Doomstead Diner Menu => Doomsteading => Seasteading => Topic started by: RE on October 06, 2020, 09:51:49 AM

Title: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 06, 2020, 09:51:49 AM
Hey Judy!  I have an idea!  Let's go Sailing!   :icon_sunny:

http://www.youtube.com/v/Hv3QupNtj4w

RE

http://www.youtube.com/v/bZSM5ZbdpWw
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Eddie on October 06, 2020, 12:06:28 PM
Looks like New Orleans is drawing the short straw again. Delta is kicking ass in the Yucatan, but it will probably become less severe by the time it reaches the US. The water is already cooling off closer to shore. Still, more flooding is likely in Louisiana and Mississippi....and they've already been smacked pretty good.

The military brass at the Pentagon is starting to have positive COVID test now for Trump's super-spreader events.

What's the over/under on Trump and Christie taking the dirt nap? Guess we'll see if being rich and having the best medical care can save old fat white men from COVID.

Trump says he feel fine (huff, puff, cough, cough.)

Right. Don't let COVID dominate your life.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: John of Wallan on October 06, 2020, 01:01:43 PM
2 Questions:
After November are you guys going to have:
1. A president who is good for the country?
2. Is this person going to be a better or worse President than current?

Seems like you guys have pretty bad choices; Frumpy Mk2 or Joe Bitten. (Nearly as poor as previous choice of Frumpy or Psycho killer)
Seems like politics everywhere is about getting lessor of 2 evils.
Our choices in Oz are not much better, and our political parties have a habit of cutting off their own heads and installing another ventriloquists dummy.

JOW
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmmvtX0IUHU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmmvtX0IUHU)
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Eddie on October 06, 2020, 02:49:32 PM
The truth is that in most ways it really won't matter that much which one we get......except that Trump is dangerous......because he is willing to suspend the rules and throw out the Constitution. We don't need a Duterte or a Bolsanaro running the country. Trump is in that mold.

Biden has plenty of bad Clinton baggage. The Democrats are buying into the more radical anti-racist message...which is very extreme....I don't care what anybody else says about it. It's a scam.....and we don't need unlimited immigration either...which is another false narrative of the Democrats...benefits their donor class.

The Democrats are fakes. The Democrat politicians are just as eager to sell out to the corporations as the Republicans, when it comes down to it.

In Oz you still have a lot of country for not very many people. Canada too. That makes for a better country, generally speaking. Too many people leads to too many laws and too many rules and too much surveillance. We once had that.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 17, 2020, 06:40:55 PM
The truth is that in most ways it really won't matter that much which one we get......except that Trump is dangerous......because he is willing to suspend the rules and throw out the Constitution.

And the Democrats aren't? If Biden is elected, Covid will continue to be an all-access pass for the government to throw out all constitutional rules relating to private property rights, privacy and most likely free expression/association as well. They seem to want to keep the country in a state of semi-lock down indefinitely. Republicans at least have some politicians (the more libertarian types) who will push back on that.

Oh, and, Biden now appears to be as corrupt as they come.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 18, 2020, 04:02:34 PM
The truth is that in most ways it really won't matter that much which one we get......except that Trump is dangerous......because he is willing to suspend the rules and throw out the Constitution.

And the Democrats aren't? If Biden is elected, Covid will continue to be an all-access pass for the government to throw out all constitutional rules relating to private property rights, privacy and most likely free expression/association as well. They seem to want to keep the country in a state of semi-lock down indefinitely. Republicans at least have some politicians (the more libertarian types) who will push back on that.

Oh, and, Biden now appears to be as corrupt as they come.

Those are Joe's sons sins. Free will removes the responsibility from the father.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 18, 2020, 04:40:03 PM
The truth is that in most ways it really won't matter that much which one we get......except that Trump is dangerous......because he is willing to suspend the rules and throw out the Constitution.

And the Democrats aren't? If Biden is elected, Covid will continue to be an all-access pass for the government to throw out all constitutional rules relating to private property rights, privacy and most likely free expression/association as well. They seem to want to keep the country in a state of semi-lock down indefinitely. Republicans at least have some politicians (the more libertarian types) who will push back on that.

Oh, and, Biden now appears to be as corrupt as they come.

Those are Joe's sons sins. Free will removes the responsibility from the father.

It appears from emails that Joe was involved as well. And it turns out the head of the "election integrity committee"  ::) at Facebook worked for Joe when he was VP and she was actually advising him on his corrupt dealings in Ukraine. No wonder they are so quick to block the evidence from being released on their platform.

And, apparently, there is much more damning evidence to come.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/does-explain-why-facebook-was-so-quick-suppress-hunter-biden-revelations (https://www.zerohedge.com/political/does-explain-why-facebook-was-so-quick-suppress-hunter-biden-revelations)

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/does-explain-why-facebook-was-so-quick-suppress-hunter-biden-revelations (https://www.zerohedge.com/political/does-explain-why-facebook-was-so-quick-suppress-hunter-biden-revelations)
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Eddie on October 18, 2020, 05:03:34 PM
Trump is the most corrupt President since Warren Harding. Trump accusing Biden of corruption is a case of a really big pot calling the kettle black.

Yes, I'm sure Biden is corrupt...He's been a sitting Senator since what? 1972?

But nothing Biden does is going to shift tha foundations of the country. Giving Trump more rope is asking for a coup attempt.

Trump has to go Ashvin. Think of the rule of law. Some things should be at least relatively sacrosanct.

Biden will be a terrible President.....yes I am sure of that.....but compared to Trump....he's a choirboy.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 18, 2020, 05:38:50 PM
Trump is the most corrupt President since Warren Harding. Trump accusing Biden of corruption is a case of a really big pot calling the kettle black.

Yes, I'm sure Biden is corrupt...He's been a sitting Senator since what? 1972?

But nothing Biden does is going to shift tha foundations of the country. Giving Trump more rope is asking for a coup attempt.

Trump has to go Ashvin. Think of the rule of law. Some things should be at least relatively sacrosanct.

Biden will be a terrible President.....yes I am sure of that.....but compared to Trump....he's a choirboy.

Eddie, it's not just Trump calling Biden corrupt... it's major news outlets with access to the emails on the recovered hard drive. They show Biden's corruption since 2015, which is not a long time ago. Are we just going to write this all off as trivial or planted by the Trump administration, because Biden (until now) had the image of a harmless old man while Trump had that of Hitler himself?

I am thinking about the rule of law. While you are speculating about potential constitutional violations when Trump finally becomes the fascist dictator everyone on the left is warning he will become, I am taking note of the actual constitutional violations taking place in states, cities and counties across the country, most extremely in the places that lean far to the left.

The draconian restrictions on businesses, restrictions on people's movement and ability to gather together (unless it's a woke protest, of course), indefinite moratoriums on foreclosures/evictions... these politicians and administrators are stripping away freedoms and doing irreversible harm to the economy at the same time. I come across people who are deeply affected by this stuff very often now. While the federal government has certainly played a role in putting some of these restrictions in place, the states and localities have played a much bigger role in keeping them in place. And they will be the ones taxing these same businesses and working class individuals to death going forward in a cruel attempt to recoup the revenues they lost from the policies they imposed.

And Trump's people are the only ones at the national level saying that the restrictions need to be rolled back, while the many on the left believe they should be expanded and intensified. Not to mention, they also support policies like "defund the police", which will absolutely destroy inner cities. This is by far the most immediate and potent threat to the rule of law in this country.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 18, 2020, 07:20:45 PM
According to the newz reports, Democrats are turning out in record numbers in the early voting and Republican Senators are running scared.  So it seems likely we'll have a Biden Presidency, assuming there is an orderly transfer of power.  That is where the most interesting questions on the political level lie at the moment.  If Trump attempts to invalidate the election, what will happen?

Neither of these dimwits in any way acknowledges or addresses the root causes of our problems, so neither will be effective in even slowing down collapse, much less turning things around to a brighter future.  To me, it is not very interesting who in the end does get the top spot, much more interesting questions revolve around how society will adjust to the new normal.  Unfortunately, we don't have Diners around anymore who are interested in discussing this.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 18, 2020, 07:49:41 PM
According to the newz reports, Democrats are turning out in record numbers in the early voting and Republican Senators are running scared.  So it seems likely we'll have a Biden Presidency, assuming there is an orderly transfer of power.  That is where the most interesting questions on the political level lie at the moment.  If Trump attempts to invalidate the election, what will happen?

RE

That's not what Biden's people are saying or the early voting in battleground states. The early turnout for Democrats has been much worse than expected, and you know Trump voters would show up to the voting booths even if a nuclear bomb went off the day before.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/18/biden-campaign-memo-warns-trump-neck-and-neck-in-several-key-states/
Quote
The Biden campaign released a memo warning that President Trump can “still win the race” and is “neck and neck” in several battleground states.

“Even the best polling can be wrong and that variables like turnout mean that in a number of critical swing states we are fundamentally tied,” Jen O’Malley Dillon wrote in a three-page message released on Saturday.

Even Biden's poll numbers have dropped off since the NY post article. It's likely going to be a very close one just like 2016.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 18, 2020, 08:03:24 PM
It's likely going to be a very close one just like 2016.

If it turns out close, that makes the election invalidation and voter fraud issues even more prominent.  You also have questions about what occurs if the Republicans lose the senate while retaining the executive branch?

I see no "good" outcome possible here, you'll just get different flavors of bad outcomes depending how it shakes out.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 19, 2020, 07:23:16 AM
It's likely going to be a very close one just like 2016.

If it turns out close, that makes the election invalidation and voter fraud issues even more prominent.  You also have questions about what occurs if the Republicans lose the senate while retaining the executive branch?

I see no "good" outcome possible here, you'll just get different flavors of bad outcomes depending how it shakes out.

RE

The practically mandated mail-in voting system will certainly make it worse - who knows how many complaints alleging fraud or other malfeasance are already prepared to be filed in various courthouses across the country. It will be a shit show for sure.

The way I see it, we have been in a state of choosing the "lesser of two evils" in American politics for a long time now. Right now Trump is the lesser for a whole host of reasons.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 19, 2020, 08:26:43 AM

The way I see it, we have been in a state of choosing the "lesser of two evils" in American politics for a long time now. Right now Trump is the lesser for a whole host of reasons.

I have no yardstick for measuring Evil, so I can't determine which one is worse.  Bad Newz, either way we are in for a shit show.  Jokers to the Left, Clowns to the right...

http://www.youtube.com/v/OMAIsqvTh7g

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 19, 2020, 06:06:03 PM



 Right now Trump is the lesser for a whole host of reasons.

Humour me sir, pray tell why?
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 19, 2020, 09:06:07 PM



 Right now Trump is the lesser for a whole host of reasons.

Humour me sir, pray tell why?

The covid/economic angle is mostly covered in my reply to Eddie. One big thing I left out was the way in which Google, Facebook, Twitter are explicitly campaigning for Biden at this point. Why is that? Because they represent a world in which all "news" is filtered through an ideological agenda and they know the democrats, who share much of the same ideology, will not regulate them in any way. It is an Orweliian and Huxleyian nightmare if they go unchecked.

I also see the "social justice" angle as another expression of this dynamic. Just as the left claims we must eradicate the Covid threat completely before returning the rule of law, we must also eradicate "systemic racism" or racism in general before returning to any other priorities. Anything that is necessary to eliminate the threat is permitted.

Of course both of those things are scientifically impossible and practically counter productive to reducing the threats, but that is why its part of an ideology - the ideas themselves take precedence over all else, including the practical realities. As long as the imprecise and invisible threats remain, we must look to the ideologues to deal with them on our behalf. At least that's the official narrative of the left right now.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 20, 2020, 01:56:04 PM



 Right now Trump is the lesser for a whole host of reasons.

Humour me sir, pray tell why?

The covid/economic angle is mostly covered in my reply to Eddie. One big thing I left out was the way in which Google, Facebook, Twitter are explicitly campaigning for Biden at this point. Why is that? Because they represent a world in which all "news" is filtered through an ideological agenda and they know the democrats, who share much of the same ideology, will not regulate them in any way. It is an Orweliian and Huxleyian nightmare if they go unchecked.

I also see the "social justice" angle as another expression of this dynamic. Just as the left claims we must eradicate the Covid threat completely before returning the rule of law, we must also eradicate "systemic racism" or racism in general before returning to any other priorities. Anything that is necessary to eliminate the threat is permitted.

Of course both of those things are scientifically impossible and practically counter productive to reducing the threats, but that is why its part of an ideology - the ideas themselves take precedence over all else, including the practical realities. As long as the imprecise and invisible threats remain, we must look to the ideologues to deal with them on our behalf. At least that's the official narrative of the left right now.

Covid lockdowns are a global phenomena. If you have states with more lax measures, they will probably end up with higher case numbers and then either have to do it again or face international condemnation. I don't think you have experienced state border closures yet, see what that does for the high infection rate states economy when the rest of the country closes it's borders.

A good metaphor is Biden using disposable paper surgical masks as opposed to Trump using the US standard of cloth mask kept in his pocket until needed. Not at the Whitehouse, maybe Walmart's condition of entry. All his followers seem to take that cue and just buy one of those. These may be environmentally friendly to the forests, but don't appear to have any differentiation inside or outside. It's exactly the same on both sides.  I assume the side you had against your face the last time you used it has 50/50 odds of being turned over to face the world the next time. No problem if it is only a symbolic gesture. Border closures to only china by trump can also be seen as a symbolic gesture that forced him to later close borders to Europe, excepting the UK which would have been an insufferable indignity to his bases ideology, regardless of the UK infection rate.

I think you will find a right wing govt can only dangle wedge issue carrots on abortions and lockdowns, but have to bow to pressure in the end every time. Consider also bill gates appearing all over the place circa February 2020, confidently explaining it would happen precisely this way, that collectivist ethos asian countries would quickly curtail the spread and recover economically, while more individually focussed western countries (or states) would reluctantly close the gate too late and want to open it again too early. It's almost as if Bill and the billionaires are prescient, isn't it? Maybe they're not entirely. Unless I missed them saying Trump's trade war would predictably fail and cause an economic depression that just coincides with necessitating increased money printing for a pandemic.

On the topic of the left eliminating racism as an ideology, I think you are again putting too much faith in the power of a president or politicians to turn that around. It follows on as an effect of tenured academics who carry on their agenda regardless of the series of presidents administrations coming and going. At the same time, their ongoing viability does depend to some extent on 'make work' rather than narrowing down the problem. Taking offence to someone taking an interest in a different hair type is actually offensive to anyone who was killed, beaten up, bullied or excluded based on race.

What you minimize, ignore, or fail to understand is the number of people longing to engage in those things again flourishing since 2015.  A denouncement consisting of 'proud boys stand aside' from the president is of course just more encouragement. Now that you mention it about social media censoring, I noticed alternative spelling of 'white' and 'oy vey,' a secret handshake of sorts on utube comments. As you suggest, their racism can't be eradicated, they find workarounds.

Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 20, 2020, 05:26:44 PM



 Right now Trump is the lesser for a whole host of reasons.

Humour me sir, pray tell why?

The covid/economic angle is mostly covered in my reply to Eddie. One big thing I left out was the way in which Google, Facebook, Twitter are explicitly campaigning for Biden at this point. Why is that? Because they represent a world in which all "news" is filtered through an ideological agenda and they know the democrats, who share much of the same ideology, will not regulate them in any way. It is an Orweliian and Huxleyian nightmare if they go unchecked.

I also see the "social justice" angle as another expression of this dynamic. Just as the left claims we must eradicate the Covid threat completely before returning the rule of law, we must also eradicate "systemic racism" or racism in general before returning to any other priorities. Anything that is necessary to eliminate the threat is permitted.

Of course both of those things are scientifically impossible and practically counter productive to reducing the threats, but that is why its part of an ideology - the ideas themselves take precedence over all else, including the practical realities. As long as the imprecise and invisible threats remain, we must look to the ideologues to deal with them on our behalf. At least that's the official narrative of the left right now.

Covid lockdowns are a global phenomena. If you have states with more lax measures, they will probably end up with higher case numbers and then either have to do it again or face international condemnation. I don't think you have experienced state border closures yet, see what that does for the high infection rate states economy when the rest of the country closes it's borders.

I dont think we will be experiencing state border closures from covid because its just not that lethal of a virus for the average healthy person below 70 (although Trumps quick recovery may suggest its not even that bad if you are 75 and fat)

The fact is that anyone who has the means to flee a super liberal area like LA or NY is fleeing, because the risk of traveling and catching covid is nothing compared to the risk of living in an increasingly repressive collectivist hellscape. Even 50 cent says fuck blm IM OUT... once again the leftist policies only hurt poor people...
https://twitter.com/50cent/status/1318303260164431873?s=20 (https://twitter.com/50cent/status/1318303260164431873?s=20)



Quote
A good metaphor is Biden using disposable paper surgical masks as opposed to Trump using the US standard of cloth mask kept in his pocket until needed. Not at the Whitehouse, maybe Walmart's condition of entry. All his followers seem to take that cue and just buy one of those. These may be environmentally friendly to the forests, but don't appear to have any differentiation inside or outside. It's exactly the same on both sides.  I assume the side you had against your face the last time you used it has 50/50 odds of being turned over to face the world the next time. No problem if it is only a symbolic gesture. Border closures to only china by trump can also be seen as a symbolic gesture that forced him to later close borders to Europe, excepting the UK which would have been an insufferable indignity to his bases ideology, regardless of the UK infection rate.

I think you will find a right wing govt can only dangle wedge issue carrots on abortions and lockdowns, but have to bow to pressure in the end every time. Consider also bill gates appearing all over the place circa February 2020, confidently explaining it would happen precisely this way, that collectivist ethos asian countries would quickly curtail the spread and recover economically, while more individually focussed western countries (or states) would reluctantly close the gate too late and want to open it again too early. It's almost as if Bill and the billionaires are prescient, isn't it? Maybe they're not entirely. Unless I missed them saying Trump's trade war would predictably fail and cause an economic depression that just coincides with necessitating increased money printing for a pandemic.


Which eastern collectist countries are those? Certainly not India who is in the middle of pretty massive outbreaks now... speaking of which, this Indian guy is really worth listening to:
https://youtu.be/T_COvdCujaA (https://youtu.be/T_COvdCujaA)

Quote
On the topic of the left eliminating racism as an ideology, I think you are again putting too much faith in the power of a president or politicians to turn that around. It follows on as an effect of tenured academics who carry on their agenda regardless of the series of presidents administrations coming and going. At the same time, their ongoing viability does depend to some extent on 'make work' rather than narrowing down the problem. Taking offence to someone taking an interest in a different hair type is actually offensive to anyone who was killed, beaten up, bullied or excluded based on race.

What you minimize, ignore, or fail to understand is the number of people longing to engage in those things again flourishing since 2015.  A denouncement consisting of 'proud boys stand aside' from the president is of course just more encouragement. Now that you mention it about social media censoring, I noticed alternative spelling of 'white' and 'oy vey,' a secret handshake of sorts on utube comments. As you suggest, their racism can't be eradicated, they find workarounds.

The leftist social justice ideology has been marinating in the academies and news/entertainment for deacdes. Its postmodern neo-Marxism. Class is substituted for race, gender, etc as the dividing line between the evil oppressors and the righteous oppressed. Its nothing new, Nietzche was tearing it apart back before the communist revolutions...
http://4umi.com/nietzsche/zarathustra/29 (http://4umi.com/nietzsche/zarathustra/29)

Meanwhile actual racism in the US has been disappearing rather quickly. Most minorities living in or close to inner cities fear losing the police presence much more than they fear being unjustly shot by the police, which rarely ever happens despite what the leftist media proclaims.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 21, 2020, 02:23:17 AM


Collectivist Asian countries referred to are eg Taiwan, SK Japan and the place we are told are lying about their numbers. The place Elon Musk mentioned he has a huge production and business operation, but did not lose one employee to covid. They do have the benefit of lower life expectancy and everyone being skinny though.  Thats the place Trump decided is in fact serious enough to immediately close border with, one he lost a trade war with, but that's nothing compared to the beating my country is taking in it.

Note I'm not arguing for collectivist ethos, I'm pointing out Bill Gates getting it right, apparently without foreknowledge. There is only one developed  economy to record positive growth this year. Someone said trade wars lead to hot wars. 

On India's outbreak, they have very high diabetes there, contributing especially on the good side of the wealth divide. Hunger is a much greater concern for probably 80% of people and the shutdown would make it worse. Food aid for people prevented from working largely did not reach the people, due to corruption of district captain's.. surprising nobody.


 On not having state border closures because the virus is not serious enough. The US is the place where the death toll is most significant, you are saying it would remain the exception to state border closures even by blue states wanting to shame a red state and keep their own economic recovery intact.  Remember I said trump did not think it serious enough to do anything at all except close border to china, but was forced by pressure to adopt all sorts of measures. That may be no different and may not even be his choice.

