky, I will comment on points: >>I do not think that the KKK, neo-Nazis or right-wing militias all share the same beliefs and political agendas.>> 1: Why then did you try to plaster with fronting, being in "an unsavory collection" -- collected by what criteria, apart from constant allusions to Nazism and its implied racialist supremacism -- and talk of how MAGA hats are just missing Nazi swastikas, with implication that red is a Nazi flag colour . . . which meant socialist BTW . . . so black swastika against white circle would recreate the Nazi flag? 2: Let me remind, again, of exactly what you said which I object to, as extended to take in your onward remarks:
[Seversky, 83:] Much like “Make America Great Again” fronting [–> notice, accusation of hiding a core agenda] for an unsavory collection [–> notice utterly imbalanced characterisation by one who doubtless would agree with “mostly peaceful protests”] of KKK, neo-Nazis, right-wing militias [–> = Nazi SA storm troopers] and Christian nationalists. [–> = Christofascist Nazis]. –> Let me add the rest of his comment to Vivid: >>And we have a pretty good idea of the only people that lot and their idol care about. The only thing missing from the MAGA hat is the black swastika on a white ground.>>
3: For cause I find that seriously out of line to the point of being blood libel, with specific intent to taint with nazism. >> I do not believe Christian nationalists are all neo-Nazis, for example.>> 4: You chose "nationalists" rather than patriots, and used a key qualifier, ALL. 5: Given context, it is fair comment to note that the first term in the name of the Nazi party is "National[ist]" so in context the tainting intent is manifest. 6: In such a context, the distinction ALL becomes rhetorically artful, as a SINGLE exception breaks an All assertion. The implication is, that you imply or suggest the typical or a material proportion of are Nazis. Which is a gross slander to the point of being blood libel. 7: Had you said that some Christians are influenced by racism or totalitarianism and nietzschean superman political messianism, which are heresies, that would be a different matter. 8: What you instead said is that the slogan and position of a main party garnering 60 million votes at its last outing serves as a FRONT for "an unsavory collection"; one that should be represented by a version of the Nazi flag . . . which pivots on a BROKEN cross, a classic sign of antichristian heresy. (And yes, that is an implied aspect of its symbolism, cf Hiene's famous prophetic text of warning.) 9: Christian [--> by implication, White] NATIONALISTS are in the list, one framed by KKK, Neo-Nazis etc. Your implication is clear, as is the underlying bigotry. 10: While doubtless Christians have struggled with racism and the like, as I already pointed out in 122, the explicit Christian, scriptural teaching could not be clearer:
Ac 17:24 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man,3 25 nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. 26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, 27 that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us Gal 3:26 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave7 nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.
>>What I do believe is that such groups on the right – or the left – of the political spectrum pose a threat to democracy. That is because their views are exclusivist to varying degrees in that, if they were able, they would without compunction impose those views on the rest of us to the exclusion of all others. >> 11: Clarification to include the left duly noted. That is, having been called on the matter, you latterly try for balancing. 12: That noted, the implication of nazism clearly continues. In response I suggest to you that there is no credible objective evidence that any significant Republican faction is against the American republican framework of significantly democratic -- We the people -- character established 1776 - 1779. >>The MAGA movement is an umbrella for Trump supporters of all stripes under which these extreme right-wing groups have also found shelter.>> 13: The shift from fronting language is telling. You cannot contend against what fronting means, so have retreated to a different position. Similarly, I find the insinuation of tacit endorsement of no merit, as Mr Trump is obviously a displaced democrat with quite "progressivist" views; hitherto widely celebrated in the media culture. (And recall, I am here giving Jack his jacket.) >>you have persistently stigmatized and scapegoated the BLM protesters by continual references to their being Red Guard stooges manipulated by some vast Marxist conspiracy.>> 14: The turnabout attempt, you might want to reconsider on who were the most prominent advocates and practitioners of this tactic. As, it is a signature. 15: Neatly left out, that BLM is explicitly marxist by confession of its founders -- who by implication are Alinsky School community organisers (i.e. literally, trained, ideological, marxist/communist agitators) -- and platform, with an emphasis on the cultural form. Further left out, that it endorses an across the board radical marxist position and has specifically sought to use critical race theory to advance it. 16: Also neatly side stepped, the course of events this year and earlier which clearly show a Red Guards insurgency strategic pattern being pushed through operationally, where co-optation, subversion, front groups etc are a cluster of signature marxist tactics. 17: To go with this, the narratives being pushed on several key incidents are agit-prop narratives in the teeth of fairly well established objective facts. The police genocide narrative is obvious, only slightly less so is that if you disagree with them, question, object or resist rioting, attacks on cultural icons across the board etc, you are a nazi who has forfeited rights now up to and including that to life. 18: And, antifa is a similar pea from the same pod. >>The definition of “blood libel” I quoted before is the original and most common usage>> 19: Blood libel has long since been extended to other materially parallel case. This fits that extension, for cause. >>If you mean that my argument that extreme right-wing groups are accepted under the MAGA umbrella is so defamatory as to constitute a “blood libel”>> 20: That was not your argument, you are trying to reshape what you said to less unpalatable forms. You explicitly said: "Much like “Make America Great Again” fronting [–> notice, accusation of hiding a core agenda] for an unsavory collection . . . " That and what follows is blood libel, and I explicitly pointed it out repeatedly above. >>I can, by the same reasoning, argue that your pejorative references to the BLM movement being no more than Red Guard stooges of a Marxist conspiracy is also a “blood libel”. It works both ways.>> 21: A further resort to turnabout projection, telling as it shows it is habitual. It invites the mirror principle inference that one projects from "the abundance of the heart." 22: Libel falls before truth and before responsible analysis. I have shown, with significant evidence, the character of the current Red Guards insurgency, which does exploit and manipulate pain, history, perceptions and need for genuine reform. But once thresholds such as rioting under colour of protest, mayhem and murder, attempts to demand defunding/abolition of police and linked courts -- including racially based reversal of verdicts across the board -- are crossed, we are dealing with misanthropic anticivilisational radicalism of a type well known since 1789. >>There is an explosive admixture of implacably hostile groups,>> 23: The operational signature of Marxist led Red Guard insurgency is clearly present and attempts to project elsewhere are immaterial to the clear, present danger that threatens to destabilise the electoral process and further accelerate 4G civil war. Which has been my fundamental warning for a considerable time, it is almost amusing that as -- regrettably -- what I warned of begins to unfold, that is studiously avoided, Wilson style. >>If those citizens come to believe that administrations have become so corrupted so that they no longer act in the best interests of all people, if they come to believe that the legislature has become little more than a rubber stamp for the President’s personal wishes, if they come to believe that the bench has been packed with partisan judges so that those of a different persuasion can no longer expect justice to be administered fairly and impartially for all, then that democracy will – and perhaps should – eventually fall.>> 24: largely, turnabout projection, especially with insertion of legislature rubber stamping the Presidency, which has simply not been the case. >>If a culture can be honest, however, not just about its great achievements but also about its past failures and present shortcomings then I would argue that, for from being weakened or undermined, it is made much stronger and placed on a much firmer footing by those acknowledgements.>> 25: That is very different from anticivilisational insurgencies and attempts to construct false critical theory narratives then impose by syllabus and by media. 1619 project, I call you by name. (And yes, I intend the parliamentary, disciplinary reference.) >> there are groups on both right and left who are trying to exploit these protests to further their various political agendas – sadly that was inevitable – but they do not in any way alter the fact that these protests are a culmination of longstanding and genuine grievances which, as a culture, we owe it to them to address.>> 26: when protests are subverted into being the sea for the Maoist fish who transmute them into riotous insurgency a la Red Guards etc, then the priority shifts to first restoring order. Ongoing reformation is the opposite of Red Guard, anticivilisational insurgency and its implied power broker backers. After all, operations require planning, logistics, capacity building and funding, typically extending over at least several years. 27: All of that is a side track from the central point: you went over the line, beyond the pale of civil discourse and have refused to acknowledge, apologise and walk back. Duly noted. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
09:46 PM
9
09
46
PM
PDT
Kairosfocus @ 177
[Seversky, 83:] Much like “Make America Great Again” fronting [–> notice, accusation of hiding a core agenda] for an unsavory collection [–> notice utterly imbalanced characterisation by one who doubtless would agree with “mostly peaceful protests”] of KKK, neo-Nazis, right-wing militias [–> = Nazi SA storm troopers] and Christian nationalists. [–> = Nazis]
Do you see the key word, fronting and the utter want of responsible balance, coming mere days after someone was cold bloodedly murdered, mafia hit man style on the streets of Portland (there is no serious reason to even suggest self-defence)?