It certainly happens here and the isolated state would have lower figures than the best US state. a friend sent me a piece of new legislation, because it's his job to keep an eye on such things, about providing reservists with superannuation and other benefits when they are deployed to  emergencies such as bushfires. I said it's very simple: When you go on exercises as a reservist or in your case national guard, you have a great time so don't care about getting entitlements. responding to bushfires would be the same, exciting. Sitting at roadblocks in the sun and rain and wind to keep a state in quarantine would be no fun at all, so they needed to legislate proper payment and benefit.  Anyway the newsreaders can always use more gravitas when announcing that Texas has more positive tests this month than last month after testing twice as many people.  It may sound like I'm trivialising covid based on an arguably insignificant death rate, but I take it very seriously for different reasons. An eye opener was a couple in their 60s here. While the woman was testing negative, the man who was very fit for his age, a cyclist, was in a coma. The non recovered figure is the big one to watch because there are many people who can not get rid of it and are ongoing very sick, many in their 30s.

Defunding police does not mean having no police, just forcing them to police their own by hitting them in the budget and using the funds on community programs. I'm not averse to anarchy anyway.

I'm curious what an acceptable number of unjust police shootings is, what is the relative reference for "hardly ever" in a racially charged background. I don't agree with all BLM members tactics, like stopping traffic or shouting at people going about their business. Im not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater over it though. I consider the fully armed counter protest movement much more menacing.

'Postmodern' is an oxymoron, but if you accept that it's been progressing nicely for decades, then why place any hope in a current president to change that if he gets a second term. I find your take on Nietzsche eisegenic. What I recall he said in the will to power about socialism was that it is for weak men, he seemed to allude to an assumption that they can't compete and therefore require redistribution to survive.

I suggest that an equalised state education system is far more of a meritocracy than where a disadvantaged student in our own system needs to first beat crab mentality and crime before his cream rises to the top if he can secure a scholarship. Let's not forget who put sputnik in orbit and who only beat it with a hoax.

Nietzsche was also an ascetic, so should approve of the spartan and austere comforts under socialism. Finally, let's not forget what most endeared him to Hitler about his opinion on socialism; he called it the product of inferior men of an inferior race. Fire up the ovens then. This is still very much front and centre in the current white supremacist cult of the 21st century Fuhrer.

What Nietzsche did NOT talk about in the 19th century was cultural Marxism. I can't even call it a stretch, just misinformed if you did not even know his era and that the substitute of proletariat and bourgeoisie for other identities was in response to post WW2 middle class affluence. I know it's all a long time ago but they miss each other by 50 yrs.

What white identitarians studiously ignore is the purpose of the exercise.  They insist it is all just 'anti White' to dilute and replace them with inferior and ignorant 'muds' and 'shitskins' incapable of the conversation we are having, or continuing the civilization they alone were capable of building. The final stage after full 'marination' as you put it, is military defeat. That needs to sink in, instead of the belief system insisting it is only geared toward a kalergi plan. War rhetoric is turned up to eleven and we are planning having a gender, race and culture war at the same time as a world war.

You say racism is rapidly dissapearing. overt racism did decline over most of the past 50 yrs, but I'm afraid you're in denial, if you can't see how what was confined to the burning platform and comments section of zerohedge only 5 yrs ago is swelling up like the Michelin man online. AI, automation immigration and feminism disposessed them instead of cotton picking slaves today, but the salve for the sting is still the same. You're not a loser if your pigmentation created the empire.
 
I doubt you follow 50c on twitter as he was popular 15-20 yrs ago. I was thinking he has more than 50c, so high taxes probably had more to do with fleeing the cities you mentioned than fear of BLM, and clicking on the tweet you linked confirmed it. What he said was that he is voting for Trump despite him hating black people because Trump's top tax rate is 58c vs Bidens 62c.

 I did not paraphrase that, Trump supporters are proudly passing around a quote by a black man saying trump hates black people. I rest my case.



Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 21, 2020, 05:49:42 AM
Quote from: Phil Rumpole

Defunding police does not mean having no police, just forcing them to police their own by hitting them in the budget and using the funds on community programs. I'm not averse to anarchy anyway.

What you call "anarchy" the poor law abiding minorities of those defunded jurisdictions would call a genocide. And they wouldn't be wrong, because thats effectively what it means for them.

Quote
I'm curious what an acceptable number of unjust police shootings is, what is the relative reference for "hardly ever" in a racially charged background. I don't agree with all BLM members tactics, like stopping traffic or shouting at people going about their business. Im not going to throw the baby out with the bathwater over it though. I consider the fully armed counter protest movement much more menacing.

Thinking of terms of "acceptable numbers" numbers is the problem. Of the unjustifiable police shooting that do occur, what number of them can be attributed to racial bias more than other factors, like lack of proper training? That's the importanr questionand the fact that people on the left don't even think to ask it is worrisome to say the least.

Quote
Postmodern' is an oxymoron, but if you accept that it's been progressing nicely for decades, then why place any hope in a current president to change that if he gets a second term. I find your take on Nietzsche eisegenic. What I recall he said in the will to power about socialism was that it is for weak men, he seemed to allude to an assumption that they can't compete and therefore require redistribution to survive.

I suggest that an equalised state education system is far more of a meritocracy than where a disadvantaged student in our own system needs to first beat crab mentality and crime before his cream rises to the top if he can secure a scholarship. Let's not forget who put sputnik in orbit and who only beat it with a hoax.

Nietzsche was also an ascetic, so should approve of the spartan and austere comforts under socialism. Finally, let's not forget what most endeared him to Hitler about his opinion on socialism; he called it the product of inferior men of an inferior race. Fire up the ovens then. This is still very much front and centre in the current white supremacist cult of the 21st century Fuhrer.

What Nietzsche did NOT talk about in the 19th century was cultural Marxism. I can't even call it a stretch, just misinformed if you did not even know his era and that the substitute of proletariat and bourgeoisie for other identities was in response to post WW2 middle class affluence. I know it's all a long time ago but they miss each other by 50 yrs.

Read the link I posted, what he wrote about the "tarantulas" in Zarathustra reads like a direct criticism of the social justice warriors we have today, virtue signaling and all. If you think Nietzsche had anything good to say about socialism then you haven't understood him at all. He also criticized "asceticism" in the way you are using it. He was not a fan of those who preached against the life impulse to be courageous, ambitious and creative in the face of life's mysteries, the slave morality which says its better to be weak and ineffectual and better still to wear your weakness as a badge of moral superiority.

Quote
What white identitarians studiously ignore is the purpose of the exercise.  They insist it is all just 'anti White' to dilute and replace them with inferior and ignorant 'muds' and 'shitskins' incapable of the conversation we are having, or continuing the civilization they alone were capable of building. The final stage after full 'marination' as you put it, is military defeat. That needs to sink in, instead of the belief system insisting it is only geared toward a kalergi plan. War rhetoric is turned up to eleven and we are planning having a gender, race and culture war at the same time as a world war.

You say racism is rapidly dissapearing. overt racism did decline over most of the past 50 yrs, but I'm afraid you're in denial, if you can't see how what was confined to the burning platform and comments section of zerohedge only 5 yrs ago is swelling up like the Michelin man online. AI, automation immigration and feminism disposessed them instead of cotton picking slaves today, but the salve for the sting is still the same. You're not a loser if your pigmentation created the empire.
 
I doubt you follow 50c on twitter as he was popular 15-20 yrs ago. I was thinking he has more than 50c, so high taxes probably had more to do with fleeing the cities you mentioned than fear of BLM, and clicking on the tweet you linked confirmed it. What he said was that he is voting for Trump despite him hating black people because Trump's top tax rate is 58c vs Bidens 62c.

 I did not paraphrase that, Trump supporters are proudly passing around a quote by a black man saying trump hates black people. I rest my case.

I have no sympathy for white identitarians who feel oppressed by the left, but deducing their numbers and influence from online comment sections is silly. What important cultural institutions in the US do the ethno nationalist types actually control? None. Not media, not entertainment, not universities.

I didnt say 50 cent hates black people. The point is that he like most reasonable people is much more worried about leftist economic policies than the president "hating black people". But he, unlike most people, has the resources to just pack up and leave. Most people, like my bankrupt clients, don't have that luxury.

I do agree that the presidency has little to do with it. These local leftists will pursue those devastating economic policies regardless of who is in the white house. However I think a Biden victory would embolden them much more and that's the last thing we need right now.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 21, 2020, 09:38:06 AM
Can we just agree we are fucked no matter who gets elected?

Look, even in RED states that open up, what idiot will go to a fitness facility for a workout?  Who will go to a restaurant no matter how good the food is?  You can't cut your own hair?  It's that hard?

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 21, 2020, 12:09:24 PM
Can we just agree we are fucked no matter who gets elected?

Look, even in RED states that open up, what idiot will go to a fitness facility for a workout?  Who will go to a restaurant no matter how good the food is?  You can't cut your own hair?  It's that hard?

RE

I go just about anywhere they will let me right now. We are social creatures and going out to places is biologically instantiated in us. That is the archetype of the hero's journey. The negative effect these lockdowns are going to have on mental health is unimaginable if they continue much longer. Zoom technology just doesnt cut it in the medium to long term.

Northern Virginia is not too bad in it's current level of restrictions. Maryland is somehwat more restrictive. I can't even imagine living in NY or Cali right now.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 21, 2020, 02:30:17 PM
To be clear, full anarchy is no govt, not  having a small part of bloated police dept budget diverted to community programs. Ask any of the older guys here about the 20th century when men could settle disputes without anyone even thinking of calling the cops and women in aprons would haul someone else's kid or teenager back to their mother and tell them what they did, then the mother would make them apologise and make restitution. Communities are capable of healthy socialisation and dealing with far more on their own than you might think.

Yes, the point to Trump supporters is 50c is "voting for Trump" because his top tax rate is 4c "less" than Biden, blank stare from trump supportersp on him saying verbatim trump hates black people. What could be more normal? I give up.

I never said Nietzsche had anything good to say on socialism. He went into isolation in the wilderness alone to harden himself, that's an ascetic. He feared exactly the softening that later came with the comfort of materialistic consumption. Blatant antisemitism behind his criticism, yes of course, what's the problem?

Patriots don't need to control CNN or Google to bash a black, but the social media giants do let them congregate on their platforms and talk all the time about how they can't wait for it to start.  They even like to promote just so much. I can tell when occasionally things appear in my utube feed that are unrelated to anything I've been looking at.  Yesterday there was one of joy villa doing a parody of some Mexican actress who posted up teary eyed about being mobbed by  Maga hats. A couple of weeks ago a bible prophesy channel had some very frumpy woman chosen by God to be the modern equivalent of Moses and see the burning bush. The vid was  over an hour long but I only got 3 mins in. In that time she had seen beatific trump like a beast of revelation take Nancy Pelosi in his teeth and shake her like a terrier with a mouse. Then she mentioned her concern for the Christians in china, implication being we need to spread them freedom and democracy. She said the great Wall is a monument, so like a statue in honour of someone or something, not over 10k miles of fortification. She provided a little known fact it was built by Christians and contains millions of their bodies. I thought it was started long before Christ was born and completed before even Marco Polo first reported back from there. Imagine what I could have learned from the full hour. 

The whole thing is like a cargo cult. I literally just can't even

 
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 21, 2020, 03:59:10 PM
Can we just agree we are fucked no matter who gets elected?

Look, even in RED states that open up, what idiot will go to a fitness facility for a workout?  Who will go to a restaurant no matter how good the food is?  You can't cut your own hair?  It's that hard?

RE

I go just about anywhere they will let me right now. We are social creatures and going out to places is biologically instantiated in us. That is the archetype of the hero's journey. The negative effect these lockdowns are going to have on mental health is unimaginable if they continue much longer. Zoom technology just doesnt cut it in the medium to long term.

Northern Virginia is not too bad in it's current level of restrictions. Maryland is somehwat more restrictive. I can't even imagine living in NY or Cali right now.

I agree Homo Sap is a Social Animal, and we can't go without congregating in groups forever.  Without the intenet even the current level of commerce could not be maintained.  The question is how long is long enough, when is it too soon, how can we best minimize transmission, how much freedom must we sacrifice, etc?

IMHO, it is too soon.  Here in Alaska where we had a remarkably low # of COVID cases even by percentage, with the reopening of schools and relaxing of restrictions on bars and restaurants, we have seen a huge spike up.

One has to remember more cases is ALSO a drain on the economy.  That means more hospitalizatios, more OT for doctors and nurses, etc.  You're going to lose money either way, but which way saves the most lives?

A 10% population reduction might be enough for Herd Immunity to set in.  That would be around 750M Dead People.  At the current pace, we might make that in 2-3 years.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 21, 2020, 06:41:35 PM
To be clear, full anarchy is no govt, not  having a small part of bloated police dept budget diverted to community programs. Ask any of the older guys here about the 20th century when men could settle disputes without anyone even thinking of calling the cops and women in aprons would haul someone else's kid or teenager back to their mother and tell them what they did, then the mother would make them apologise and make restitution. Communities are capable of healthy socialisation and dealing with far more on their own than you might think.

Yeah, well, those days are gone now... when there is even talk of reducing police presence in major cities, violent crime spikes, mostly serious assaults and murders. What would happen if that presence was actually cut in half or even more? It's easy to say people living in these terrible situations can "deal with far more on their own" because you don't have to deal with the reality when it happens.

Quote
Yes, the point to Trump supporters is 50c is "voting for Trump" because his top tax rate is 4c "less" than Biden, blank stare from trump supporters on him saying verbatim trump hates black people. What could be more normal? I give up.

Who cares if he says Trump hates black people? His actions speak volumes louder than his words - if he actually thought a Trump presidency was a huge threat to the very existence of black people in this country, he wouldn't vote for him, no matter how high Biden's tax rate was. His tweet was a big fuck you to BLM because their motto is, "the ONLY thing you should be thinking about when you cast your vote is how Trump (and all republicans) hate blacks and want to destroy our race". Sorry, most Americans including most black Americans realize that's garbage.

Quote
I never said Nietzsche had anything good to say on socialism. He went into isolation in the wilderness alone to harden himself, that's an ascetic. He feared exactly the softening that later came with the comfort of materialistic consumption. Blatant antisemitism behind his criticism, yes of course, what's the problem?

What "blatant antisemitism"?  If you are referring to his fascist sister's editing of his works while he was dying and after he was dead, that was exposed for what it was a long time ago. He is actually the guy who wrote a letter to a friend saying "I am just having all anti-Semites shot".

Quote
Patriots don't need to control CNN or Google to bash a black, but the social media giants do let them congregate on their platforms and talk all the time about how they can't wait for it to start.  They even like to promote just so much. I can tell when occasionally things appear in my utube feed that are unrelated to anything I've been looking at.  Yesterday there was one of joy villa doing a parody of some Mexican actress who posted up teary eyed about being mobbed by  Maga hats. A couple of weeks ago a bible prophesy channel had some very frumpy woman chosen by God to be the modern equivalent of Moses and see the burning bush. The vid was  over an hour long but I only got 3 mins in. In that time she had seen beatific trump like a beast of revelation take Nancy Pelosi in his teeth and shake her like a terrier with a mouse. Then she mentioned her concern for the Christians in china, implication being we need to spread them freedom and democracy. She said the great Wall is a monument, so like a statue in honour of someone or something, not over 10k miles of fortification. She provided a little known fact it was built by Christians and contains millions of their bodies. I thought it was started long before Christ was born and completed before even Marco Polo first reported back from there. Imagine what I could have learned from the full hour. 

The whole thing is like a cargo cult. I literally just can't even

You are basing your fear of the rise of neo-Nazi racists in the US on some random videos that come on to your YouTube feed? Do you really think those people are representative of the average conservative American? What's cult like is the willingness of the average American (or perhaps even Westerner) to accept the narratives fed to them by radical leftist institutions without question.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 21, 2020, 06:45:33 PM
Can we just agree we are fucked no matter who gets elected?

Look, even in RED states that open up, what idiot will go to a fitness facility for a workout?  Who will go to a restaurant no matter how good the food is?  You can't cut your own hair?  It's that hard?

RE

I go just about anywhere they will let me right now. We are social creatures and going out to places is biologically instantiated in us. That is the archetype of the hero's journey. The negative effect these lockdowns are going to have on mental health is unimaginable if they continue much longer. Zoom technology just doesnt cut it in the medium to long term.

Northern Virginia is not too bad in it's current level of restrictions. Maryland is somehwat more restrictive. I can't even imagine living in NY or Cali right now.

I agree Homo Sap is a Social Animal, and we can't go without congregating in groups forever.  Without the intenet even the current level of commerce could not be maintained.  The question is how long is long enough, when is it too soon, how can we best minimize transmission, how much freedom must we sacrifice, etc?

IMHO, it is too soon.  Here in Alaska where we had a remarkably low # of COVID cases even by percentage, with the reopening of schools and relaxing of restrictions on bars and restaurants, we have seen a huge spike up.

One has to remember more cases is ALSO a drain on the economy.  That means more hospitalizatios, more OT for doctors and nurses, etc.  You're going to lose money either way, but which way saves the most lives?

A 10% population reduction might be enough for Herd Immunity to set in.  That would be around 750M Dead People.  At the current pace, we might make that in 2-3 years.

RE

What segment of the population is mostly getting infected? Has there also been a huge spike up in hospitalizations and deaths?

There is no comparison between the drain on the economy from increased Covid infections and the DRAIN on the economy from literally shutting it down.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 21, 2020, 08:32:22 PM

What segment of the population is mostly getting infected? Has there also been a huge spike up in hospitalizations and deaths?

By anf large, it kills the old, the otherwise health compromised and the poor.  This varies from state to state by absolute numbers and by percent.

Quote
There is no comparison between the drain on the economy from increased Covid infections and the DRAIN on the economy from literally shutting it down.

That is because no numbers have been estimated for the total health care costs or the lost workers who are sick.  It definitely has cost trillions in funny money so far though.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 21, 2020, 09:15:14 PM

What segment of the population is mostly getting infected? Has there also been a huge spike up in hospitalizations and deaths?

By anf large, it kills the old, the otherwise health compromised and the poor.  This varies from state to state by absolute numbers and by percent.

Quote
There is no comparison between the drain on the economy from increased Covid infections and the DRAIN on the economy from literally shutting it down.

That is because no numbers have been estimated for the total health care costs or the lost workers who are sick.  It definitely has cost trillions in funny money so far though.

RE

I meant the "huge spike" of cases in Alaska this month?
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: John of Wallan on October 21, 2020, 10:47:58 PM
I keep hearing the same line:
"Its only the people already sick or old it affecting."
That's ok then. They are not important to the economy apparently..
Lockdowns are are drain on the economy. So is healthcare. So is the military. so is the police. So is education. So is welfare. We can do with out all these, but not sure I would like to live in a country without them thankyou very much.

I know quite a few elderly and infirm people I would like not to die early from this virus thank you very much. My parents. My wife. RE. A few of my friends. All of my uncles and aunts.

This other myth; "Its not as deadly as the flu."
Incorrect. Its about 10 times more infectious and 10 times more deadly from what figures from our health department are saying. I dont believe China would have locked down like they did if it was just another seasonal flu. There has not been a huge spike in hospitalizations and death as we have been in lockdown to stop a huge spike in hospitalizations and deaths.

We have gone through a quite severe lockdown here in Melbourne and surrounding areas. Rightly so. It may not be affecting the young and fit as much, but it still affects them. A young fitter in our maintenance team around 30 years old and very physically fit came down with it about 2 months ago. We all went and got tested as a precaution. Was like a bad flu for about a week and a half according to him. Since "recovering" he has not been able to run any distance despite previously doing 5km every other night in training for his football team. Says he goes about 200m and has to stop and gasp for air. Doctors tell him his lung function may be permanently compromised. It affects other differently. Some more severe, some less. Latest data shows if you are O type blood you dont get it as severe as other types.

I cant understand why it has become a political divide not just in Merika but here in Oz as well. Science does not have a political view, its science. It tries to find the facts.

JOW.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 22, 2020, 02:50:47 AM
To be clear, full anarchy is no govt, not  having a small part of bloated police dept budget diverted to community programs. Ask any of the older guys here about the 20th century when men could settle disputes without anyone even thinking of calling the cops and women in aprons would haul someone else's kid or teenager back to their mother and tell them what they did, then the mother would make them apologise and make restitution. Communities are capable of healthy socialisation and dealing with far more on their own than you might think.

Yeah, well, those days are gone now... when there is even talk of reducing police presence in major cities, violent crime spikes, mostly serious assaults and murders. What would happen if that presence was actually cut in half or even more? It's easy to say people living in these terrible situations can "deal with far more on their own" because you don't have to deal with the reality when it happens.

Quote
Yes, the point to Trump supporters is 50c is "voting for Trump" because his top tax rate is 4c "less" than Biden, blank stare from trump supporters on him saying verbatim trump hates black people. What could be more normal? I give up.