Let me be quite clear that I regard the above as a misrepresentation of my views. I do not think that the KKK, neo-Nazis or right-wing militias all share the same beliefs and political agendas. I do not believe Christian nationalists are all neo-Nazis, for example. What I do believe is that such groups on the right - or the left - of the political spectrum pose a threat to democracy. That is because their views are exclusivist to varying degrees in that, if they were able, they would without compunction impose those views on the rest of us to the exclusion of all others. The MAGA movement is an umbrella for Trump supporters of all stripes under which these extreme right-wing groups have also found shelter. This is because, by failing to repudiate them unambiguously, Trump has indicated tacitly that their support is not unwelcome. To that extent, MAGA is a front for those groups
A front group etc is short for false stalking horse front as maskirovka, i.e. the direct implication is that the advocates of the slogan are at best dupes used to provide cover for the following list, a list that makes several invidious associations that stigmatise and scapegoat.
Which is how you have persistently stigmatized and scapegoated the BLM protesters by continual references to their being Red Guard stooges manipulated by some vast Marxist conspiracy.
Such is clear blood libel (which does not just apply to events hundreds of years ago as was suggested in attempted red herrings).
The definition of "blood libel" I quoted before is the original and most common usage, I would argue. That does not prevent anyone using it to mean something different if they choose but, if they want that meaning to be understood as the one intended, then it would be helpful if that was made clear from the beginning. If you mean that my argument that extreme right-wing groups are accepted under the MAGA umbrella is so defamatory as to constitute a "blood libel" then I can, by the same reasoning, argue that your pejorative references to the BLM movement being no more than Red Guard stooges of a Marxist conspiracy is also a "blood libel". It works both ways.
The resort to red herring tactics indicates that those trying such stunts know their assertions are indefensible. Which, they are. Blood libel leads to blood, as was shown by the Portland hit on the weekend past.
There is no red herring. There is an explosive admixture of implacably hostile groups, some of whom are hotheaded and armed, which means, as we have seen with the Portland and Kenosha shootings, that those guns are going to be fired sooner or later if nothing is done to defuse the situation. If you want to know where this can lead, I suggest you look up the Tulsa massacre of 1932. No one in their right mind wants something like that to happen again.
Notice the sort of accusations that are being made against our civilisation in general, and one of its greatest achievements, constitutional democratic self government of a key people with government seen as mandated to protect God-given, unalienable rights. it is not for nothing that the reply to the 2nd para of the US DoI is in effect to try to taint its authors and more broadly the emerging state they founded and framed.
A constitutional democracy, more than any other form of government, depends on the trust of its citizens for its ultimate survival. If those citizens come to believe that administrations have become so corrupted so that they no longer act in the best interests of all people, if they come to believe that the legislature has become little more than a rubber stamp for the President's personal wishes, if they come to believe that the bench has been packed with partisan judges so that those of a different persuasion can no longer expect justice to be administered fairly and impartially for all, then that democracy will - and perhaps should - eventually fall. If a culture can be honest, however, not just about its great achievements but also about its past failures and present shortcomings then I would argue that, for from being weakened or undermined, it is made much stronger and placed on a much firmer footing by those acknowledgements. We can recognize, for example, the noble aspirations of the Declaration of Independence while accepting that the personal behavior of some of those who drafted it fell short of those ideals. We can recognize the achievement of building a great continental power while not closing our eyes to the fact that it was done by dispossessing the original inhabitants by deception, fraud and violence that, on occasion, came close to genocide. We can recognize the development of the industries that made this country the foremost economic power in the world while recognizing that they were built on the exploited labor of the poor Chinese or Irish and that attempts by workers to organize for better pay and conditions were sometimes violently crushed by private gangs of thugs and even the National Guard. We can recognize the great service rendered to their country in World War II by Dwight Eisenhower, Douglas MacArthur and George Patton while also noting that between the wars, they led a detachment of infantry and tanks that violently dispersed a large number of World War I veterans who had camped in Washington to demand bonus payments they had been promised. Finally, we can recognize that this country fought a bloody civil war in order to put an end to slavery while also recognizing that even those sacrifices have not put an end to racial discrimination that persists to this day. Yes, there are groups on both right and left who are trying to exploit these protests to further their various political agendas - sadly that was inevitable - but they do not in any way alter the fact that these protests are a culmination of longstanding and genuine grievances which, as a culture, we owe it to them to address.Seversky