Who cares if he says Trump hates black people? His actions speak volumes louder than his words - if he actually thought a Trump presidency was a huge threat to the very existence of black people in this country, he wouldn't vote for him, no matter how high Biden's tax rate was. His tweet was a big fuck you to BLM because their motto is, "the ONLY thing you should be thinking about when you cast your vote is how Trump (and all republicans) hate blacks and want to destroy our race". Sorry, most Americans including most black Americans realize that's garbage.

Quote
I never said Nietzsche had anything good to say on socialism. He went into isolation in the wilderness alone to harden himself, that's an ascetic. He feared exactly the softening that later came with the comfort of materialistic consumption. Blatant antisemitism behind his criticism, yes of course, what's the problem?

What "blatant antisemitism"?  If you are referring to his fascist sister's editing of his works while he was dying and after he was dead, that was exposed for what it was a long time ago. He is actually the guy who wrote a letter to a friend saying "I am just having all anti-Semites shot".

Quote
Patriots don't need to control CNN or Google to bash a black, but the social media giants do let them congregate on their platforms and talk all the time about how they can't wait for it to start.  They even like to promote just so much. I can tell when occasionally things appear in my utube feed that are unrelated to anything I've been looking at.  Yesterday there was one of joy villa doing a parody of some Mexican actress who posted up teary eyed about being mobbed by  Maga hats. A couple of weeks ago a bible prophesy channel had some very frumpy woman chosen by God to be the modern equivalent of Moses and see the burning bush. The vid was  over an hour long but I only got 3 mins in. In that time she had seen beatific trump like a beast of revelation take Nancy Pelosi in his teeth and shake her like a terrier with a mouse. Then she mentioned her concern for the Christians in china, implication being we need to spread them freedom and democracy. She said the great Wall is a monument, so like a statue in honour of someone or something, not over 10k miles of fortification. She provided a little known fact it was built by Christians and contains millions of their bodies. I thought it was started long before Christ was born and completed before even Marco Polo first reported back from there. Imagine what I could have learned from the full hour. 

The whole thing is like a cargo cult. I literally just can't even

You are basing your fear of the rise of neo-Nazi racists in the US on some random videos that come on to your YouTube feed? Do you really think those people are representative of the average conservative American? What's cult like is the willingness of the average American (or perhaps even Westerner) to accept the narratives fed to them by radical leftist institutions without question.

Well you can have the statist ratcheting up of atomization of community and lawfare as arbiter until it ends in anarchy. Ethics will then become resurgent by necessity for survival. A violent criminal will be punished by the community when there is no punishment for taking law into its own hands. Speaking of hands, even the handshake evolved first from meeting a stranger and checking if they had a weapon by shaking their hand. It then became a way of signalling your decency and trustworthiness. It has gone by the wayside now.

I don't know about Voltaire's sister editing his writing. I'm not interested enough to look into it. I read his work initially to see why Hitler was basing his ideology around the philosophy. I do recall seeing it written that he attributed socialism to a broken or inferior men and race. You would need to look at the original handwritten pages to determine if he never said it. I'm sorry to say that I can't see he said anything profound.

I provided the two utube vids to illustrate the social media giants promoting rather than silencing support for Trump. The second one also illustrates the post facts or post truth nature of political discourse today. the host could have decided to not post her demonstrably false dialogue. Instead there is an unspoken agreement to always admire the emperor's new clothes. This is on both sides of politics. Postmodernist communists would not succeed in demoralising and dividing the people enough, if one side was reality based enough to not wish away incoming fire in a war.

I take behavioral science very seriously, it's reading the comments not under those utube vids, but under Jordan Peterson Brett and Eric Weinstein, Sam Harris, Charles and Douglas Murray and other intellectuals that white supremacists don't even understand. I mentioned the burning platform and zerohedge before, add to that the Facebook pages of right wing politicians such as Senator Chris McDaniels in America, Pauline Hanson in Australia and every men's rights activist or writer. I gave up on the whole movement as it decided to alienate half its potential support base by becoming aligned with the far right. Without fail, there are always people who chime in with comments completely off topic about western civilization, immigration, race mixing and the Jewish conspiracy. White people with shit going on in their lives don't need to do this, those who do are just losers left behind. They are easily refuted if I deign to waste my time, which I have often done. The point being, that is my data set, not the two vids I last mentioned.

50c is perfectly entitled to vote for whoever least taxes top income earners and I will not castigate him for doing it. Any of us would do the same thing. What I find astonishing is Trump supporters accepting the part of his tweet saying "trump doesn't like black people" and gleefully sharing it. Would you accept Lot's lot and find just two good men to say he is wrong? The irony is I don't think it is true. If Mexicans, Blacks and LGBTQ appointed him their figurehead and promised the votes to get re-elected, he would play up to them instead.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 22, 2020, 08:04:56 AM

Lockdowns are are drain on the economy. So is healthcare. So is the military. so is the police. So is education. So is welfare. We can do with out all these, but not sure I would like to live in a country without them thankyou very much.

I don't understand why lockdowns are getting called a "drain" on the economy, like any other government service. It is literally the shutting down of businesses and consumer spending and all the associated taxes, i.e. the economy.

Quote
I know quite a few elderly and infirm people I would like not to die early from this virus thank you very much. My parents. My wife. RE. A few of my friends. All of my uncles and aunts.

The question is whether you think these people can make informed responsible decisions without sweeping government restrictions on movement and private property (i.e. the ability to continue operating a business), or do we need the government to make sure the elderly and infirm are protected until this virus completely disappears?

Quote
This other myth; "Its not as deadly as the flu."
Incorrect. Its about 10 times more infectious and 10 times more deadly from what figures from our health department are saying. I dont believe China would have locked down like they did if it was just another seasonal flu. There has not been a huge spike in hospitalizations and death as we have been in lockdown to stop a huge spike in hospitalizations and deaths.

Can you provide a scientific source for that bolded assertion?
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 22, 2020, 08:22:31 AM
I don't know about Voltaire's sister editing his writing. I'm not interested enough to look into it. I read his work initially to see why Hitler was basing his ideology around the philosophy. I do recall seeing it written that he attributed socialism to a broken or inferior men and race. You would need to look at the original handwritten pages to determine if he never said it. I'm sorry to say that I can't see he said anything profound.

This is a troubling trend, especially from people who lean left, but totally unsurprising to me at this point. You start opining on someone's philosophy and calling that person an "anti-Semite" while admitting you are not even interested enough to read his works or get his name right. Nietzsche was one of the most profound philosophers in human history, but of course you need to read him or at least credible sources on him to appreciate that.

Quote
I take behavioral science very seriously, it's reading the comments not under those utube vids, but under Jordan Peterson Brett and Eric Weinstein, Sam Harris, Charles and Douglas Murray and other intellectuals that white supremacists don't even understand. I mentioned the burning platform and zerohedge before, add to that the Facebook pages of right wing politicians such as Senator Chris McDaniels in America, Pauline Hanson in Australia and every men's rights activist or writer. I gave up on the whole movement as it decided to alienate half its potential support base by becoming aligned with the far right. Without fail, there are always people who chime in with comments completely off topic about western civilization, immigration, race mixing and the Jewish conspiracy. White people with shit going on in their lives don't need to do this, those who do are just losers left behind. They are easily refuted if I deign to waste my time, which I have often done. The point being, that is my data set, not the two vids I last mentioned.

Yes and this is to be expected, because the type of people who spend most of their time shooting off comments on YouTube videos are exactly the types with extreme views or just fucking around to get the more serious viewers riled up. It provides no insight into how influential those radical views actually are, and certainly no insight into the ideas of the people on the videos they are commenting on. It really should not be your "data set" for anything.

Quote
50c is perfectly entitled to vote for whoever least taxes top income earners and I will not castigate him for doing it. Any of us would do the same thing. What I find astonishing is Trump supporters accepting the part of his tweet saying "trump doesn't like black people" and gleefully sharing it. Would you accept Lot's lot and find just two good men to say he is wrong? The irony is I don't think it is true. If Mexicans, Blacks and LGBTQ appointed him their figurehead and promised the votes to get re-elected, he would play up to them instead.

I agree with you that it isn't true. What I'm saying is that most of the people who say they believe it's true (50c) are lying, because they don't act like its true. I don't think Trump supporters think that sharing the tweet means they are endorsing the "Trump hates black people" statement... why would it?
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 22, 2020, 10:57:52 AM
I cant understand why it has become a political divide not just in Merika but here in Oz as well. Science does not have a political view, its science. It tries to find the facts.

JOW.

Because we tend to dichotomize,  and any problems are always the fault of the "other guy".  It's the Radical Left!!  It's the Christian Right!  It's not.  It's Collapse.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 22, 2020, 12:48:13 PM
I don't know about Voltaire's sister editing his writing. I'm not interested enough to look into it. I read his work initially to see why Hitler was basing his ideology around the philosophy. I do recall seeing it written that he attributed socialism to a broken or inferior men and race. You would need to look at the original handwritten pages to determine if he never said it. I'm sorry to say that I can't see he said anything profound.

This is a troubling trend, especially from people who lean left, but totally unsurprising to me at this point. You start opining on someone's philosophy and calling that person an "anti-Semite" while admitting you are not even interested enough to read his works or get his name right. Nietzsche was one of the most profound philosophers in human history, but of course you need to read him or at least credible sources on him to appreciate that.

Quote
I take behavioral science very seriously, it's reading the comments not under those utube vids, but under Jordan Peterson Brett and Eric Weinstein, Sam Harris, Charles and Douglas Murray and other intellectuals that white supremacists don't even understand. I mentioned the burning platform and zerohedge before, add to that the Facebook pages of right wing politicians such as Senator Chris McDaniels in America, Pauline Hanson in Australia and every men's rights activist or writer. I gave up on the whole movement as it decided to alienate half its potential support base by becoming aligned with the far right. Without fail, there are always people who chime in with comments completely off topic about western civilization, immigration, race mixing and the Jewish conspiracy. White people with shit going on in their lives don't need to do this, those who do are just losers left behind. They are easily refuted if I deign to waste my time, which I have often done. The point being, that is my data set, not the two vids I last mentioned.

Yes and this is to be expected, because the type of people who spend most of their time shooting off comments on YouTube videos are exactly the types with extreme views or just fucking around to get the more serious viewers riled up. It provides no insight into how influential those radical views actually are, and certainly no insight into the ideas of the people on the videos they are commenting on. It really should not be your "data set" for anything.

Quote
50c is perfectly entitled to vote for whoever least taxes top income earners and I will not castigate him for doing it. Any of us would do the same thing. What I find astonishing is Trump supporters accepting the part of his tweet saying "trump doesn't like black people" and gleefully sharing it. Would you accept Lot's lot and find just two good men to say he is wrong? The irony is I don't think it is true. If Mexicans, Blacks and LGBTQ appointed him their figurehead and promised the votes to get re-elected, he would play up to them instead.

I agree with you that it isn't true. What I'm saying is that most of the people who say they believe it's true (50c) are lying, because they don't act like its true. I don't think Trump supporters think that sharing the tweet means they are endorsing the "Trump hates black people" statement... why would it?

 God only knows how "I read his works", mentioned three or four times, is interpreted as meaning the exact opposite. I don't need to read his complete works to examine particular passages.  I referred to God as all knowing because Nietzsche said He is dead, having lived, having existed. Perhaps his sister penned that quote and he was not an atheist at all. Taking advice on what an ubermensch is from a man admitted to an insane asylum can be for Hitler and his followers, not me thanks.

I suppose it is possible from what you are saying, that the lack of opprobrium from everyone who does not share the white supremacist views I see online, is due to those who disagree knowing they are only trolling. I think they just don't care enough and Ive seen the same opinion expressed by Bill Cosby and Muhammad Ali. "You don't all think like that, but there are enough of you who do and those that don't, aren't doing enough about it". That to me, is the worrying trend and it is only on the right.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 22, 2020, 05:12:58 PM
I don't know about Voltaire's sister editing his writing. I'm not interested enough to look into it. I read his work initially to see why Hitler was basing his ideology around the philosophy. I do recall seeing it written that he attributed socialism to a broken or inferior men and race. You would need to look at the original handwritten pages to determine if he never said it. I'm sorry to say that I can't see he said anything profound.

This is a troubling trend, especially from people who lean left, but totally unsurprising to me at this point. You start opining on someone's philosophy and calling that person an "anti-Semite" while admitting you are not even interested enough to read his works or get his name right. Nietzsche was one of the most profound philosophers in human history, but of course you need to read him or at least credible sources on him to appreciate that.

Quote
I take behavioral science very seriously, it's reading the comments not under those utube vids, but under Jordan Peterson Brett and Eric Weinstein, Sam Harris, Charles and Douglas Murray and other intellectuals that white supremacists don't even understand. I mentioned the burning platform and zerohedge before, add to that the Facebook pages of right wing politicians such as Senator Chris McDaniels in America, Pauline Hanson in Australia and every men's rights activist or writer. I gave up on the whole movement as it decided to alienate half its potential support base by becoming aligned with the far right. Without fail, there are always people who chime in with comments completely off topic about western civilization, immigration, race mixing and the Jewish conspiracy. White people with shit going on in their lives don't need to do this, those who do are just losers left behind. They are easily refuted if I deign to waste my time, which I have often done. The point being, that is my data set, not the two vids I last mentioned.

Yes and this is to be expected, because the type of people who spend most of their time shooting off comments on YouTube videos are exactly the types with extreme views or just fucking around to get the more serious viewers riled up. It provides no insight into how influential those radical views actually are, and certainly no insight into the ideas of the people on the videos they are commenting on. It really should not be your "data set" for anything.

Quote
50c is perfectly entitled to vote for whoever least taxes top income earners and I will not castigate him for doing it. Any of us would do the same thing. What I find astonishing is Trump supporters accepting the part of his tweet saying "trump doesn't like black people" and gleefully sharing it. Would you accept Lot's lot and find just two good men to say he is wrong? The irony is I don't think it is true. If Mexicans, Blacks and LGBTQ appointed him their figurehead and promised the votes to get re-elected, he would play up to them instead.

I agree with you that it isn't true. What I'm saying is that most of the people who say they believe it's true (50c) are lying, because they don't act like its true. I don't think Trump supporters think that sharing the tweet means they are endorsing the "Trump hates black people" statement... why would it?

 God only knows how "I read his works", mentioned three or four times, is interpreted as meaning the exact opposite. I don't need to read his complete works to examine particular passages.  I referred to God as all knowing because Nietzsche said He is dead, having lived, having existed. Perhaps his sister penned that quote and he was not an atheist at all. Taking advice on what an ubermensch is from a man admitted to an insane asylum can be for Hitler and his followers, not me thanks.

You're right, I incorrectly applied your admission "I'm not interested enough to look into it"to the reading of Nietzsche in general. But you were only admitting that you didn't have enough interest to look into the idea that he was NOT an anti-Semite (as you labeled him) and his association with the Nazis ONLY comes through his exploitative sister.

That's still pretty bad, though. It should remind you of someone else who is frequently accused by the Western left of being a Nazi or Hitler-esque figure. If you can't even summon the interest to fact-check the anti-Semitic accusation against a person who some consider the greatest Western philosopher to ever live, you can't blame me not taking your similar accusations against Trump (perhaps the dumbest American president to ever live) and Trump supporters seriously.

Nietzsche did proclaim "God is dead, God remains dead", and immediately followed that with, "And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves?"He then proceeded to predict the consequence of God's death as nihilism and the rise of revolutionary dictators in the 20th century which would kill hundreds of millions of people.

Quote
I suppose it is possible from what you are saying, that the lack of opprobrium from everyone who does not share the white supremacist views I see online, is due to those who disagree knowing they are only trolling. I think they just don't care enough and Ive seen the same opinion expressed by Bill Cosby and Muhammad Ali. "You don't all think like that, but there are enough of you who do and those that don't, aren't doing enough about it". That to me, is the worrying trend and it is only on the right.

This is what Jung would call your unconscious projections, and also projections of the collective unconscious. It is the LEFT that lacks any opprobrium from the "moderates" within it. They are simply unwilling to call out any fellow leftists who have gone too far towards "equality of outcome" doctrines. Anyone on the left who has dared to call out such doctrines in the last few years is immediately associated with the "alt-right". Instead of facing this ideological tendency on the left, it is projected out onto everyone who may be considered "conservative", even though it's perfectly evident that conservatives call each other out all the time. We call Trump out for his shenanigans and stupidity all the time. But if you are only paying attention to chat sessions on YouTube videos, I can see how you might miss that.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 23, 2020, 03:13:40 AM
his shenanigans and stupidity all the time. But if you are only paying attention to chat sessions on YouTube videos, I can see how you might miss that.

My admission that "you would need to look at the original handwritten notes to determine if he never said it" ("socialism is the product of broken men and a broken race"), left out that YOU would also need to learn German, as the onus is on YOU to back up the claim Nietzsche did not write that line in The Will To Power/Mein Kampf.

No discussion of Nietzsche is complete without some mention of Heidegger, his contemporary and compatriot card carrying member of the National Socialist Party anyway.

"Every artist is a canibal, every poet is a thief, they kill their inspiration and sing about the grief" Bono. Nietzsche did not need to take the approach that the Age of Reason disproves the existence of God, he obviously had no faith if he believed that, while being appreciative of religion only as a tool for social stability.   The natural reaction of a true believer would be to expect science would help prove God's existence. Instead of seeing Darwin's  theory of evolution through natural selection and random mutation as a death blow to morality, he could have pointed out the impossibility of such things as intermediary stages or a fully functioning male and female reproductive system as seperate but simultaneous mutations in a population.

He could have rejoiced in an end to religious and sectarian war. I don't recall he predicted hundreds of millions in the 20th C dead,  you may have heard that from another fallible authority.

 By your own standard, if you did not check the veracity of that statement I don't need to take any defence of trump or his supporters seriously. I didn't realise that by lesser evil, you meant the right is 100% less evil than the left and want to get out of assessing 'accusations against' trump such as his losing the trade war, and trump supporters on their stand alone objective merits.

I can't be projecting my sides attributes onto your side when I do not belong to any side, let me reiterate my position that you really on the same side you are ostensibly against, by obliging them and engaging in civil war. You
 know I am projecting if I say you are being objective, fair, evenhanded, impartial, non partisan and handsome.

I am well aware of cancel culture and shouldn't gloat at the 2nd Wave feminists who thought they occupied an unnasailable position atop the dominance hierarchy until intersectionality hit them like a truck at an intersection. Now it is not hyperbole that they are associated with the alt right, SWERFS and TERFS have literally become Trump supporters. Yes, yes, I observed this on social media, but I don't associate with man haters in real life.
Where do you think the Twitter president got "when the looting starts, the shooting starts", not from the collective unconscious.

I wasn't aware conservatives call Trump out all the time. Isn't the consensus that Romney is just butthurt, while Chris Wallace is considered hostile and has a fatwa for ambushing Trump in an interview by not pitching only softball questions. I remember when he said Ted Cruz father was present when JFK was assassinated and questioned what he was doing there.  Some ridiculous number of people then believed he may be responsible.
 

Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 23, 2020, 07:22:46 AM
his shenanigans and stupidity all the time. But if you are only paying attention to chat sessions on YouTube videos, I can see how you might miss that.

My admission that "you would need to look at the original handwritten notes to determine if he never said it" ("socialism is the product of broken men and a broken race"), left out that YOU would also need to learn German, as the onus is on YOU to back up the claim Nietzsche did not write that line in The Will To Power/Mein Kampf.

Where did he say "socialism is the product of a broken race"? I did find this from Nietzsche, which critiques socialism and also captures the meaning of his "will to power" (no mention of inferior races whatsoever):

"Socialism ― or the tyranny of the meanest and the most brainless, ―that is to say, the superficial, the envious, and the mummers, brought to its zenith, ―is, as a matter of fact, the logical conclusion of “modern ideas” and their latent anarchy: but in the genial atmosphere of democratic well-being the capacity for forming resolutions or even for coming to an end at all, is paralysed. Men follow―but no longer their reason. That is why socialism is on the whole a hopelessly bitter affair: and there is nothing more amusing than to observe the discord between the poisonous and desperate faces of present-day socialists―and what wretched and nonsensical feelings does not their style reveal to us! ―and the childish lamblike happiness of their hopes and desires. Nevertheless, in many places in Europe, there may be violent hand-to-hand struggles and irruptions on their account: the coming century is likely to be convulsed in more than one spot, and the Paris Commune, which finds defenders and advocates even in Germany, will seem to have but a slight indigestion compared with what is to come. Be this as it may, there will always be too many people of property for socialism ever to signify anything more than an attack of illness: and these people of property are like one man with one faith, “one must possess something in order to be some one.” This, however, is the oldest and most wholesome of all instincts; I should add: “one must desire more than one has in order to become more.” For this is the teaching which life itself preaches to all living things: the morality of Development. To have and to wish to have more, in a word, Growth―that is life itself. In the teaching of socialism “a will to the denial of life” is but poorly concealed: botched men and races they must be who have devised a teaching of this sort. In fact, I even wish a few experiments might be made to show that in socialistic society life denies itself, and itself cuts away its own roots."

Quote
No discussion of Nietzsche is complete without some mention of Heidegger, his contemporary and compatriot card carrying member of the National Socialist Party anyway.


Well that's another absurd statement, but one that fits right in with leftist ideology. Yes let's all define people in terms of their "associations", or better yet, their falsely perceived associations. Martin Heidegger was born the year before Nietzsche died... so what, you want to eternally link them together because they were both German philosophers?

Quote
"Every artist is a canibal, every poet is a thief, they kill their inspiration and sing about the grief" Bono. Nietzsche did not need to take the approach that the Age of Reason disproves the existence of God, he obviously had no faith if he believed that, while being appreciative of religion only as a tool for social stability.   The natural reaction of a true believer would be to expect science would help prove God's existence. Instead of seeing Darwin's  theory of evolution through natural selection and random mutation as a death blow to morality, he could have pointed out the impossibility of such things as intermediary stages or a fully functioning male and female reproductive system as seperate but simultaneous mutations in a population.

He could have rejoiced in an end to religious and sectarian war. I don't recall he predicted hundreds of millions in the 20th C dead,  you may have heard that from another fallible authority.

I'm not sure what you are saying above. Nietzsche was not an "atheist" in any modern sense of that word, although he was certainly anti-dogmatic religion, which is what the modern left has become. As for your last sentence about his 20th century predictions, you may not recall it, but he did. See the bolded sentence in the quote above, as well as many other parts of his writings.

Quote
I am well aware of cancel culture and shouldn't gloat at the 2nd Wave feminists who thought they occupied an unnasailable position atop the dominance hierarchy until intersectionality hit them like a truck at an intersection. Now it is not hyperbole that they are associated with the alt right, SWERFS and TERFS have literally become Trump supporters. Yes, yes, I observed this on social media, but I don't associate with man haters in real life.

Well at least we agree that intersectionality reveals the incoherency of leftist ideological positions. And yes, women have now taken the silver or bronze to young black men in the oppression Olympics. I don't know if feminists have "literally become Trump supporters", though.

Quote
I wasn't aware conservatives call Trump out all the time. Isn't the consensus that Romney is just butthurt, while Chris Wallace is considered hostile and has a fatwa for ambushing Trump in an interview by not pitching only softball questions. I remember when he said Ted Cruz father was present when JFK was assassinated and questioned what he was doing there.  Some ridiculous number of people then believed he may be responsible.

They do. Ben Shapiro is maybe the most well known conservative commentator, and he criticizes Trump quite often. Lately, though, given all the dishonest, vile shit the ideological left has been up to, any silly or offensive thing that Trump tweets out seems like peanuts in comparison.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 23, 2020, 10:21:53 AM
his shenanigans and stupidity all the time. But if you are only paying attention to chat sessions on YouTube videos, I can see how you might miss that.

My admission that "you would need to look at the original handwritten notes to determine if he never said it" ("socialism is the product of broken men and a broken race"), left out that YOU would also need to learn German, as the onus is on YOU to back up the claim Nietzsche did not write that line in The Will To Power/Mein Kampf.

Where did he say "socialism is the product of a broken race"? I did find this from Nietzsche, which critiques socialism and also captures the meaning of his "will to power" (no mention of inferior races whatsoever):

"Socialism ― or the tyranny of the meanest and the most brainless, ―that is to say, the superficial, the envious, and the mummers, brought to its zenith, ―is, as a matter of fact, the logical conclusion of “modern ideas” and their latent anarchy: but in the genial atmosphere of democratic well-being the capacity for forming resolutions or even for coming to an end at all, is paralysed. Men follow―but no longer their reason. That is why socialism is on the whole a hopelessly bitter affair: and there is nothing more amusing than to observe the discord between the poisonous and desperate faces of present-day socialists―and what wretched and nonsensical feelings does not their style reveal to us! ―and the childish lamblike happiness of their hopes and desires. Nevertheless, in many places in Europe, there may be violent hand-to-hand struggles and irruptions on their account: the coming century is likely to be convulsed in more than one spot, and the Paris Commune, which finds defenders and advocates even in Germany, will seem to have but a slight indigestion compared with what is to come. Be this as it may, there will always be too many people of property for socialism ever to signify anything more than an attack of illness: and these people of property are like one man with one faith, “one must possess something in order to be some one.” This, however, is the oldest and most wholesome of all instincts; I should add: “one must desire more than one has in order to become more.” For this is the teaching which life itself preaches to all living things: the morality of Development. To have and to wish to have more, in a word, Growth―that is life itself. In the teaching of socialism “a will to the denial of life” is but poorly concealed: botched men and races they must be who have devised a teaching of this sort. In fact, I even wish a few experiments might be made to show that in socialistic society life denies itself, and itself cuts away its own roots."

Quote
No discussion of Nietzsche is complete without some mention of Heidegger, his contemporary and compatriot card carrying member of the National Socialist Party anyway.


Well that's another absurd statement, but one that fits right in with leftist ideology. Yes let's all define people in terms of their "associations", or better yet, their falsely perceived associations. Martin Heidegger was born the year before Nietzsche died... so what, you want to eternally link them together because they were both German philosophers?

Quote
"Every artist is a canibal, every poet is a thief, they kill their inspiration and sing about the grief" Bono. Nietzsche did not need to take the approach that the Age of Reason disproves the existence of God, he obviously had no faith if he believed that, while being appreciative of religion only as a tool for social stability.   The natural reaction of a true believer would be to expect science would help prove God's existence. Instead of seeing Darwin's  theory of evolution through natural selection and random mutation as a death blow to morality, he could have pointed out the impossibility of such things as intermediary stages or a fully functioning male and female reproductive system as seperate but simultaneous mutations in a population.

He could have rejoiced in an end to religious and sectarian war. I don't recall he predicted hundreds of millions in the 20th C dead,  you may have heard that from another fallible authority.

I'm not sure what you are saying above. Nietzsche was not an "atheist" in any modern sense of that word, although he was certainly anti-dogmatic religion, which is what the modern left has become. As for your last sentence about his 20th century predictions, you may not recall it, but he did. See the bolded sentence in the quote above, as well as many other parts of his writings.

Quote
I am well aware of cancel culture and shouldn't gloat at the 2nd Wave feminists who thought they occupied an unnasailable position atop the dominance hierarchy until intersectionality hit them like a truck at an intersection. Now it is not hyperbole that they are associated with the alt right, SWERFS and TERFS have literally become Trump supporters. Yes, yes, I observed this on social media, but I don't associate with man haters in real life.

Well at least we agree that intersectionality reveals the incoherency of leftist ideological positions. And yes, women have now taken the silver or bronze to young black men in the oppression Olympics. I don't know if feminists have "literally become Trump supporters", though.

Quote
I wasn't aware conservatives call Trump out all the time. Isn't the consensus that Romney is just butthurt, while Chris Wallace is considered hostile and has a fatwa for ambushing Trump in an interview by not pitching only softball questions. I remember when he said Ted Cruz father was present when JFK was assassinated and questioned what he was doing there.  Some ridiculous number of people then believed he may be responsible.

They do. Ben Shapiro is maybe the most well known conservative commentator, and he criticizes Trump quite often. Lately, though, given all the dishonest, vile shit the ideological left has been up to, any silly or offensive thing that Trump tweets out seems like peanuts in comparison.

Thanks for finding that for me, it would have been a herculean task on my own to try and go through Will To Power finding it. From your passage:

"botched men and races they must be who have devised a teaching of this sort."

 Recall I said I was going from memory when I decided to look into why holocaust denial is so persistent, which was years ago. I said "broken or inferior", in my mind the word "busted" kept throwing up, but I knew that couldn't be correct for the epoch. "botched" it is, close meaning, number of letters, syllables and letter it begins with. The part of your passage put in bold on the other hand, is a stretch to equate with him saying "hundreds of millions will be killed in the 20th  century based on nihilistic ideology". Within that passage he says he sees socialism as a minor irritant to a natural order of capitalism because man is nothing without owning. So this is what he meant by all those statements that life is suffering without meaning in it and you can endure anything if you have a purpose. No he isn't an atheist, his god is Laxmi or mammon. 

I don't see why what you call  another absurd statement should not stand. There is a reason Nietzsche is claimed by Hitler, Proud Boys and Heidegger. "Herr Fuhrer, it's 50 below here at stalingrad, we don't have adequate clothes or fuel for our panzers" , is a weak excuse when the Nazis ideology says all an ubermensch needs is the will to power. You can't do this with Tolstoy, Dostoevsky or Bukowski, my philosopher of choice.

Not all feminists have become Trump supporters, just a good chunk of 2nd Wave TERFS. Do the math on how old they are now and why expressing their opinions has no bearing on their employment. I noticed you used an alliterative phrase I coined a long time ago and went viral for a while, nice to see it not forgot. 

I think the reason Ben Shapiro sometimes just can't take any more bullshit, is all those others that say it's really 5D chess and call him God-emperor etc. It was true when he said something like he could run naked down 5th Avenue shooting people and they would still applaud.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 23, 2020, 10:30:28 AM
his shenanigans and stupidity all the time. But if you are only paying attention to chat sessions on YouTube videos, I can see how you might miss that.

My admission that "you would need to look at the original handwritten notes to determine if he never said it" ("socialism is the product of broken men and a broken race"), left out that YOU would also need to learn German, as the onus is on YOU to back up the claim Nietzsche did not write that line in The Will To Power/Mein Kampf.

Where did he say "socialism is the product of a broken race"? I did find this from Nietzsche, which critiques socialism and also captures the meaning of his "will to power" (no mention of inferior races whatsoever):

So I see where he refers to socialist teaching as a machination of a "botched man or race", which I presume is what you are referring to. I would say his concept of "race" was more along the lines of what we now call "culture", except with maybe more of a connection to evolutionary biology (but that last part is far from certain). The topic of what constitutes substantive biological differences between groups of people is a hotly debated topic among evolutionary biologists even today, let alone in his time when Darwinian theory was relatively new. (this is another way in which I would say the ideological left is anti-scientific - they are unable to discuss such legitimate scientific topics in the open for fear of being called "racist").

In any case, I cannot find any instances of Nietzsche linking socialist teachings to people of Jewish faith or descent (which would be a very odd thing to do if you think about it), and I can find many instances where he was critical of his own cultural grouping (Germans, Aryans, "Northerners").  He also condemns people who feel they must use violence on weaker groups to prove their strength/power - in his view this is actually weakness. So there is no sense in which his philosophical ideas supported Nazi ideology, which of course is a form of socialist ideology to begin with, and we have already established how much he despised socialism.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 23, 2020, 10:56:54 AM
The part of your passage put in bold on the other hand, is a stretch to equate with him saying "hundreds of millions will be killed in the 20th  century based on nihilistic ideology".

As I stated before, it is within many of his writings. You know he wrote A LOT of stuff. Maybe I'll go find some more for you later.

Quote
Within that passage he says he sees socialism as a minor irritant to a natural order of capitalism because man is nothing without owning. So this is what he meant by all those statements that life is suffering without meaning in it and you can endure anything if you have a purpose. No he isn't an atheist, his god is Lakshmi or mammon. 

Of course you would think that, because to you "ownership" must be reduced to the material dimension of owning resources and objects and nothing else just like "power" must be reduced to control over other people. Nietzsche was a metaphysician and a trained philologist. He understands that all of our "physical" language today evolved from psychic concepts many thousands of years ago. Or, more accurately, there was no distinction between the psychic and the "physical" for ancient humans, unlike philosophical materialists today (which is practically everyone in the West and especially on the ideological left). What he is talking about is so much deeper, more rich and multi-dimensional than what you are trying to attribute to him by saying his god was "mammon".

Quote
I don't see why what you call  another absurd statement should not stand. There is a reason Nietzsche is claimed by Hitler, Proud Boys and Heidegger. "Herr Fuhrer, it's 50 below here at stalingrad, we don't have adequate clothes or fuel for our panzers" , is a weak excuse when the Nazis ideology says all an ubermensch needs is the will to power.

Ideologues claim every profound thinker for themselves. Plenty of ideologues on the radical left claim Nietzsche as well. That doesn't make any of them correct about his philosophy or your simplistic rendering of his philosophy any more insightful.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Eddie on October 23, 2020, 11:03:52 AM
his shenanigans and stupidity all the time. But if you are only paying attention to chat sessions on YouTube videos, I can see how you might miss that.

My admission that "you would need to look at the original handwritten notes to determine if he never said it" ("socialism is the product of broken men and a broken race"), left out that YOU would also need to learn German, as the onus is on YOU to back up the claim Nietzsche did not write that line in The Will To Power/Mein Kampf.

Where did he say "socialism is the product of a broken race"? I did find this from Nietzsche, which critiques socialism and also captures the meaning of his "will to power" (no mention of inferior races whatsoever):

So I see where he refers to socialist teaching as a machination of a "botched man or race", which I presume is what you are referring to. I would say his concept of "race" was more along the lines of what we now call "culture", except with maybe more of a connection to evolutionary biology (but that last part is far from certain). The topic of what constitutes substantive biological differences between groups of people is a hotly debated topic among evolutionary biologists even today, let alone in his time when Darwinian theory was relatively new. (this is another way in which I would say the ideological left is anti-scientific - they are unable to discuss such legitimate scientific topics in the open for fear of being called "racist").

In any case, I cannot find any instances of Nietzsche linking socialist teachings to people of Jewish faith or descent (which would be a very odd thing to do if you think about it), and I can find many instances where he was critical of his own cultural grouping (Germans, Aryans, "Northerners").  He also condemns people who feel they must use violence on weaker groups to prove their strength/power - in his view this is actually weakness. So there is no sense in which his philosophical ideas supported Nazi ideology, which of course is a form of socialist ideology to begin with, and we have already established how much he despised socialism.

This is the Ashvin I like....Ashvin the scholar. Always willing to make a deep dive. When I came to the Diner I knew very little about Nietzsche other than a general knowledge that he was influential and went crazy...and the general time frame he lived and wrote. Now I have a better understanding of Nietzsche and nihilism both.

I think you'e right about Nietzsche, but wrong about the Nazis.

The Nazis didn't get Nietzsche.....but they used his words to justify their POV....sort of like the way the Trump base thinks about Trump. They are in love with their vision of Trump....not the real Trump.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 23, 2020, 02:30:45 PM
Race meaning culture is more of a stretch than him saying hundreds of millions dead from nihilism. You were on more solid ground attributing the racist quote to the sisters editing, which is a possibility. I know he wrote a lot, so much it contradicts itself everywhere. I'm sure if he said there would be hundreds of millions dead from nihilism it would be well known. That was your original point and I don't need to read anything else from him. I'm glad you enjoy it though.

What you say about language having a reference to psychic concepts seems like stating the obvious, or perhaps you should explain what you mean. You're not treating any of it as opinion, but facts he knew. An interest or understanding of such things is not bettering oneself according to him anyway. Man is nothing without him owning. 

On what do you base the claim that for me, power is only power over other people?   

Redistribution of wealth and property under socialism only requires a simplistic understanding. Note you have not given any explanation for what other type of things can not be owned under socialism he supposedly refers to.

If you think the idea of socialism being the product of a particular race is preposterous, you have a hell of a lot of other trump supporters to convince.

For someone who is so squarely opposed to the political left, you embrace a lot of their praxis. Liz Warren saying she's native American makes sense and the reasoning is reminiscent of Bill Clintons 'it depends what you mean by is

I need to excuse myself from this discussion. My rule is to be working by 0900 and I'm a little behind because I got sidetracked here.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 23, 2020, 03:42:24 PM
This is the Ashvin I like....Ashvin the scholar. Always willing to make a deep dive. When I came to the Diner I knew very little about Nietzsche other than a general knowledge that he was influential and went crazy...and the general time frame he lived and wrote. Now I have a better understanding of Nietzsche and nihilism both.

I think you'e right about Nietzsche, but wrong about the Nazis.

The Nazis didn't get Nietzsche.....but they used his words to justify their POV....sort of like the way the Trump base thinks about Trump. They are in love with their vision of Trump....not the real Trump.

Thanks Eddie, at least for your appreciation of my discussion of Nietzsche.

I haven't really said what I think about the Nazis yet, other than the obvious fact that their ideology is evil. We like to think that these ideologies were made possible by a few elite people who went on a power trip and scoured for a bunch of a philosophy and science to support their violent machinations. We like to think that because it effectively absolves us of complicity.

This is an anti-religious perspective and one that has little utility in explaining the 20th century atrocities. As Solzhenitsyn put it, when brilliantly explaining the causes of Stalinist atrocities in the Gulag Archipelago:
“The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either -- but right through every human heart -- and through all human hearts."

Hitler was known to be a master at playing off of his audiences when he gave speeches. He could sense their deep frustrations, angers, resentments, and he would pay attention to what they reacted positively to when he spoke and follow that thread. In a very real sense, the German people created the Hitler we personify as the quintessential evil dictator today. They had real bones to pick with the states of their lives in the aftermath of WWI and their economic destruction, but they remained unconscious of their deep resentments. The unconscious psyche does not remain hidden when we ignore it within ourselves, but it projects out into the world. The Jewish people, among others, became the containers of their unconscious projections.

Sure, there are certainly some American conservatives who envision Trump as a savior figure from the evil leftist mobs, the cultural Marxists and what not. But we cannot ignore that they are in the minority here. Trump is much more of a container for the unconscious resentments of the left. They project all the dark aspects of themselves onto Trump. Suddenly the rich, narcissistic, bigoted reality TV celebrity becomes the epitome of evil itself, capable of Nazi-like atrocities to squash his opposition. Even people who are opposed to the Marxist left tend to start viewing him in this way, and it's no wonder because that is the image quite literally projected onto him by almost all of the mainstream media.

I agree with you that Trump is no savior figure for people with conservative values and should never be conceived that way, but he is a far cry from Nazi dictator as well. We need to take more responsibility for our roles in the frustrations and resentments we have in American culture, instead of projecting it out onto individual people (Trump), political parties (Democrat or Republican), classes (the rich) or entire races and genders (white males). My rants here against the ideological left should be taken as rants against the above way of thinking (or NOT thinking), and not necessarily against "liberal" political values or Democratic politicians.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 23, 2020, 04:05:12 PM

Quote
If you think the idea of socialism being the product of a particular race is preposterous, you have a hell of a lot of other trump supporters to convince.

Again, the only people who clearly and visibly make race a defining factor of identity in America right now is the left and the one or two neo-Nazis mucking about. In fact, the most anti-Semitism you find in American right now is in Black Lives Matter. The racial component is so bad that you can't watch a sports broadcast on ESPN or stream something on Netflix or Amazon without coming across it a dozen times. And forget the "news", which is now nothing more than identity politics 24/7.

So I'm watching the new Borat movie on Amazon by Sacha Baron Cohen and just had to bring this up, given what we have been discussing. The number of anti-Semitic jokes, including references to a "holocaust remembrance day" in the beginning, is amazing. I realize he is Jewish, but still. He's a ballsy comedian for sure, but I also think he knows he can get away with it because he is on the left, anti-Trump AND anti-Semitism isn't exactly frowned upon within the American left these days.

He does the usual thing where he goes into the south and films interactions with people until he finds the people who will put up with a ridiculous amount of racist shit or even go along with it and then uses that footage. I have to admit it's funny... but still hypocritical as hell given the overall political narrative he wants to impart.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 23, 2020, 04:39:27 PM
Here are some more passages written by Nietzsche which quite clearly refer to an "unimaginable" number of deaths and were written many decades in advance of such events, in a time of relative peace in Europe:

And although silent here about some things, I will not, however, be silent about my morality, which says to me: Live in concealment in order that thou mayest live to thyself. Live ignorant of that which seems to thy age to be most important! Put at least the skin of three centuries betwixt thyself and the present day! And the clamour of the present day, the noise of wars and revolutions, ought to be a murmur to thee! -The Gay Science, 1882

“The Transvaluation of all Values, this is my formula for mankind's greatest step towards coming to its senses—a step which in me became flesh and genius. … Thus, I am necessarily a man of Fate. For when Truth enters the lists against the falsehood of ages, shocks are bound to ensue, and a spell of earthquakes, followed by the transposition of hills and valleys, such as the world has never yet imagined even in its dreams. The concept "politics" then becomes elevated entirely to the sphere of spiritual warfare. All the mighty realms of the ancient order of society are blown into space—for they are all based on falsehood: there will be wars, the like of which have never been seen on earth before. Only from my time and after me will politics on a large scale exist on earth." - Ecce Homo, 1888.