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
08:12 PM
8
08
12
PM
PDT
DaveS @ 185
Physicalism Physicalism is the thesis that everything is physical, or as contemporary philosophers sometimes put it, that everything supervenes on the physical. The thesis is usually intended as a metaphysical thesis, parallel to the thesis attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Thales, that everything is water, or the idealism of the 18th Century philosopher Berkeley, that everything is mental. The general idea is that the nature of the actual world (i.e. the universe and everything in it) conforms to a certain condition, the condition of being physical. Of course, physicalists don't deny that the world might contain many items that at first glance don't seem physical — items of a biological, or psychological, or moral, or social nature. But they insist nevertheless that at the end of the day such items are either physical or supervene on the physical
As to whether abstract entities such as religious beliefs or moral principles or numbers are physical, it is at least arguable that they only exist within the conscious mind that perceives them and the only conscious minds that we know of are closely correlated with physical brains. So closely correlated in fact that, when the physical brain is destroyed, the associated consciousness is lost for good. Since the brain is a physical entity occupying a specific location in space and time we can say that, to that extent, abstract entities are physical or at least supervene on the physical.Seversky
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
06:08 PM
6
06
08
PM
PDT
MMT, Please remember what you lent support to:
[Seversky, 83:] Much like “Make America Great Again” fronting [–> notice, accusation of hiding a core agenda] for an unsavory collection [–> notice utterly imbalanced characterisation by one who doubtless would agree with “mostly peaceful protests”] of KKK, neo-Nazis, right-wing militias [–> = Nazi SA storm troopers] and Christian nationalists. [–> = Christofascist Nazis]. --> Let me add the rest of his comment to Vivid: >>And we have a pretty good idea of the only people that lot and their idol care about. The only thing missing from the MAGA hat is the black swastika on a white ground.>>
(And no, the just cited and annotated is patently not sarcastic or satirical commentary to be lightly set aside. I know, i know, the media narratives can make such seem almost conventional wisdom if one is immersed in a suitable bubble environment, but it is actually a classic of agit prop accusations, invidious associations and pivoting on deadly misrepresentations of reality. Blanket labelling dozens of millions of people as FRONTING nazism and several things closely associated therewith in context like that is hateful bigotry and should be walked back. The KKK was founded by and long associated with the Democrat Party of the US, witness a former Grand Kleagle. One can be a Christian and a patriot of the US without being a Nazi or Christofascist, insofar as such has any legitimate meaning. Nazism, more correctly is a left wing ideology insofar as the R/L political spectrum has any coherence, and more.) Sorry to have to be direct, but enabling blood libel is anything but civil or a matter of opinion. This is part of what is setting off things so potentially horrible that it is hard to put such in words. Recall, Seversky spoke in terms of FRONTING, with not the slightest modicum of nuance or recognition of legitimately different views, much less, corrective facts. Oh, again: things such as what the national socialist german worker's party ideology actually is, or the like. Some very serious rethinking is needed to drain out a lot of toxic polarisation that if left to itself, will predictably lead to blood. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
04:41 PM
4
04
41
PM
PDT
TF, I don't know, maybe none of the above? Perhaps a quale (if that's the right term)? My actual experience is that of seeing a printed page.daveS
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
03:23 PM
3
03
23
PM
PDT
The Argument
You decided to inspect the dictionary (#200) using your eyes (entry point of information). 1.Natural science tells us that light bounces off objects, passing through space, to enter the eye. 2.Photons striking the retina are then converted into nerve impulses which pass through the optic nerve into the occipital lobe of the brain deep inside the brain. 3. Occipital lobe of the brain: where visual experience takes place. *** The question is what exactly do we experience in vision: (1) the external object as it is at some distance from the eye, (2) the external object as it is presented to the end organ in the eye (retina), (3) changes in the end organ itself (retina), or (4) changes inside the brain (occipital lobe) which appear to terminate the visual sequence?