"What I relate is the history of the next two centuries. I describe what is coming, what can no longer come differently: the advent of nihilism... For some time now, our whole European culture has been moving as toward a catastrophe, with a tortured tension that is growing from decade to decade: restlessly, violently, headlong, like a river that wants to reach the end, that no longer reflects, that is afraid to reflect." Id.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 24, 2020, 05:38:26 AM
Race meaning culture is more of a stretch than him saying hundreds of millions dead from nihilism. You were on more solid ground attributing the racist quote to the sisters editing, which is a possibility. I know he wrote a lot, so much it contradicts itself everywhere. I'm sure if he said there would be hundreds of millions dead from nihilism it would be well known. That was your original point and I don't need to read anything else from him. I'm glad you enjoy it though.

What you say about language having a reference to psychic concepts seems like stating the obvious, or perhaps you should explain what you mean. You're not treating any of it as opinion, but facts he knew. An interest or understanding of such things is not bettering oneself according to him anyway. Man is nothing without him owning. 

On what do you base the claim that for me, power is only power over other people?   

Redistribution of wealth and property under socialism only requires a simplistic understanding. Note you have not given any explanation for what other type of things can not be owned under socialism he supposedly refers to.

If you think the idea of socialism being the product of a particular race is preposterous, you have a hell of a lot of other trump supporters to convince.

For someone who is so squarely opposed to the political left, you embrace a lot of their praxis. Liz Warren saying she's native American makes sense and the reasoning is reminiscent of Bill Clintons 'it depends what you mean by is

I need to excuse myself from this discussion. My rule is to be working by 0900 and I'm a little behind because I got sidetracked here.

I guess I accidentally wrote over my response to this earlier. Basically, I made the following points:

1) The use of an inherently ill-defined word as "race", especially in the 19th century, needs to be determined in context. Throughout the entire corpus of his work, it becomes clear he is using it to mean something more similar to what we mean by "culture", and NOT what we mean by "race". Our modern use of the word is inherently "racist" in some ways, since it implies that the color of a person's skin is a valid cognitive category which gives us accurate insight into their biological structure and also helps us figure out who should be placed where on an various hierarchies, such as the left's hierarchies of oppression. Clearly Nietzsche wasn't using it in this way at all.

2) The evolution of language throughout human history does consist of empirical facts that Nietzsche was aware of, since he was a trained philologist. And about the only people Nietzsche had respect for was ancient cultures who found psychic qualities in what we now call the "physical world". This is what was referred to as "original participation" (Barfield) or "participation mystique" (Levy-Bruhl, Jung). What we now think of as words describing purely "physical" phenomenon were for them describing what we now call "psychological" processes. Of course they didn't make this mind/matter distinction at all.

3) In that sense, what cannot be "owned" under socialism is a person's unique identity and autonomy, which is fundamentally rooted in the evolution of consciousness over our history. Socialism demands a  flattening out of unique identities into a homogenous, collectivized, demythologized grouping of people.

4) The linking of race to political positions and policies is most evidently expressed in the American left today, as we can see in the popularity of Critical Race Theory. We see the most anti-Semitic sentiments in this country from groups like Black Lives Matter (there are many more people who identify with BLM than with neo-Nazi groups). The identity politics of the left has become so prevalent here that you cannot watch a sports broadcast on ESPN or movies/tv on Netflix or Amazon without coming across it a dozen times. And of course the mainstream "news" is identity politics 24/7.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 24, 2020, 02:05:53 PM
For a trained philologist in the late 19th C the body of empirical knowledge at their disposal could be fit on a postage stamp. He had thinkers like Locke, Hobbes, (Darwin, Galileo and Copernicus are empiricist) to fall back on, but that is only the field of philosophical postulation. Note you refer to 20th C thinkers.

 He would probably reject Hobbes who said the prehistoric life of man was "nasty, brutish and short" because he would be looking to rationalise extreme pessimism. A good way to do that is find that a good existence can only be found in the past, sonething we cannot access, thereby justifying his being tortured. This is not a well adjusted man who suddenly went mad, but who would have seen a bat instead of a butterfly and so on, on every inkblot in the Rorschach Test.

His cataclysmic prediction of the future which you define as the 20th C never came to pass and he was wrong about it never happening prior. Volcanic eruptions suspected of sending the dinosaur extinct and meteors appearing to my eye to have shaped the gulf of Mexico and Hudson bay, would have achieved the slow geotectonic process of displacing mountains and valleys as per his melancholy prediction.

 If you want to take a less literal interpretation and treat his stream of consciousness like Nostradamus Quatrains, it was not hard to see mechanised killing coming as an ongoing extension of war that had never ceased before. He witnessed the period of most rapid technological advancements in history along with his own country becoming united Germany from independent provinces around 1870 and it's engineering at least equalling, arguably surpassing the British and French. Happier people are more prone to normalcy bias, so optimism about the future wasn't something he suffered. Unhindered by rose tinged glasses, he could see hi tech, more efficient killing coming. WW1 wasn't fought over nihilisticic ideology, and neither was the war in Pacific in WW2. There had been plenty of ethnic cleansing and genocide in the past over resources and/or religions starting with homo sapiens eradication of neanderthals. Aboriginal peoples were being rapidly reduced to a tiny remnant in the new worlds and mass killing in Africa such as Leopold of Netherlands atrocity in Congo were happening all in his own time. It should have been Apocalypse Now for Nietzsche.

Nietzsche could not study the origin of language but only theorise. He would naturally exaggerate the limits of words in conveying meaning and ignore all the benefits. He spilled hundreds of thousands of words in the belief it was all like describing colours to the blind or trying to describe a tune to someone without their reading music and without humming or singing.  Fish would understand deep universal truth as they are silent, but if they evolve to the point they can grunt with the intention to express that there is an afterlife, the knowing is lost. All knowing fish come hominid immediately loses its sixth sense.  Texts like the Holy Bible can only take you away from spiritual truth and promote materialism like a clearance sale catalogue. While there is something to what he is saying, hes justifying never being satisfied through nostalgia.

You need to explain who he meant by the "botched race" if we are to consider seriously that he did not regard Chinese as those in china or even the most vague distinction of people's to the east as Asiatic. Whatever our present state of knowledge is on gene flows isn't relevant to that.

Speaking of owning things under socialism, is a different topic to him talking about owning yourself in any social group. That's to do with the matter of  voluntary conformity.

Did someone once say that the left and right can recognise each other's bullshit, but not their own? It follows that if he then came to identify with the right, would tell us that BLM on the left who make no mention of Jews, are infinitely more antisemitic than white supremacists on the right saying there is a Jewish consiracy to take down their race.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 24, 2020, 03:42:52 PM
For a trained philologist in the late 19th C the body of empirical knowledge at their disposal could be fit on a postage stamp. He had thinkers like Locke, Hobbes, (Darwin, Galileo and Copernicus are empiricist) to fall back on, but that is only the field of philosophical postulation. Note you refer to 20th C thinkers.

He was the youngest person ever to be Chair of Classical Philology at the University of Basel (where a lot great thinkers studied, including Carl Jung). He knew ancient Latin and Greek inside and out, and was also fluent in German, French and Italian. How about you? 

Quote
His cataclysmic prediction of the future which you define as the 20th C never came to pass and he was wrong about it never happening prior. Volcanic eruptions suspected of sending the dinosaur extinct and meteors appearing to my eye to have shaped the gulf of Mexico and Hudson bay, would have achieved the slow geotectonic process of displacing mountains and valleys as per his melancholy prediction.

LOL... never came to pass?? WWI, WWII, the "Cold" War (which was actually pretty hot)... are we just pretending those didn't happen? And no, nothing like those wars had ever occurred in human history, in terms of the sheer number of deaths and in terms of their grounding in the exact modes of thinking that Nietzsche was criticizing in his writings (nihilism and rationalist authoritarian ideology).

You are really stretching the limits of credulity here to undermine Nietzsche and stick to your a priori assumptions about him.

Quote
If you want to take a less literal interpretation and treat his stream of consciousness like Nostradamus Quatrains, it was not hard to see mechanised killing coming as an ongoing extension of war that had never ceased before. He witnessed the period of most rapid technological advancements in history along with his own country becoming united Germany from independent provinces around 1870 and it's engineering at least equalling, arguably surpassing the British and French. Happier people are more prone to normalcy bias, so optimism about the future wasn't something he suffered. Unhindered by rose tinged glasses, he could see hi tech, more efficient killing coming. WW1 wasn't fought over nihilisticic ideology, and neither was the war in Pacific in WW2. There had been plenty of ethnic cleansing and genocide in the past over resources and/or religions starting with homo sapiens eradication of neanderthals. Aboriginal peoples were being rapidly reduced to a tiny remnant in the new worlds and mass killing in Africa such as Leopold of Netherlands atrocity in Congo were happening all in his own time. It should have been Apocalypse Now for Nietzsche.

Oh, so, now your argument has changed to "yeah, well, so what if he predicted it? it was EASY for anyone to see it coming". Talk about Monday morning quarterbacking...

In reality, no one saw it coming except for a few visionaries like him. Dostoevsky, who Nietzsche really admired, kind of saw it coming, but he wrote fiction and didn't make any clear predictions. Jung, who was greatly influenced by Nietzsche, also saw WWI coming a few years before it broke out due to a prophetic vision he had on a train. Except he just thought he was going crazy until it actually happened. Nietzsche saw it coming a full THREE decades in advance.

You really need to brush up on your 20th century history. It's perfectly clear that the atrocities of the 20th century were marked by the extremes of nihilism and rationalist ideology, sometimes with both of those mixed together.

Quote
Nietzsche could not study the origin of language but only theorise. He would naturally exaggerate the limits of words in conveying meaning and ignore all the benefits. He spilled hundreds of thousands of words in the belief it was all like describing colours to the blind or trying to describe a tune to someone without their reading music and without humming or singing.  Fish would understand deep universal truth as they are silent, but if they evolve to the point they can grunt with the intention to express that there is an afterlife, the knowing is lost. All knowing fish come hominid immediately loses its sixth sense. That's just never satisfied through nostalgia.

Again, what are you talking about here? He clearly studied and taught the evolution of language at Basel. This was really a side tangent we got on because you thought his statement about "ownership" could only be referring to private property. That kind of ownership was certainly a facet of what he was saying, but it wasn't the whole picture he was painting in that passage by a long shot. I already explained to you how socialism deprives individuals of ownership, control, whatever you want to call it, of their unique identity and autonomy. Without that, one cannot even own their ideas, let alone material resources. It is a non-starter.

Quote
You need to explain who he meant by the "botched race" if we are to consider seriously that he did not regard Chinese as those in china or even the most vague distinction of people's to the east as Asiatic. Whatever our present state of knowledge is on gene flows isn't relevant to that.

Actually, I just need to show that he never spoke of the Jews as a "botched race" or linked them to socialism. Your argument from the beginning was that he was anti-Semitic and therefore Nazi ideology was a natural offshoot from his philosophy. That has been clearly refuted here and you have not provided any rebuttals of my evidence.

Quote
Speaking of owning things under socialism, is a different topic to him talking about owning yourself in any social group. That's to do with the matter of conformity.

Did someone once say that the left and right can recognise each other's bullshit, but not their own? It follows that if he then came to identify with the right, would tell us that BLM on the left who make no mention of Jews, are infinitely more antisemitic than white supremacists on the right saying there is a Jewish consiracy to take down their race.

BLM makes no mention of Jews? Are you aware of the links between BLM and the Nation of Islam, founded by Louis Farrakhan, who is an out and out anti-Semite? If not, read further:

https://newspress.com/blm-l-a-leader-and-anti-semitism/
"In what is a widely underreported event, protesters from the Black Lives Matter group of Los Angeles purposely met in the oldest Jewish neighborhood in the region to destroy Jewish businesses, schools and synagogues. In all, they managed to loot a large number of stores, three Jewish schools and five synagogues. The next day, locals woke up to scrawled graffitied images reading an obscene message attacking Jews, “Free Palestine,” and, perhaps scariest of all, “Kill the Jews!”

On the night of May 30, while the rioters looted and burned without the intervention of the local police, they chanted an obscene message attacking the police and saying “kill the Jews.”

It’s not a far cry from 18th-century Poland, is it?

And lest you think that this was perhaps a small group of people who took advantage of the BLM protests to steal valuables and really had nothing to do with them, let me show you how that is not the case.

The “protest” was organized by BLM-L.A.’s leader, Melina Abdullah, who has on numerous occasions said incredibly anti-Semitic things, as well as endorsing and defending multiple outspoken anti-Semites like Louis Farrakhan. "
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 24, 2020, 05:03:15 PM
For a trained philologist in the late 19th C the body of empirical knowledge at their disposal could be fit on a postage stamp. He had thinkers like Locke, Hobbes, (Darwin, Galileo and Copernicus are empiricist) to fall back on, but that is only the field of philosophical postulation. Note you refer to 20th C thinkers.

He was the youngest person ever to be Chair of Classical Philology at the University of Basel (where a lot great thinkers studied, including Carl Jung).




He knew ancient Latin and Greek inside and out, and was also fluent in German, French and Italian. How about you? 

Quote
His cataclysmic prediction of the future which you define as the 20th C never came to pass and he was wrong about it never happening prior. Volcanic eruptions suspected of sending the dinosaur extinct and meteors appearing to my eye to have shaped the gulf of Mexico and Hudson bay, would have achieved the slow geotectonic process of displacing mountains and valleys as per his melancholy prediction.

LOL... never came to pass?? WWI, WWII, the "Cold" War (which was actually pretty hot)... are we just pretending those didn't happen? And no, nothing like those wars had ever occurred in human history, in terms of the sheer number of deaths and in terms of their grounding in the exact modes of thinking that Nietzsche was criticizing in his writings (nihilism and rationalist authoritarian ideology).

You are really stretching the limits of credulity here to undermine Nietzsche and stick to your a priori assumptions about him.

Quote
If you want to take a less literal interpretation and treat his stream of consciousness like Nostradamus Quatrains, it was not hard to see mechanised killing coming as an ongoing extension of war that had never ceased before. He witnessed the period of most rapid technological advancements in history along with his own country becoming united Germany from independent provinces around 1870 and it's engineering at least equalling, arguably surpassing the British and French. Happier people are more prone to normalcy bias, so optimism about the future wasn't something he suffered. Unhindered by rose tinged glasses, he could see hi tech, more efficient killing coming. WW1 wasn't fought over nihilisticic ideology, and neither was the war in Pacific in WW2. There had been plenty of ethnic cleansing and genocide in the past over resources and/or religions starting with homo sapiens eradication of neanderthals. Aboriginal peoples were being rapidly reduced to a tiny remnant in the new worlds and mass killing in Africa such as Leopold of Netherlands atrocity in Congo were happening all in his own time. It should have been Apocalypse Now for Nietzsche.

Oh, so, now your argument has changed to "yeah, well, so what if he predicted it? it was EASY for anyone to see it coming". Talk about Monday morning quarterbacking...

In reality, no one saw it coming except for a few visionaries like him. Dostoevsky, who Nietzsche really admired, kind of saw it coming, but he wrote fiction and didn't make any clear predictions. Jung, who was greatly influenced by Nietzsche, also saw WWI coming a few years before it broke out due to a prophetic vision he had on a train. Except he just thought he was going crazy until it actually happened. Nietzsche saw it coming a full THREE decades in advance.

You really need to brush up on your 20th century history. It's perfectly clear that the atrocities of the 20th century were marked by the extremes of nihilism and rationalist ideology, sometimes with both of those mixed together.

Quote
Nietzsche could not study the origin of language but only theorise. He would naturally exaggerate the limits of words in conveying meaning and ignore all the benefits. He spilled hundreds of thousands of words in the belief it was all like describing colours to the blind or trying to describe a tune to someone without their reading music and without humming or singing.  Fish would understand deep universal truth as they are silent, but if they evolve to the point they can grunt with the intention to express that there is an afterlife, the knowing is lost. All knowing fish come hominid immediately loses its sixth sense. That's just never satisfied through nostalgia.

Again, what are you talking about here? He clearly studied and taught the evolution of language at Basel. This was really a side tangent we got on because you thought his statement about "ownership" could only be referring to private property. That kind of ownership was certainly a facet of what he was saying, but it wasn't the whole picture he was painting in that passage by a long shot. I already explained to you how socialism deprives individuals of ownership, control, whatever you want to call it, of their unique identity and autonomy. Without that, one cannot even own their ideas, let alone material resources. It is a non-starter.

Quote
You need to explain who he meant by the "botched race" if we are to consider seriously that he did not regard Chinese as those in china or even the most vague distinction of people's to the east as Asiatic. Whatever our present state of knowledge is on gene flows isn't relevant to that.

Actually, I just need to show that he never spoke of the Jews as a "botched race" or linked them to socialism. Your argument from the beginning was that he was anti-Semitic and therefore Nazi ideology was a natural offshoot from his philosophy. That has been clearly refuted here and you have not provided any rebuttals of my evidence.

Quote
Speaking of owning things under socialism, is a different topic to him talking about owning yourself in any social group. That's to do with the matter of conformity.

Did someone once say that the left and right can recognise each other's bullshit, but not their own? It follows that if he then came to identify with the right, would tell us that BLM on the left who make no mention of Jews, are infinitely more antisemitic than white supremacists on the right saying there is a Jewish consiracy to take down their race.

BLM makes no mention of Jews? Are you aware of the links between BLM and the Nation of Islam, founded by Louis Farrakhan, who is an out and out anti-Semite? If not, read further:

https://newspress.com/blm-l-a-leader-and-anti-semitism/
"In what is a widely underreported event, protesters from the Black Lives Matter group of Los Angeles purposely met in the oldest Jewish neighborhood in the region to destroy Jewish businesses, schools and synagogues. In all, they managed to loot a large number of stores, three Jewish schools and five synagogues. The next day, locals woke up to scrawled graffitied images reading an obscene message attacking Jews, “Free Palestine,” and, perhaps scariest of all, “Kill the Jews!”

On the night of May 30, while the rioters looted and burned without the intervention of the local police, they chanted an obscene message attacking the police and saying “kill the Jews.”

It’s not a far cry from 18th-century Poland, is it?

And lest you think that this was perhaps a small group of people who took advantage of the BLM protests to steal valuables and really had nothing to do with them, let me show you how that is not the case.

The “protest” was organized by BLM-L.A.’s leader, Melina Abdullah, who has on numerous occasions said incredibly anti-Semitic things, as well as endorsing and defending multiple outspoken anti-Semites like Louis Farrakhan. "



You are not addressing what I am saying.

Again, thinking is not knowing. It's a bunch of postulation. When they get anything right, it is usually just things many average people know without the leisure and level of articulation to express them. That's Jung in the 20th C, his teacher of tradition was Freud who was a behavioral scientist not just theoretician. The empirical knowledge Nietzsche had to work with was next to nil. The languages you listed are great to work with in advancing a western centric theory, so the Holy Bible can only take you further away from God like a clearance sale catalogue. To know origins of language he needed to look south as much as possible and to know the possibilities of spiritual attunement without interference of words or thinking in words, he only needed to look east. His theory was based on not knowing Sanskrit which was the root of the Germanic ones you mentioned.

You are adding "rationalistic" to nihilistic now. All war is rational in the need to take and control resources. What did I say about ww2, even if we allow that Nazism and fascism is nihilistic and that is the cause of THAT war, which I really think is nonsense, it does not explain the war in the Pacific.

Mountains and valleys changing places did not come to pass in the 20th C. It did happen in the past by processes I listed. Nietzsche got it wrong on both counts. A 19th century chair of phi lol ogy can be forgiven that ignorance. If Yellowstone blows soon, he gets a point, as he didn't specifically mention the 20th C. Phil ology is the superior discipline.

Did you not understand what I meant by allowing YOU a non literal interpretation? Nietzsche is all things to all men, including Hitler in doing so. 

Farrakhan and the LA leader does fit a total of "one or two" anti-Semites, those BLM messages messing up sports and 99% of BLM do not identify at all with Islam or give a thought to Jews. The same can not be said for white supremacists ordered to stand by.

When I point out that the genocide down to a tiny remnant of the populations in the new worlds and n Africa at his own time is evidence that Nietzsche was wrong that what he saw for the future had never happened. Homo sap eradicated Neanderthal in the past as well. Thats an example of clearly refuted. Entire continents populations almost eradicated.

You don't know everyone who could see WW1 coming. I don't think it's hard to predict with great advances in technology at the time, that future wars would be killing more people in shorter time.

You do need to explain who he meant by "botched race" that produced socialism, if you want to refute Hitler taking it as a green light. Perhaps he couldn't find any other explanation either.

This is wasting time and boring everyone reading, spamming and stinking up the diner again. I hope RE locks the topic. 
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: John of Wallan on October 24, 2020, 05:16:31 PM
I seem to agree with Ashwin here:
I am an engineer not a philosopher, yet I too am struggling to see anything positive to come out of Nietzsche's work from what little I have read of it. (When I retire I will read more of his work, along with more Charles Dickens... I loved a tale of two cities).

If he predicted cataclysmic times in the 20th century he got it pretty damn right by my reading of history.

I am too busy with reality unfolding around me, like many at the moment, to see anything other than bad behavior being excused because society is unfair. Its always easy to blame others for your predicament. As you rightly point out politicians do it all the time. (Pauline Hanson here in Oz) Create a "THEM" to blame so "WE" can prevail. Religion is just the ultimate political power game, which is what makes theocracies so dangerous.

Call out bad behaviour in Israel and you are an anti semmite. Call out bad behaviour of the Sudanese youth gangs car jacking in Melbourne and you are racist. Call out the bad behaviour of the government bailing out the rich and you are a socialist. Call out rioters and you are a facist.

The left in the US need to call out BLM and other rioters. The right the racists. Both need to call out the bank bailouts that only help the rich.

Being a heterosexual white male who owns property I am automatically sexist, racist, facist and homophobic it would seem. I absolutely have enjoyed some privelidge as a result of my genetics, but i have not sought it out, so I should not be called out for this.

The irony of you calling me a leftie in another post Ashwin amuses me. I have been called everything you can think of at one time or another when ever I call out bad behaviour. The only real point of contention should be what I consider bad behaviour. Many others have considered my behaviour bad.

If you can benefit others by your actions you should. Behaviour defines us not what others label us. Probably too simplistic for some intenectuals, but simple enough for logical me.

JOW
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 24, 2020, 06:24:48 PM
You are not addressing what I am saying.

Again, thinking is not knowing. It's a bunch of postulation. When they get anything right, it is usually just things many average people know without the leisure and level of articulation to express them. That's Jung in the 20th C, his teacher of tradition was Freud who was a behavioral scientist not just theoretician. The empirical knowledge Nietzsche had to work with was next to nil. The languages you listed are great to work with in advancing a western centric theory, so the Holy Bible can only take you further away from God like a clearance sale catalogue. To know origins of language he needed to look south as much as possible and to know the possibilities of spiritual attunement without interference of words or thinking in words, he only needed to look east. His theory was based on not knowing Sanskrit which was the root of the Germanic ones you mentioned.

I never said Nietzsche figured out the "origins of language". I said he understood the evolution of language and how the change in the meaning of words reflected a change in consciousness, and how we can see a progression from the mental meaning of words to the physical. There is no better source for this than the Bible, because it was compiled over many centuries and contains a vast amount of written traditions. This is exactly what Owen Barfield does in Saving the Appearances and he was an Anthroposophist (follower of Rudolf Steiner), which is about as Eastern as spiritual worldviews come in the West.

The title character for Nietzsche's masterpiece was Zarathustra, who is the mythical founder of Zoroastrianism. If you are familiar with it, then you know it has no problem with the idea of pointing to spiritual truths through mystical experience. Nietzsche identified himself with this character and therefore saw himself in some ways reconstituting the tenets of that faith in the modern world. Both he and Jung had deep mystical experiences which informed their worldviews and subsequent writings, but unfortunately Nietzsche's also drove him to madness.

Quote
You are adding "rationalistic" to nihilistic now. All war is rational in the need to take and control resources. What did I say about ww2, even if we allow that Nazism and fascism is nihilistic and that is the cause of THAT war, which I really think is nonsense, it does not explain the war in the Pacific.

I am using these terms in a philosophical sense. Rationalism is the philosophy (epistemology) which says that all knowledge of reality must come through logic and reason, and therefore we can dispense with mythology, spirituality or anything which tries to incorporate emotions, intuitions, imaginations/dreams, i.e. the mind as a whole, because it only leads us to false conclusions about reality. Nietzsche absolutely despised rationalist modes of thinking. Marxism is an ideology which undeniably embraces that mode of thinking. And the Communists likely killed a lot more people in the 20th century than the Nazis.

As for Nazis and nihilism, I think the fact that Hitler would rather see his nation burn and everyone in it die rather than cede it to foreign powers speaks for itself.

Quote
Mountains and valleys changing places did not come to pass in the 20th C. It did happen in the past by processes I listed. Nietzsche got it wrong on both counts. A 19th century chair of phi lol ogy can be forgiven that ignorance. If Yellowstone blows soon, he gets a point, as he didn't specifically mention the 20th C.

Here you go again with the literalist or physicalist interpretation when clearly we are dealing with a highly symbolic and metaphorical thinker. This is like the new atheist who throws out the Bible because he thinks of it in the same literalist way as the fundamentalist Christian, but doesn't realize it.

Quote
Farrakhan does fit a total of "one or two" anti-Semites, those BLM messages messing up sports and 99.999% of BLM do not identify at all with Islam or give a thought to Jews. The same can not be said for white supremacists ordered to stand by.

Why you feel the need to downplay the connection between BLM and anti-Semitism? The article I linked makes clear the anti-Semitic sentiments of Melina Abdullah, the leader of BLM in Los Angeles. I have no problem calling leaders of the Proud Boys white supremacists, but why do you have a problem calling prominent BLM leaders anti-Semitic?

And here's another example of anti-Semitism on the left, which had nothing to do with BLM.

https://stanfordreview.org/spoiler-alert-ben-shapiro-is-no-anti-semite/
TL;DR: “Coalition of Concerned Students” calls Ben Shapiro anti-Semitic in apology letter for being anti-semitic.

Two days ago, we reported that the “Coalition of Concerned Students” had covered campus with fliers depicting Ben Shapiro’s face on a bottle of insecticide. To their credit, the Coalition apologized quite promptly, acknowledging that the imagery was offensive and in poor taste, and released new and improved posters. So far, so civil.

And then they had to go and ruin it.

“Therefore, as we call back this flyer and apologize for its antisemitic tropes, we condemn Shapiro’s unwavering Islamophobia and antisemitism through his belief that only way to be a real Jew is to agree with him and through his strong support of Zionism.”


Quote
You said earlier you are familiar with projection. When I point out that the genocide down to a tiny remnant of the populations in the new worlds and n Africa at his own time is evidence that Nietzsche was wrong that what he saw for the future had never happened, or that homo sap eradicated Neanderthal, you are clearly refuted.

You are just playing semantic games now. What he was talking about was large-scale conflict between nation-states, which couldn't be any more clear from the passages cited, and nothing like that had happened previously.

Quote
You do need to explain who he meant by "botched race", if you want to refute Hitler taking it as a green light.

No, I don't, because that's ridiculous. And once again you can only think in physicalist terms - in your mind, "race" must mean a specific group of people with recently shared ancestry and can't possibly mean anything else. If you value Eastern religion or philosophy, then why do you seem so stuck on this Western materialist mode of thinking?

I already explained my thinking on Hitler. He got the green light from the German people attending his sermons, not some philosopher writing 50 years ago.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 24, 2020, 06:33:46 PM
The irony of you calling me a leftie in another post Ashwin amuses me.

Which one was that? I lost track during this back and forth with Phil. You clearly recognize the threat of identity politics on the right AND the left, and recognize it's actually happening on the left, and no "leftie" I have come across can say as much, so I apologize!
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 24, 2020, 08:44:39 PM
He got the green light from the German people attending his sermons, not some philosopher writing 50 years ago.

It seems everything is moving towards impossible to prove or disprove. Saying something never happened before though, is clear cut. Even the deluge, while we mention the Bible, is proof that near extinction events have happened.

The Phil ological approach includes conflict within nation states, not just between them, which is all you are claiming. I say the wars would have happened anyway, regardless of ideology. Communist revolutions are a much stronger argument both for the ideological aspect and for number of dead.

I don't mind saying the LA BLM shouldnt be allowing an Islamic leader to take them off course and I hope that is corrected. The Ben Shapiro bugspray and facetious apology are nothing serious. Singing Dr Jo Mengele to the tune of Mr Bojangles at MAGA rallies, not so much.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 03:33:02 AM
Quote from: Phil Rumpole
The Phil ological approach includes conflict within nation states, not just between them, which is all you are claiming. I say the wars would have happened anyway, regardless of ideology. Communist revolutions are a much stronger argument both for the ideological aspect and for number of dead.

True, it was conflict between and within nation states on a scale never seen before. At least we can we agree on the Communist atrocities. I would say Nietzche was mostly predicting that, given how much he railed against the socialist tendencies of his day. He does point to nihilism as well though.

Quote
I don't mind saying the LA BLM shouldnt be allowing an Islamic leader to take them off course and I hope that is corrected. The Ben Shapiro bugspray and facetious apology are nothing serious. Singing Dr Jo Mengele to the tune of Mr Bojangles at MAGA rallies, not so much.

I think they are both serious, but the liberals doing it unconsciously is more troublesome in my view. They are adopting Nazi dehumanizing language to attack their perceived enemies without even realizing it. The Shapiro example isnt the only time that "disgusting insect" sort of language is used on the left to attack the right.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 25, 2020, 07:34:01 AM
The 20th Century was simply 100 years of oil driven power seeking.  It wasn't really different from any other century other than new and more powerful weapons were developed for killing people.  What Nietze "predicted" was just CFS in action.  WWI and WWII could not have been stopped any more than you can stop collapse today.

Jietze "descended into madness"?  What is madness anyhow?

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: K-Dog on October 25, 2020, 08:49:43 AM

Jietze "descended into madness"?  What is madness anyhow?

RE

Lack of care for oneself or others to the point that life suffers.  Being tied up in a straitjacket by definition is a life which suffers.  I would go in the direction of not being able to rationally apprehend the world.  But that would mean everyone we know is bat-shit crazy.

I actually have found an exception.

http://www.youtube.com/v/7LqaotiGWjQ

Nietzsche himself could not make the beating of a horse stop and went bat-shit.  Going bat shit could not stop the beating of the horse.  A circle of grief such as this demonstrates what crazy is.  But things are not so clear cut always.

The American Election is an example.  Everyone who voted expects change they will not get.  Thus voting was crazy.  Unless you voted for the lesser crazy.

Which one is that?
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 10:07:34 AM
The 20th Century was simply 100 years of oil driven power seeking.  It wasn't really different from any other century other than new and more powerful weapons were developed for killing people.  What Nietze "predicted" was just CFS in action.  WWI and WWII could not have been stopped any more than you can stop collapse today.

Nietzsche certainly didn't think they could be stopped. But wars before the 20th century were not driven by the same type of rationalist ideologies or nihilism, because scientism and rationalism only became mainstays of Western culture in the 19th century or maybe late 18th century. And nihilism, i.e. not perceiving any sort of meaning in life, was never really a problem for anyone before this time either.

Quote
Jietze "descended into madness"?  What is madness anyhow?

RE

It could be thought of as being unable to mediate eruptions from the unconscious during our waking consciousness. Normally we all have these eruptions during our dreams, or with fits of passion during our waking consciousness (which is why we have legal categories like manslaughter, killing in the "heat of rage"). Going mad to the point of sensory "delusions" could be like dreaming while you are awake with no control over it.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 25, 2020, 12:15:25 PM
Wars aren't fought for 'rationalist ideologies".  They are fought for access to resources.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Eddie on October 25, 2020, 12:17:44 PM

Quote
Jietze "descended into madness"?  What is madness anyhow?

RE

Quote
It could be thought of as being unable to mediate eruptions from the unconscious during our waking consciousness. Normally we all have these eruptions during our dreams, or with fits of passion during our waking consciousness (which is why we have legal categories like manslaughter, killing in the "heat of rage"). Going mad to the point of sensory "delusions" could be like dreaming while you are awake with no control over it.

This is more or less what schizophrenia amounts to, I think.......when the dreams that are a normal part of sleeping life, arising out of a free-associating subconscious mind......bleed over Into waking life, and the victim can no longer tell them apart.....which can also occur when people take psychedelic drugs......which is what makes them dangerous for some people who are more susceptible.

This probably happens more than we acknowledge......it's only when someone's life is affected in ways that make it unmanageable....that it gets diagnosed and treated.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 12:47:52 PM
Wars aren't fought for 'rationalist ideologies".  They are fought for access to resources.

RE

That is the materialist view and I disagree. Material resources of course factor in, but the most brutal wars of the last 500 years or so have been primarily about ideologies. Religious and secular ones.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 01:56:46 PM

Quote
Jietze "descended into madness"?  What is madness anyhow?

RE

Quote
It could be thought of as being unable to mediate eruptions from the unconscious during our waking consciousness. Normally we all have these eruptions during our dreams, or with fits of passion during our waking consciousness (which is why we have legal categories like manslaughter, killing in the "heat of rage"). Going mad to the point of sensory "delusions" could be like dreaming while you are awake with no control over it.

This is more or less what schizophrenia amounts to, I think.......when the dreams that are a normal part of sleeping life, arising out of a free-associating subconscious mind......bleed over Into waking life, and the victim can no longer tell them apart.....which can also occur when people take psychedelic drugs......which is what makes them dangerous for some people who are more susceptible.

This probably happens more than we acknowledge......it's only when someone's life is affected in ways that make it unmanageable....that it gets diagnosed and treated.

Yes and I would add that this seems to get worse when one tries to resist the natural expressions of the unconscious mind instead of accepting it and letting it express itself. There is a lot of wisdom and practical solutions to problems to find in our dreams.

Hypnagogic experiences are something we can all easily access to experience how this state may feel when it is properly balanced with our waking mode of consciousness. Next time you are falling asleep, try to take hold of and remember those experiences which occur when you are still half awake.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 25, 2020, 02:02:47 PM

Quote
Jietze "descended into madness"?  What is madness anyhow?

RE

Quote
It could be thought of as being unable to mediate eruptions from the unconscious during our waking consciousness. Normally we all have these eruptions during our dreams, or with fits of passion during our waking consciousness (which is why we have legal categories like manslaughter, killing in the "heat of rage"). Going mad to the point of sensory "delusions" could be like dreaming while you are awake with no control over it.

This is more or less what schizophrenia amounts to, I think.......when the dreams that are a normal part of sleeping life, arising out of a free-associating subconscious mind......bleed over Into waking life, and the victim can no longer tell them apart.....which can also occur when people take psychedelic drugs......which is what makes them dangerous for some people who are more susceptible.

This probably happens more than we acknowledge......it's only when someone's life is affected in ways that make it unmanageable....that it gets diagnosed and treated.

There are 3 subcategories of schizophrenia. Catatonic, Disorganised, and Paranoid.

I don't know whether witnessing a horse beating or auditory-visual hallucinations triggered Nietzsche going over the edge, but he was not well adjusted prior and that comes through in the writing which is over-arching negativity. Although research shows pessimists are more realistic than optimists, within limits, it doesn't apply to theories of everything. I suspect a sensitive soul with a very intelligent but over active mind, moved steadily into hopelessness.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 25, 2020, 03:27:47 PM
Wars aren't fought for 'rationalist ideologies".  They are fought for access to resources.

RE

That is the materialist view and I disagree. Material resources of course factor in, but the most brutal wars of the last 500 years or so have been primarily about ideologies. Religious and secular ones.

The ideologies come after.  People tend to be very amenable with full bellies.  All the ideologies do is give you a reason to kill somebody else.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 03:44:38 PM
Bringing this back to the original question of the upcoming US presidential election, I want to know what possible defense there is for this:

https://taibbi.substack.com/p/with-the-hunter-biden-expose-suppression-136

Unprecedented efforts to squelch information about a New York Post story may prove to be more dangerous corruption than whatever Hunter Biden did with a crooked Ukrainian energy company
Matt Taibbi

The flow of information in the United States has become so politicized – bottlenecked by an increasingly brazen union of corporate press and tech platforms – that it’s become impossible for American audiences to see news about certain topics absent thickets of propagandistic contextualizing. Try to look up anything about Burisma, Joe Biden, or Hunter Biden in English, however, and you’re likely to be shown a pile of “fact-checks” and explainers ahead of the raw information...

The flow of information in the United States has become so politicized – bottlenecked by an increasingly brazen union of corporate press and tech platforms – that it’s become impossible for American audiences to see news about certain topics absent thickets of propagandistic contextualizing. Try to look up anything about Burisma, Joe Biden, or Hunter Biden in English, however, and you’re likely to be shown a pile of “fact-checks” and explainers ahead of the raw information:


(https://cdn.substack.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F564a32b9-639c-4e53-9eba-5040503a4bb3_875x997.png)
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 04:07:28 PM
Wars aren't fought for 'rationalist ideologies".  They are fought for access to resources.

RE

That is the materialist view and I disagree. Material resources of course factor in, but the most brutal wars of the last 500 years or so have been primarily about ideologies. Religious and secular ones.


The ideologies come after.  People tend to be very amenable with full bellies.  All the ideologies do is give you a reason to kill somebody else.

RE

True, no one is going to fight a large scale war over ideologies if they are all starving. But once a civilization reaches a certain level of material stability,  and a certain mode of scientific rationalist thinking, ideologies are the only things that will possess them to risk all out destruction. That is what we saw during the Cold War with episodes like the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Our human need to defend our convenient yet fictional narratives of the world against any and all challengers is only a little less fundamental (in an evolutionary sense) than our need to satisfy basic biological needs. Our minds are built to tell itself deceptive stories about reality, because this gives some people (our ancestors) a huge competitive advantage over others in a selective ecosystem.

You could even argue that it's more fundamental, because it organizes the world in way that makes it much easier to satisfy those basic needs. Check out Donald Hoffman's "Interface Theory of Perception", which he has proved using mathematically rigorous and precise evolutionary game theoretical simulations. He shows that space-time and matter itself is a "story" that our species (and presumably many others) constructs to this end.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 25, 2020, 04:58:28 PM
Wars aren't fought for 'rationalist ideologies".  They are fought for access to resources.

RE

That is the materialist view and I disagree. Material resources of course factor in, but the most brutal wars of the last 500 years or so have been primarily about ideologies. Religious and secular ones.


The ideologies come after.  People tend to be very amenable with full bellies.  All the ideologies do is give you a reason to kill somebody else.

RE

True, no one is going to fight a large scale war over ideologies if they are all starving. But once a civilization reaches a certain level of material stability,  and a certain mode of scientific rationalist thinking, ideologies are the only things that will possess them to risk all out destruction. That is what we saw during the Cold War with episodes like the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Our human need to defend our convenient yet fictional narratives of the world against any and all challengers is only a little less fundamental (in an evolutionary sense) than our need to satisfy basic biological needs. Our minds are built to tell itself deceptive stories about reality, because this gives some people (our ancestors) a huge competitive advantage over others in a selective ecosystem.

You could even argue that it's more fundamental, because it organizes the world in way that makes it much easier to satisfy those basic needs. Check out Donald Hoffman's "Interface Theory of Perception", which he has proved using mathematically rigorous and precise evolutionary game theoretical simulations. He shows that space-time and matter itself is a "story" that our species (and presumably many others) constructs to this end.
It was the hardships of the onerous reparations and hyperinflation in Weimar Germany horse that went before the Hitler cart. It was the indifference to suffering of the French horse by Mary Antionette that was followed by the guillotine cart. Romanov Tsar's indifference to Russian suffering, again came before the revolution. You should look into the collapse of the Songhai Empire through endless war. Identify an ideology in any of that bloodbath. They were very wealthy and comfortable with hot and cold running gold.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 05:34:37 PM
Wars aren't fought for 'rationalist ideologies".  They are fought for access to resources.

RE

That is the materialist view and I disagree. Material resources of course factor in, but the most brutal wars of the last 500 years or so have been primarily about ideologies. Religious and secular ones.


The ideologies come after.  People tend to be very amenable with full bellies.  All the ideologies do is give you a reason to kill somebody else.

RE

True, no one is going to fight a large scale war over ideologies if they are all starving. But once a civilization reaches a certain level of material stability,  and a certain mode of scientific rationalist thinking, ideologies are the only things that will possess them to risk all out destruction. That is what we saw during the Cold War with episodes like the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Our human need to defend our convenient yet fictional narratives of the world against any and all challengers is only a little less fundamental (in an evolutionary sense) than our need to satisfy basic biological needs. Our minds are built to tell itself deceptive stories about reality, because this gives some people (our ancestors) a huge competitive advantage over others in a selective ecosystem.

You could even argue that it's more fundamental, because it organizes the world in way that makes it much easier to satisfy those basic needs. Check out Donald Hoffman's "Interface Theory of Perception", which he has proved using mathematically rigorous and precise evolutionary game theoretical simulations. He shows that space-time and matter itself is a "story" that our species (and presumably many others) constructs to this end.
It was the hardships of the onerous reparations and hyperinflation in Weimar Germany horse that went before the Hitler cart. It was the indifference to suffering of the French horse by Mary Antionette that was followed by the guillotine cart. Romanov Tsar's indifference to Russian suffering, again came before the revolution. You should look into the collapse of the Songhai Empire through endless war. Identify an ideology in any of that bloodbath. They were very wealthy and comfortable with hot and cold running gold.

I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to. All I need to show is that, after the revolutions (and democratic election of Hitler), ideological commitment/possession was necessary to maintain their brutal, dehumanizing policies at such a large scale.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 25, 2020, 05:58:04 PM
Wars aren't fought for 'rationalist ideologies".  They are fought for access to resources.