Truthfreedom
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
03:11 PM
3
03
11
PM
PDT
TF,
So believing in “unlocated in spacetime numbers” is “rational” but believing in other “unlocated in spacetime things” is “pants-on-head crazy”.
No, just because I don't believe in something doesn't mean I think it's crazy to believe in that thing. People have told me that they have witnessed miraculous events; I have doubts, but if these experiences are genuine, then their belief in God is rational, IMO. The rest of the post mostly does not reflect my views. It is correct that I don't think I came about through a process guided by a divine being.daveS
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
03:05 PM
3
03
05
PM
PDT
Mmm, my monkey brain missed the irony. So believing in "unlocated in spacetime numbers" is "rational" but believing in other "unlocated in spacetime things" is "pants-on-head crazy". Sounds a bit strange. And you "are" a brain, the product of an "evolutionary process" that is usually classified as a "botched-job" (not my words), that for "neurochemical reasons" believes that being "rational" (close to truth), is something "good" (we should 'aspire' to 'know truth' and not be misled by non-sense). Am I right in what I wrote?Truthfreedom
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
02:49 PM
2
02
49
PM
PDT
TF, No, I don't.daveS
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
02:30 PM
2
02
30
PM
PDT
KF
you are simply enabling blood libel. Unsurprising, on your track record at UD.
Well, I don't think that attitude is called for. I have always been civi to you, even when I disagree with you. As I do in this case. Sev used sarcasm, possibly more than necessary, to make a valid point. You can't argue the fact that there are some very unsavory characters who put on the MAGA hat and think that this justifies their hateful action. Just as there are other very unsavory characters who wear the BLM shirts to justify their hateful action. The vast majority of Trump supporters are friendly, generous, law-abiding people, as are the vast majority of BLM supporters. You can't discredit the views of a group of people because of the actions of a few.Mac McTavish
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
02:29 PM
2
02
29
PM
PDT
DaveS
Well, I don’t think it’s pants-on-head crazy to believe in such things. I do, anyway.
-Do you believe in "gods" and "souls"?Truthfreedom
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
02:08 PM
2
02
08
PM
PDT
Well, I don't think it's pants-on-head crazy to believe in such things. I do, anyway. Edit: I'll say "yes".daveS
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
01:46 PM
1
01
46
PM
PDT
198 DaveS Last one before proceeding with the argument:
An abstract entity is an entity that does not have spacetime coordinates. At least that’s how I understand the term.
So it is rational to believe in "things" that are not located in space-time. (Things that are part of reality/ existence but not bounded by the spacetime constraints). - God for example? Fits the bill. - A "soul" would be "possible"?Truthfreedom
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
01:33 PM
1
01
33
PM
PDT
DS, I think a far more likely explanation is polarised, toxic fog of war; as opposed to the binary alternatives you suggest; political arms races and polarisation have spiralled up and someone had the bright idea to start playing with culture form marxism. Which is contributing to the speeding up of the juggernaut. I don't like it but I smell trouble. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
12:38 PM
12
12
38
PM
PDT
KF, I think your answer to my question would then be something like "not necessarily"; presumably you simply don't know Ms Obama's intentions well enough to answer "yes" or "no" confidently. TF, Yes, I believe my brain is physical.daveS
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
11:42 AM
11
11
42
AM
PDT
DaveS
I’ll refer to a dictionary if I need clarification.