RE

That is the materialist view and I disagree. Material resources of course factor in, but the most brutal wars of the last 500 years or so have been primarily about ideologies. Religious and secular ones.


The ideologies come after.  People tend to be very amenable with full bellies.  All the ideologies do is give you a reason to kill somebody else.

RE

True, no one is going to fight a large scale war over ideologies if they are all starving. But once a civilization reaches a certain level of material stability,  and a certain mode of scientific rationalist thinking, ideologies are the only things that will possess them to risk all out destruction. That is what we saw during the Cold War with episodes like the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Our human need to defend our convenient yet fictional narratives of the world against any and all challengers is only a little less fundamental (in an evolutionary sense) than our need to satisfy basic biological needs. Our minds are built to tell itself deceptive stories about reality, because this gives some people (our ancestors) a huge competitive advantage over others in a selective ecosystem.

You could even argue that it's more fundamental, because it organizes the world in way that makes it much easier to satisfy those basic needs. Check out Donald Hoffman's "Interface Theory of Perception", which he has proved using mathematically rigorous and precise evolutionary game theoretical simulations. He shows that space-time and matter itself is a "story" that our species (and presumably many others) constructs to this end.
It was the hardships of the onerous reparations and hyperinflation in Weimar Germany horse that went before the Hitler cart. It was the indifference to suffering of the French horse by Mary Antionette that was followed by the guillotine cart. Romanov Tsar's indifference to Russian suffering, again came before the revolution. You should look into the collapse of the Songhai Empire through endless war. Identify an ideology in any of that bloodbath. They were very wealthy and comfortable with hot and cold running gold.

I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to. All I need to show is that, after the revolutions (and democratic election of Hitler), ideological commitment/possession was necessary to maintain their brutal, dehumanizing policies at such a large scale.

What was the ideology of the participants in Milgrams and Shachters experiments? Those being explicitly designed to explain the actions of the little cogs and foot soldiers under the Nazis, as if a bullet in the back were not enough.

You're an American so your foreign and domestic policies must all be your ideology, right?
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 06:13:41 PM
It was the hardships of the onerous reparations and hyperinflation in Weimar Germany horse that went before the Hitler cart. It was the indifference to suffering of the French horse by Mary Antionette that was followed by the guillotine cart. Romanov Tsar's indifference to Russian suffering, again came before the revolution. You should look into the collapse of the Songhai Empire through endless war. Identify an ideology in any of that bloodbath. They were very wealthy and comfortable with hot and cold running gold.

Quote
I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to. All I need to show is that, after the revolutions (and democratic election of Hitler), ideological commitment/possession was necessary to maintain their brutal, dehumanizing policies at such a large scale.

What was the ideology of the participants in Milgrams and Shachters experiments? Those being explicitly designed to explain the actions of the little cogs and foot soldiers under the Nazis, as if a bullet in the back were not enough.

You're an American so your foreign and domestic policies must all be your ideology, right?

The experiments which showed how cruel people can be to others when socially pressured by a perceived source of authority? That is almost the definition of ideological possession (especially when the source of authority is an all-encompassing complex of ideas). How do they support the "material hardship" explanation?
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 25, 2020, 06:31:25 PM
This probably happens more than we acknowledge......it's only when someone's life is affected in ways that make it unmanageable....that it gets diagnosed and treated.

My life has become unmanageable.  I must have gone mad.  I am done Diners.  I won't see Xmas,  with or without the leg.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 25, 2020, 06:41:41 PM
It was the hardships of the onerous reparations and hyperinflation in Weimar Germany horse that went before the Hitler cart. It was the indifference to suffering of the French horse by Mary Antionette that was followed by the guillotine cart. Romanov Tsar's indifference to Russian suffering, again came before the revolution. You should look into the collapse of the Songhai Empire through endless war. Identify an ideology in any of that bloodbath. They were very wealthy and comfortable with hot and cold running gold.

Quote
I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to. All I need to show is that, after the revolutions (and democratic election of Hitler), ideological commitment/possession was necessary to maintain their brutal, dehumanizing policies at such a large scale.

What was the ideology of the participants in Milgrams and Shachters experiments? Those being explicitly designed to explain the actions of the little cogs and foot soldiers under the Nazis, as if a bullet in the back were not enough.

You're an American so your foreign and domestic policies must all be your ideology, right?

The experiments which showed how cruel people can be to others when socially pressured by a perceived source of authority? That is almost the definition of ideological possession (especially when the source of authority is an all-encompassing complex of ideas). How do they support the "material hardship" explanation?

Again, what are these all encompassing ideas at play?

I take it as a yes on ideological support of US foreign and domestic policy. We are voting for the man who increased the MIC budget 25% on day 1 after all.

 In any case you now need to explain how social pressure, authority and an all encompassing system was absent  for subjects/serfs prior to the materialist nihilism of the enlightenment.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 07:11:35 PM
It was the hardships of the onerous reparations and hyperinflation in Weimar Germany horse that went before the Hitler cart. It was the indifference to suffering of the French horse by Mary Antionette that was followed by the guillotine cart. Romanov Tsar's indifference to Russian suffering, again came before the revolution. You should look into the collapse of the Songhai Empire through endless war. Identify an ideology in any of that bloodbath. They were very wealthy and comfortable with hot and cold running gold.

Quote
I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to. All I need to show is that, after the revolutions (and democratic election of Hitler), ideological commitment/possession was necessary to maintain their brutal, dehumanizing policies at such a large scale.


What was the ideology of the participants in Milgrams and Shachters experiments? Those being explicitly designed to explain the actions of the little cogs and foot soldiers under the Nazis, as if a bullet in the back were not enough.

You're an American so your foreign and domestic policies must all be your ideology, right?

The experiments which showed how cruel people can be to others when socially pressured by a perceived source of authority? That is almost the definition of ideological possession (especially when the source of authority is an all-encompassing complex of ideas). How do they support the "material hardship" explanation?

Again, what are these all encompassing ideas at play?

Marxism is an all-encompassing set of ideas - it purports to explain all of human history through the dialectic of class struggle (historical materialism) and also predicts a utopian form of socioeconomic relations. Ideologies do not need to be all-encompassing in this same way, but they undeniably became this way.

Also, what is your explanation for the fact that the Milgram experiment, which you brought up, undermines your material hardship explanation of 20th century atrocities?

Quote
I take it as a yes on ideological support of US foreign and domestic policy. We are voting for the man who increased the MIC budget 25% on day 1 after all.

I would evaluate those policies on a case by case basis and try not to color my perceptions of them by a priori ideas about the nature of reality or what's "good" and "evil" (even though this is much easier said than done, and to some extent impossible).

And, no, I don't think increasing the military budget by 25% was or is a good policy. I also think Obama started more wars and left more US troops on foreign soil than Trump, who has started no wars and reduced troops. Trump also managed to convince Israel and several MENA countries to reach a peace deal just recently. I don't have any confidence that Biden can do the same or that the deals already struck will even be finalized or remain in place if he is elected.

Quote
In any case you now need to explain how social pressure, authority and an all encompassing system was absent  for subjects/serfs prior to the materialist nihilism of the enlightenment.

Why would I need explain why those things were absent? Remember, I'm not the one who thinks material hardships are a sufficient explanation for any large scale conflicts, at any time in human history.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 25, 2020, 07:36:39 PM
Did you forget your acknowledgement that ideology is only the perpetuating factor for 20 th C atrocities and not the cause of any regime coming to power?

You would have us believe that the participants and organisers of Milgrams and schacters experiments were Marxists now.

I'm sure you decide on a case by case basis not to protest any policy and pay tax for all of them.

You say rationalist nihilist ideology explains the actions of 20th C regimes actions only after they come to power because hardship does explain their coming to power. You say this is defined as social pressure, authority and a power structure having nothing to do with Marxism or fascism. It follows that unless there was no power structure, authority, or social pressure, prior to the advent of materialist nihilism, there was no difference in motivation to do anything for either good king Arthur or glorious comrade Stalin. Rationalist nihilist ideology doesn't explain either the introduction or continuation of any govt then.



Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 25, 2020, 07:52:31 PM
Anyway at least we have an answer on the ideology supported. Zionism.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 25, 2020, 08:13:24 PM
Did you forget your acknowledgement that ideology is only the perpetuating factor for 20 th C atrocities and not the cause of any regime coming to power?

You would have us believe that the participants and organisers of Milgrams and schacters experiments were Marxists now.

I'm sure you decide on a case by case basis not to protest any policy and pay tax for all of them.

You say rationalist nihilist ideology explains the actions of 20th C regimes actions only after they come to power because hardship does explain their coming to power. You say this is defined as social pressure, authority and a power structure having nothing to do with Marxism or fascism. It follows that unless there was no power structure, authority, or social pressure, prior to the advent of materialist nihilism, there was no difference in motivation to do anything for either good king Arthur or glorious comrade Stalin. Rationalist nihilist ideology doesn't explain either the introduction or continuation of any govt then.

No, I clearly said "I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to". Go back and read the post.

If you are not going to read and accurately represent my statement, or say silly things like my ideology is "Zionism", then there is no point discussing this further because you are not acting in good faith.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 25, 2020, 09:42:00 PM
I read it accurately. When hunger and hardship explained Hitler coming to power, the French revolution and the Soviet revolution, as just three examples, you abandoned rationalist ideology as the cause, and moved instead to their only perpetuating regimes. Experiments were done to explain human behaviour in following orders by the Nazis. These did not require any ideology  , only a sense of authority . You then said that social pressure, authority and a power structure were the definition of ideological posession without explaining what particular ideology they were associated in the American experiments. When I asked again, you spoke of socialism.

Either the participants and organizers in the experiments were socialist or you mentioned it in response to my question for no reason.

If we can conclude that no socialism or Nazism was involved in those experiments and the only thing that is required is ideological posession, then ideological posession has nothing to do with rationalistic nihilism. You define ideological posession as only social pressure, authority and a power structure. These are as old as any herd species and in particular humans.

The peace deals you mentioned as an extention of moving embassy to Jerusalem and outraging the Arabs were gunboat diplomacy.

Logical conclusions from testing your theory are not bad faith, but if its a better explanation for you than Nietzsche being fallible, I will abide and stop kicking your sacred cow.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 25, 2020, 10:03:06 PM
I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to. All I need to show is that, after the revolutions (and democratic election of Hitler), ideological commitment/possession was necessary to maintain their brutal, dehumanizing policies at such a large scale.

Yes to keep it up you need to create an ideology that justifies perpetual murder.  Both the Radical Right and Radical Left, the Christians and the Muslims and the Rich & Poor all have justifications for killing the "other| in their ideologies.  The goal is always the same, reduce the population of those who disagree with you, thus you can be richer.  This went Viral during the Age of Oil and the Greed went amok with right wing capitalist ideology.  In the words of Gordon Gekko, "Greed is good".

http://www.youtube.com/v/PF_iorX_MAw

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 26, 2020, 05:46:35 AM
Did the ancients keep their killing small because they lacked ideology, or post penicillin population and technology?

First off, there were a lot fewer Homo Saps in 1500 vs 2000.  Global Population was 425M as opposed to 6.2B in 1500.  So there were many less people available to KILL and run up your numbers as a Political/Religious unit.  All major ideologies have a large Kill Count over the millenia.  You also could not KILL so many people at once, the technology wasn't up to it.  Really only since the Scientific Revolution have their War Machines become good enough for killing millions at a pop.

Recent high Kill Counts are mainly a result of fewer people and death dealing power, not ideology.  People alive in 1500 were just as violent as those living in 2000.  Absolute numbers have increased, but percentages do not seem to have changed much.  According to the Bible,  in times of Collapse the 4 Horsemen were empowered to do a 25% Culling of the Herd.  All 4 Horsemen are riding now.  I can hear their hoofbeats.

Revelation 6
King James Version

6 And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.

2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

3 And when he had opened the second seal, I heard the second beast say, Come and see.

4 And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.

5 And when he had opened the third seal, I heard the third beast say, Come and see. And I beheld, and lo a black horse; and he that sat on him had a pair of balances in his hand.

6 And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts say, A measure of wheat for a penny, and three measures of barley for a penny; and see thou hurt not the oil and the wine.

7 And when he had opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth beast say, Come and see.

8 And I looked, and behold a pale horse: and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hell followed with him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth, to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with death, and with the beasts of the earth.

(https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/queen-of-seducers-and-destruction/images/8/82/Horsemen_of_the_Apocalypse.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20191220220733)

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 07:47:26 AM
If we can conclude that no socialism or Nazism was involved in those experiments and the only thing that is required is ideological posession, then ideological posession has nothing to do with rationalistic nihilism. You define ideological posession as only social pressure, authority and a power structure. These are as old as any herd species and in particular humans.

Rationalist ideologies and nihilist ideologies (they are two separate kinds) are obviously sub-species of ideologies in general. Anything can be considered an ideology. If you read a book by your favorite author, then start to view every aspect of the world through that author's lens, you have been possessed by an ideology. It happens to us all the time in modern society. It is when you cede your personal responsibility for critical thinking to a broad set of ideas.

Marxism is a rationalist ideology. Do you deny that? This ideology was undeniably what drove the Russian revolution and various other revolutions of the 20th century (Mao, Pol Pot, etc.). The possession of Soviet citizens, etc. by this ideology is what allowed the State to maintain their brutal policies over long periods of time.

National Socialism can also be considered a rationalist ideology, however it is also a good example of the fine line between rationalism and nihilism. Hitler wanted to create an ethno-nationalist, technocratic new world order, but when it became clear that was not happening, he simply wanted everything and everyone (including himself and his family) to be destroyed. It is the ultimate rejection of being itself.

Quote
The peace deals you mentioned as an extention of moving embassy to Jerusalem and outraging the Arabs were gunboat diplomacy.

This is what I would call ideological possession. You are so enamored with the anti-Trump and, presumably, anti-Zionist ideas that, no matter what deals are struck and how many lives are saved in the region as a result, you will find a reason to call it a bad thing. If it comes from Trump and/or benefits Israel in any way, then it must be bad. You have ceded your critical thinking on this issue to the ideology.

Quote
Logical conclusions from testing your theory are not bad faith, but if its a better explanation for you than Nietzsche being fallible, I will abide and stop kicking your sacred cow.

Of course Nietzsche was fallible, and there are quite a few arguments he made that I believe were off the mark. But the 20th century atrocities as a result of rationalist and nihilist ideologies rising up in the wake of the rejection of Western Christian values (the "death of God") was one that he got absolutely right, and that is evident to anyone who reads him critically.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 26, 2020, 09:39:51 AM
If you read a book by your favorite author, then start to view every aspect of the world through that author's lens, you have been possessed by an ideology. It happens to us all the time in modern society. It is when you cede your personal responsibility for critical thinking to a broad set of ideas.

By this definition, Christianity is an Ideology.  So is Islam & Judaism also.  The Bible, Koran & Talmud are all books people look to for answers on how to live.  The issue here is that ideologue on the Diner is used as an epithet.  It has a layer of criticism embedded in the word.  So essentially everyone is an ideologue, and the word loses it's validity as a critique.  You're a Christian Ideologue.  What else is new?

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 09:50:34 AM
I don't agree that material hardships can adequately explain any of the above mentioned, but I don't need to. All I need to show is that, after the revolutions (and democratic election of Hitler), ideological commitment/possession was necessary to maintain their brutal, dehumanizing policies at such a large scale.

Yes to keep it up you need to create an ideology that justifies perpetual murder.  Both the Radical Right and Radical Left, the Christians and the Muslims and the Rich & Poor all have justifications for killing the "other| in their ideologies.  The goal is always the same, reduce the population of those who disagree with you, thus you can be richer.  This went Viral during the Age of Oil and the Greed went amok with right wing capitalist ideology.  In the words of Gordon Gekko, "Greed is good".

All you really need is the dissipation of evolved values which tame the innate human tendency towards violent conflict. This violent conflict happened since time immemorial, even when there were barely any resources to fight over. The values which tamed the violence evolved through ancient mythological systems, i.e. they were not rationally created by anyone. The modes of thinking which allowed for the scientific and industrial revolutions were the same ones which dispensed with those values as unnecessary byproducts of ancient superstitions. None of this is a coincidence.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 10:08:47 AM
If you read a book by your favorite author, then start to view every aspect of the world through that author's lens, you have been possessed by an ideology. It happens to us all the time in modern society. It is when you cede your personal responsibility for critical thinking to a broad set of ideas.

By this definition, Christianity is an Ideology.  So is Islam & Judaism also.  The Bible, Koran & Talmud are all books people look to for answers on how to live.  The issue here is that ideologue on the Diner is used as an epithet.  It has a layer of criticism embedded in the word.  So essentially everyone is an ideologue, and the word loses it's validity as a critique.  You're a Christian Ideologue.  What else is new?

RE

That's why it's so important to keep an open mind and constantly reflect on your inner states, i.e. what is driving you to think and act in certain ways. This is what depth psychology in the 20th century was really concerned with (and many would say Nietzsche played an important role in paving the way for Freud, Adler, Jung etc)

As you know, I used to identify with fundamentalist Christianity and that was ideological possession. I don't anymore, but it's always a risk that whatever system of religious thinking I get into could be another form of ideological possession. As a general rule, if the ideas you are enthralled with allow you to blame others for your problems or the world's problems, and abdicate you of personal responsibility, then it's an ideology which has possessed you.

My view right now is that all ancient, long-lasting religious traditions have evolved to guard against this ever-repeating phenomenon. It is what the Christian tradition is concerned with when it points to "demonic possession". It is also what the pagan traditions thought of as being possessed by the spirits of various gods.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 26, 2020, 10:28:42 AM
All you really need is the dissipation of evolved values which tame the innate human tendency towards violent conflict.

Why do evolved values dissipate?  Because there's not enough resources around! Historically Food, but now including many other things.  if I can get gas for my car, why can't my counterpart in Myanmar get it for his?  He wants to live the Happy Motoring life too!  Problem of course is there isn't enough around for everyone.  So they all fight over what there is left.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 26, 2020, 10:38:54 AM
I used to identify with fundamentalist Christianity and that was ideological possession. I don't anymore, but it's always a risk that whatever system of religious thinking I get into could be another form of ideological possession. As a general rule, if the ideas you are enthralled with allow you to blame others for your problems or the world's problems, and abdicate you of personal responsibility, then it's an ideology which has possessed you.

My view right now is that all ancient, long-lasting religious traditions have evolved to guard against this ever-repeating phenomenon. It is what the Christian tradition is concerned with when it points to "demonic possession". It is also what the pagan traditions thought of as being possessed by the spirits of various gods.

You're not a Fundamentalist Christian anymore?  You no longer believe the Bible is literal truth?

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 11:29:31 AM
All you really need is the dissipation of evolved values which tame the innate human tendency towards violent conflict.

Why do evolved values dissipate?  Because there's not enough resources around! Historically Food, but now including many other things.  if I can get gas for my car, why can't my counterpart in Myanmar get it for his?  He wants to live the Happy Motoring life too!  Problem of course is there isn't enough around for everyone.  So they all fight over what there is left.

RE

This dissipation happened mostly in the late 18th and 19th centuries, at the height of the scientific revolution but right before the industrial revolution really picked up with fossil fuels. Nietazche wrote about in the 1880s, when Europeans were generally content with their lives and the peaceful state of affairs.

The values are what had allowed people to weather the storms of material hardships throughout human history. When they went, so did the ability to deal with adversity without succumbing to the allires of the political extemists.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Eddie on October 26, 2020, 11:30:19 AM
I seem to agree with Ashwin here:
I am an engineer not a philosopher, yet I too am struggling to see anything positive to come out of Nietzsche's work from what little I have read of it. (When I retire I will read more of his work, along with more Charles Dickens... I loved a tale of two cities).

If he predicted cataclysmic times in the 20th century he got it pretty damn right by my reading of history.

I am too busy with reality unfolding around me, like many at the moment, to see anything other than bad behavior being excused because society is unfair. Its always easy to blame others for your predicament. As you rightly point out politicians do it all the time. (Pauline Hanson here in Oz) Create a "THEM" to blame so "WE" can prevail. Religion is just the ultimate political power game, which is what makes theocracies so dangerous.

Call out bad behaviour in Israel and you are an anti semmite. Call out bad behaviour of the Sudanese youth gangs car jacking in Melbourne and you are racist. Call out the bad behaviour of the government bailing out the rich and you are a socialist. Call out rioters and you are a facist.

The left in the US need to call out BLM and other rioters. The right the racists. Both need to call out the bank bailouts that only help the rich.

Being a heterosexual white male who owns property I am automatically sexist, racist, facist and homophobic it would seem. I absolutely have enjoyed some privelidge as a result of my genetics, but i have not sought it out, so I should not be called out for this.

The irony of you calling me a leftie in another post Ashwin amuses me. I have been called everything you can think of at one time or another when ever I call out bad behaviour. The only real point of contention should be what I consider bad behaviour. Many others have considered my behaviour bad.