I am not being snarky. Ok. Let's imagine you want to gain knowledge about something and read the dictionary. Although this part may seem pretty obvious, it is very important for the argument: -I assume you accept the findings of the natural sciences and you consider your brain "physical" (locatable by spacetime coordinates). Am I right?Truthfreedom
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
11:22 AM
11
11
22
AM
PDT
DS, let me give a key historical example. As Europe tumbled into the abyss in July to September 1914, almost every country saw itself as acting defensibly for itself or an ally or guaranteed buffer state. Including Germany; one reason why it spiralled so deeply out of control. Fog of war. At this point I believe many perceive the despised deplorables much in the terms Seversky used, and would see a defeat for their favoured party as catastrophic. Given the Red Guards already on the streets for months -- cf again the direct parallels pointed out -- and enabling behaviour of local officials, the exceeding danger is patent. It is that that I am speaking to, it does not at all need to be deliberate double speak to be dangerous. I mark the difference between making threats and acting in ways that are dangerously threatening, i.e. escalatory. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
11:15 AM
11
11
15
AM
PDT
TF, I think I understand what "physical" means fairly well. I'll refer to a dictionary if I need clarification. An abstract entity is an entity that does not have spacetime coordinates. At least that's how I understand the term.daveS
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
10:41 AM
10
10
41
AM
PDT
168 DaveS So you do not understand the meaning of "physical"? You wrote
I am a dualist in the sense that I believe there are two kinds of entities, abstract ones and concrete ones.
"Abstract" meaning?Truthfreedom
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
10:33 AM
10
10
33
AM
PDT
KF, If my question cannot be answered with a "yes" or "no", I think that would mean that the statement "Michelle Obama was dog-whistling a threat [in the instance cited]" has no truth value. Or, if we unpack it a bit, the statement:
Michelle Obama intended to send a coded message to her followers. The message was that if Trump wins in November, then the left will retaliate, making things worse than they presently are.
has no truth value.daveS
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
10:16 AM
10
10
16
AM
PDT
DS, what I have implied is that the question is mal-formed. It cannot be simplistically answered. What is clear is the polarisation in such a situation will lead to dangerous projections that feed into the already accelerating kinetic aspect of the 4G war in progress. My view is, the aftermath of the election will be pivotal, and unfortunately is likely to be bloody as well as chaotic and economically destructive, possibly making shipwreck of the credibility of the US political system. Which can be disguised cf the early Roman Empire. On the scenario of a Trump election night win (with or without mail in vote chaos) many will have been led to believe a new Hitler has emerged as Chancellor, and current chaos would with high probability accelerate. Beyond a certain point, people are going to fight for their lives, homes, businesses and families regardless of narratives and some will reach the nothing left to lose level. The Red Guard rioting is approaching a threshold you don't want to cross. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
10:04 AM
10
10
04
AM
PDT
I'll take that as "no" (or perhaps "no comment" on that specific question).daveS
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
09:44 AM
9
09
44
AM
PDT
DS, I think she is caught up in the polarisation of the moment and projects to the despised other, imagining that those she champions will be justifiably resisting nazis and enablers of nazis as well as those knowingly fronting for them. In short, the US is in material part now in a media distorted plato's cave world of dangerously destructive shadow shows. Some call it the fog of war. Meanwhile she is actually enabling a situation where the juggernaut is already rolling. I shake my head and remember what I have already seen play out. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
09:41 AM
9
09
41
AM
PDT
DS, on physicalism, there is no stable mod point between, mind reduces to brain as GIGO limited inherently non-rational computational substrate and poof magic emergence which smuggles in elements of a contrary worldview . . . theism, pantheism or the like . . . to get around difficulties. On the first pole, self-referential incoherence emerges. On the second, physicalism is implicitly abandoned. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
09:35 AM
9
09
35
AM
PDT
KF, So you think Michelle Obama was dog-whistling a threat then?daveS
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
09:29 AM
9
09
29
AM
PDT
MMT, you are simply enabling blood libel. Unsurprising, on your track record at UD. Notice, the utter want of balance, the direct implication of false front for Nazism in direct and veiled form and more:
[Seversky, 83:] Much like “Make America Great Again” fronting [–> notice, accusation of hiding a core agenda] for an unsavory collection [–> notice utterly imbalanced characterisation by one who doubtless would agree with “mostly peaceful protests”] of KKK, neo-Nazis, right-wing militias [–> = Nazi SA storm troopers] and Christian nationalists. [–> = Christofascist Nazis]
I put it to you that you have tried to soften what was done after the fact, with no accountability for the blood libel. That tells us all we need to know. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2020
September
09
Sep
3
03
2020
09:26 AM
9
09
26
AM
PDT
1 23 24 25 26 27 32

Leave a Reply