If you can benefit others by your actions you should. Behaviour defines us not what others label us. Probably too simplistic for some intenectuals, but simple enough for logical me.

JOW

Although we are many thousands of miles apart, we live in the same world.  I appreciate that comment, JOW.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Eddie on October 26, 2020, 11:36:07 AM
If you read a book by your favorite author, then start to view every aspect of the world through that author's lens, you have been possessed by an ideology. It happens to us all the time in modern society. It is when you cede your personal responsibility for critical thinking to a broad set of ideas.

By this definition, Christianity is an Ideology.  So is Islam & Judaism also.  The Bible, Koran & Talmud are all books people look to for answers on how to live.  The issue here is that ideologue on the Diner is used as an epithet.  It has a layer of criticism embedded in the word.  So essentially everyone is an ideologue, and the word loses it's validity as a critique.  You're a Christian Ideologue.  What else is new?

RE

That's why it's so important to keep an open mind and constantly reflect on your inner states, i.e. what is driving you to think and act in certain ways. This is what depth psychology in the 20th century was really concerned with (and many would say Nietzsche played an important role in paving the way for Freud, Adler, Jung etc)

As you know, I used to identify with fundamentalist Christianity and that was ideological possession. I don't anymore, but it's always a risk that whatever system of religious thinking I get into could be another form of ideological possession. As a general rule, if the ideas you are enthralled with allow you to blame others for your problems or the world's problems, and abdicate you of personal responsibility, then it's an ideology which has possessed you.

My view right now is that all ancient, long-lasting religious traditions have evolved to guard against this ever-repeating phenomenon. It is what the Christian tradition is concerned with when it points to "demonic possession". It is also what the pagan traditions thought of as being possessed by the spirits of various gods.

Where is that fucking like button? 
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 26, 2020, 12:43:04 PM
Nietazche wrote about in the 1880s, when Europeans were generally content with their lives and the peaceful state of affairs.

Do you include the French Revolution?  The Russian Pogroms?  How about Oliver Twist?

http://www.youtube.com/v/upD6cB9Rzvk

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 01:49:21 PM
Nietazche wrote about in the 1880s, when Europeans were generally content with their lives and the peaceful state of affairs.

Do you include the French Revolution?  The Russian Pogroms?  How about Oliver Twist?

The French Revolution could be thought of as the inauguration for rationalist ideologies which would come after it. It was the first major rebuke of traditional religious values in Western Europe.

Fyodor Dostoevsky was involved in protest when was a teenager in Russia (circa 1840s), and the Tsar ordered him to be executed by a firing squad. It turned out that the soldiers in the firing squad had blanks, but it scared him so badly he developed epileptic seizures for the rest of his life. These seizures also gave him mystical experiences. Dostoevsky was admired by Nietzsche, which is VERY high praise. He ended up writing some of the greatest novels ever written in any language, including Notes from the Underground, where he brilliantly captures the fatal flaw of rationalist utopian ideology:

“And, indeed, this is the odd thing that is continually happening: there are continually turning up in life moral and rational persons, sages and lovers of humanity who make it their object to live all their lives as morally and rationally as possible, to be, so to speak, a light to their neighbours simply in order to show them that it is possible to live morally and rationally in this world. And yet we all know that those very people sooner or later have been false to themselves, playing some queer trick, often a most unseemly one. Now I ask you: what can be expected of man since he is a being endowed with strange qualities? Shower upon him every earthly blessing, drown him in a sea of happiness, so that nothing but bubbles of bliss can be seen on the surface; give him economic prosperity, such that he should have nothing else to do but sleep, eat cakes and busy himself with the continuation of his species, and even then out of sheer ingratitude, sheer spite, man would play you some nasty trick. He would even risk his cakes and would deliberately desire the most fatal rubbish, the most uneconomical absurdity, simply to introduce into all this positive good sense his fatal fantastic element. It is just his fantastic dreams, his vulgar folly that he will desire to retain, simply in order to prove to himself--as though that were so necessary-- that men still are men and not the keys of a piano, which the laws of nature threaten to control so completely that soon one will be able to desire nothing but by the calendar. And that is not all: even if man really were nothing but a piano-key, even if this were proved to him by natural science and mathematics, even then he would not become reasonable, but would purposely do something perverse out of simple ingratitude, simply to gain his point. And if he does not find means he will contrive destruction and chaos, will contrive sufferings of all sorts, only to gain his point!

Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 01:52:58 PM
I used to identify with fundamentalist Christianity and that was ideological possession. I don't anymore, but it's always a risk that whatever system of religious thinking I get into could be another form of ideological possession. As a general rule, if the ideas you are enthralled with allow you to blame others for your problems or the world's problems, and abdicate you of personal responsibility, then it's an ideology which has possessed you.

My view right now is that all ancient, long-lasting religious traditions have evolved to guard against this ever-repeating phenomenon. It is what the Christian tradition is concerned with when it points to "demonic possession". It is also what the pagan traditions thought of as being possessed by the spirits of various gods.

You're not a Fundamentalist Christian anymore?  You no longer believe the Bible is literal truth?

RE

No. It is filled with Truths, but not when read literally.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 26, 2020, 02:07:36 PM
If we can conclude that no socialism or Nazism was involved in those experiments and the only thing that is required is ideological posession, then ideological posession has nothing to do with rationalistic nihilism. You define ideological posession as only social pressure, authority and a power structure. These are as old as any herd species and in particular humans.

Rationalist ideologies and nihilist ideologies (they are two separate kinds) are obviously sub-species of ideologies in general. Anything can be considered an ideology. If you read a book by your favorite author, then start to view every aspect of the world through that author's lens, you have been possessed by an ideology. It happens to us all the time in modern society. It is when you cede your personal responsibility for critical thinking to a broad set of ideas.

Marxism is a rationalist ideology. Do you deny that? This ideology was undeniably what drove the Russian revolution and various other revolutions of the 20th century (Mao, Pol Pot, etc.). The possession of Soviet citizens, etc. by this ideology is what allowed the State to maintain their brutal policies over long periods of time.

National Socialism can also be considered a rationalist ideology, however it is also a good example of the fine line between rationalism and nihilism. Hitler wanted to create an ethno-nationalist, technocratic new world order, but when it became clear that was not happening, he simply wanted everything and everyone (including himself and his family) to be destroyed. It is the ultimate rejection of being itself.

Quote
The peace deals you mentioned as an extention of moving embassy to Jerusalem and outraging the Arabs were gunboat diplomacy.

This is what I would call ideological possession. You are so enamored with the anti-Trump and, presumably, anti-Zionist ideas that, no matter what deals are struck and how many lives are saved in the region as a result, you will find a reason to call it a bad thing. If it comes from Trump and/or benefits Israel in any way, then it must be bad. You have ceded your critical thinking on this issue to the ideology.

Quote
Logical conclusions from testing your theory are not bad faith, but if its a better explanation for you than Nietzsche being fallible, I will abide and stop kicking your sacred cow.

Of course Nietzsche was fallible, and there are quite a few arguments he made that I believe were off the mark. But the 20th century atrocities as a result of rationalist and nihilist ideologies rising up in the wake of the rejection of Western Christian values (the "death of God") was one that he got absolutely right, and that is evident to anyone who reads him critically.
We are giving your theory a fair test.

Europe and mankind had always been at war. The death of God made no difference to that. WW1 was not ideological, it was a powder keg of territorial dispute just needing a match. Even the Serb who shot Franz Ferdinand was not of any Nazi or Marxist ideology.

Hitler came to power because of hardship, hunger and hyperinflation. The same factors with the Soviet revolution. Both in the 20thC. Onerous taxation and opression leading to revolt was not new to the 20thC. The only things new were the level of population and technology to kill.

The war in the Pacific involved no Nazis or Soviets. So what ideology was at play there?

What ideology has kept the US busy fulfilling Nietzsche's nightmare not only in the 20th but we'll into the 21st C?



I asked twice why you mentioned Marxism in response to the question: "what ideology posessed the people involved in the American experiments specifically designed to explain the action of the nazi little cogs in the machine".

Now I ask again: why do you keep speaking of Marxism in response, unless you believe America is Marxist?

I do not suffer from any anti trump ideological posession. Pro trump posession may have driven you to think a mugging where the victim gives over his wallet and keeps his life if saving lives, if trump is the one giving the green light to the mugger. That's known as gunboat diplomacy. Zionism is an anihilist ideology.

  Freedumb & Demockracy are irrational ideologies. John the Revelator warned of the dire consequences from Patmos.
Nothing could be more irrational than this fight to keep BLM off of the fuselage and  LGBTQ 🌈 Pride flag off the tail of the B52.


 


Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 26, 2020, 02:41:31 PM
I used to identify with fundamentalist Christianity and that was ideological possession. I don't anymore, but it's always a risk that whatever system of religious thinking I get into could be another form of ideological possession. As a general rule, if the ideas you are enthralled with allow you to blame others for your problems or the world's problems, and abdicate you of personal responsibility, then it's an ideology which has possessed you.

My view right now is that all ancient, long-lasting religious traditions have evolved to guard against this ever-repeating phenomenon. It is what the Christian tradition is concerned with when it points to "demonic possession". It is also what the pagan traditions thought of as being possessed by the spirits of various gods.

You're not a Fundamentalist Christian anymore?  You no longer believe the Bible is literal truth?

RE

No. It is filled with Truths, but not when read literally.

I've been thinking all along that you have shifted the fixation from Christianity to reactionary right wing politics. Saying Christians mean only ideological posession by demonic possession really seals that.

There is no evidence religious ideology is any less genocidal than what you consider rationalist and nihilist. Every leap in technology has steadily facilitated it with greater efficiency throughout human history, there is no demarcation in the 1800s. You used to argue that men of faith in fact brought about science and invention. 
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 26, 2020, 03:26:47 PM

You're not a Fundamentalist Christian anymore?  You no longer believe the Bible is literal truth?

RE

No. It is filled with Truths, but not when read literally.
[/quote]

So when did you accept this New Truth?  What is still literal truth and what is not?  Was there a real Adam & Eve who spawned the human race?  How long ago did they live?  Did all creatures on Earth get killed in a flood?  Were they all packed on 1 boat to be Saved by Noah?  Did Mary have a Virgin Birth?

You can go into about any text and CHOOSE what you want to believe, but that doesn't make it true.  You also CHOOSE to believe many things written by others, Jordan Peterson and Karl Jung for example.  But you DISMISS about everything Karl Marx wrote as False.

So generally, your ideology is one of convenience.  Once Upon a Time when you were Admin at TAE, you believed in Peak Oil and oncoming Collapse of Industrial Civilization.  Then you repudiated all of it you wrote here and asked me to delete it all, which I refused to do.

So what do you believe NOW?  Is Collapse real and demonstrably in progress or not?

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 06:06:26 PM
Quote

You're not a Fundamentalist Christian anymore?  You no longer believe the Bible is literal truth?

RE

No. It is filled with Truths, but not when read literally.

So when did you accept this New Truth?  What is still literal truth and what is not?  Was there a real Adam & Eve who spawned the human race?  How long ago did they live?  Did all creatures on Earth get killed in a flood?  Were they all packed on 1 boat to be Saved by Noah?  Did Mary have a Virgin Birth?

You can go into about any text and CHOOSE what you want to believe, but that doesn't make it true.  You also CHOOSE to believe many things written by others, Jordan Peterson and Karl Jung for example.  But you DISMISS about everything Karl Marx wrote as False.

So generally, your ideology is one of convenience.  Once Upon a Time when you were Admin at TAE, you believed in Peak Oil and oncoming Collapse of Industrial Civilization.  Then you repudiated all of it you wrote here and asked me to delete it all, which I refused to do.


My ideas evolve as I am exposed to more deep thinkers, yes. Carl Jung did a massive comparative study of nearly all ancient religious systems of thought, up to and including astrology and alchemy, and that is fundamentally how he discovered (or at least verified) the existence of the collective unconscious or "objective psyche", which has been supported by more recent studies in anthropology, evolutionary psychology and neuroscience.

He viewed scripture as mythologically (or "mytho-poetically"), i.e. symbolically, describing encounters between the personal ego and the transpersonal unconscious, the latter consisting of evolved archetypal patterns (instantiated in biology and culture) which can also be thought of as autonomous psychic contents or sub-personalities which are alive, i.e. what the ancients called gods and spirits. It's important to keep in mind, though, that all of these terms are abstract human representations of an underlying reality which is fundamentally ineffable, as all major ancient religious traditions hold as well. Ineffable is not the same as unknowable, though, and we experience this reality in all aspects of our lives and human culture.

Is it possible he got some key aspects of this "objective psyche" wrong? Yes, of course. I did not stop my considerations of it with him, and I see the same ideas hinted at (or sometimes explicitly stated) in many other visionary thinkers as well, from both the East and the West.

Quote
So what do you believe NOW?  Is Collapse real and demonstrably in progress or not?

RE

You have to provide some kind of precise definition of "Collapse" here. I could ask five people on this forum what it means and get five different answers with very substantive differences.

In general, I don't think we can predict any large-scale outcomes of complex system dynamics in the next 50 years, as the margins of error get increasingly larger the farther we go out. I think this is also part of why the great religious traditions focus on individual transformation as the only reliable means of "changing the world". This seems so ludicrous to us know because we are so heavily steeped in the culture of philosophical materialism/rationalism.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 06:33:39 PM
We are giving your theory a fair test.

Europe and mankind had always been at war. The death of God made no difference to that. WW1 was not ideological, it was a powder keg of territorial dispute just needing a match. Even the Serb who shot Franz Ferdinand was not of any Nazi or Marxist ideology.

Hitler came to power because of hardship, hunger and hyperinflation. The same factors with the Soviet revolution. Both in the 20thC. Onerous taxation and opression leading to revolt was not new to the 20thC. The only things new were the level of population and technology to kill.

The war in the Pacific involved no Nazis or Soviets. So what ideology was at play there?

What ideology has kept the US busy fulfilling Nietzsche's nightmare not only in the 20th but we'll into the 21st C?

This has been explained over and over again to you. The fact that you still think of the entire 20th century in these terms means rationalism is alive and well.

Dostoevsky said, "without God, everything is permitted". Human beings have many deep-seated motivations which cannot be reduced to just material needs. Rationalism a priori excludes all of that from consideration, while materialism claims everything about the human being, including consciousness, can be reduced to mindless interactions between matter in space-time.

How could the exclusion of spiritual drives and values instantiated in our biology NOT effect the dynamics of modern human cultures and politics at a large scale? That is the real question.

Quote
I asked twice why you mentioned Marxism in response to the question: "what ideology posessed the people involved in the American experiments specifically designed to explain the action of the nazi little cogs in the machine".

Now I ask again: why do you keep speaking of Marxism in response, unless you believe America is Marxist?

Marxism is the rationalist ideology par excellence. You can see this clearly in any good account of the Soviet history, such as the Gulag Archipelago. He also shows how the individual moral failures of Soviet citizens made the brutalities of the Soviet state possible. Those social psyche experiments only lend support to his insights.

Quote
I do not suffer from any anti trump ideological posession. Pro trump posession may have driven you to think a mugging where the victim gives over his wallet and keeps his life if saving lives, if trump is the one giving the green light to the mugger. That's known as gunboat diplomacy. Zionism is an anihilist ideology.

Framing it in that way is clear evidence of ideological possession. Never mind the fact that millions of people in that region can now go to bed at night feeling a little more secure. Phil says this is bad for you and you should stay at arms with Israel until HIS idea of what is "right" comes to fruition.

 
Quote
Freedumb & Demockracy are irrational ideologies. John the Revelator warned of the dire consequences from Patmos.
Nothing could be more irrational than this fight to keep BLM off of the fuselage and  LGBTQ 🌈 Pride flag off the tail of the B52.

You mean to keep BLM and Antifa from getting in people's faces on the streets or in restaurants while they are enjoying a meal, asking them the modern leftist equivalent of "Heil Hitler!" to figure out where their "allegiances" lie and whether they are enemies to the "cause"? I can't wait to hear what excuse you serve up to downplay this one.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/blm-invades-affluent-portland-suburb-demand-allegiance-shoppers-and-diners (https://www.zerohedge.com/political/blm-invades-affluent-portland-suburb-demand-allegiance-shoppers-and-diners)
"One of the Moms United for Black Lives carried a bullhorn and yelled at one man who was walking by: “Excuse me, Sir? Are you anti-racists? Can I get a Black Lives Matter?” He kept walking but it sounded like he answered, “Yes.”

She asked someone else, “How ’bout you?! Do Black Lives Matter?”

She then turned her sights on a woman sitting alone at a restaurant table on the corner.

The protesters surrounded the woman and mocked her as she recorded them with her phone. One of them said, “Damn! She’s super anxious!”

They asked her her name, and added, “Does your kid go to LO (Lake Osweg0) High? Do your kids go to LO High? Do they go to LO High?”
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 26, 2020, 07:54:27 PM
We are giving your theory a fair test.

Europe and mankind had always been at war. The death of God made no difference to that. WW1 was not ideological, it was a powder keg of territorial dispute just needing a match. Even the Serb who shot Franz Ferdinand was not of any Nazi or Marxist ideology.

Hitler came to power because of hardship, hunger and hyperinflation. The same factors with the Soviet revolution. Both in the 20thC. Onerous taxation and opression leading to revolt was not new to the 20thC. The only things new were the level of population and technology to kill.

The war in the Pacific involved no Nazis or Soviets. So what ideology was at play there?

What ideology has kept the US busy fulfilling Nietzsche's nightmare not only in the 20th but we'll into the 21st C?

This has been explained over and over again to you. The fact that you still think of the entire 20th century in these terms means rationalism is alive and well.

Dostoevsky said, "without God, everything is permitted". Human beings have many deep-seated motivations which cannot be reduced to just material needs. Rationalism a priori excludes all of that from consideration, while materialism claims everything about the human being, including consciousness, can be reduced to mindless interactions between matter in space-time.

How could the exclusion of spiritual drives and values instantiated in our biology NOT effect the dynamics of modern human cultures and politics at a large scale? That is the real question.

Quote
I asked twice why you mentioned Marxism in response to the question: "what ideology posessed the people involved in the American experiments specifically designed to explain the action of the nazi little cogs in the machine".

Now I ask again: why do you keep speaking of Marxism in response, unless you believe America is Marxist?

Marxism is the rationalist ideology par excellence. You can see this clearly in any good account of the Soviet history, such as the Gulag Archipelago. He also shows how the individual moral failures of Soviet citizens made the brutalities of the Soviet state possible. Those social psyche experiments only lend support to his insights.

Quote
I do not suffer from any anti trump ideological posession. Pro trump posession may have driven you to think a mugging where the victim gives over his wallet and keeps his life if saving lives, if trump is the one giving the green light to the mugger. That's known as gunboat diplomacy. Zionism is an anihilist ideology.

Framing it in that way is clear evidence of ideological possession. Never mind the fact that millions of people in that region can now go to bed at night feeling a little more secure. Phil says this is bad for you and you should stay at arms with Israel until HIS idea of what is "right" comes to fruition.

 
Quote
Freedumb & Demockracy are irrational ideologies. John the Revelator warned of the dire consequences from Patmos.
Nothing could be more irrational than this fight to keep BLM off of the fuselage and  LGBTQ 🌈 Pride flag off the tail of the B52.

You mean to keep BLM and Antifa from getting in people's faces on the streets or in restaurants while they are enjoying a meal, asking them the modern leftist equivalent of "Heil Hitler!" to figure out where their "allegiances" lie and whether they are enemies to the "cause"? I can't wait to hear what excuse you serve up to downplay this one.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/blm-invades-affluent-portland-suburb-demand-allegiance-shoppers-and-diners (https://www.zerohedge.com/political/blm-invades-affluent-portland-suburb-demand-allegiance-shoppers-and-diners)
"One of the Moms United for Black Lives carried a bullhorn and yelled at one man who was walking by: “Excuse me, Sir? Are you anti-racists? Can I get a Black Lives Matter?” He kept walking but it sounded like he answered, “Yes.”

She asked someone else, “How ’bout you?! Do Black Lives Matter?”

She then turned her sights on a woman sitting alone at a restaurant table on the corner.

The protesters surrounded the woman and mocked her as she recorded them with her phone. One of them said, “Damn! She’s super anxious!”

They asked her her name, and added, “Does your kid go to LO (Lake Osweg0) High? Do your kids go to LO High? Do they go to LO High?”


I've given numerous reasons the radical theory to fit reality to Nietzsche just doesn't work, moving into intangible nonspecifics doesn't sway me.

The experiments conducted in the US involved participants saying their prayers at night in a Christian country, by scientists you used to claim were not incompatible with religion. This did not happen in bible banning USSR. They were not denied God, yet they were willing to torture and kill when told to do so, proving atheist ideology has no monopoly on atrocity.

This is one reason why Nietzsche wrote Beyond Good and Evil, to tell you american are not immune to everything you ascribe to only communists.

Speaking of the Bible and Christianity, if demonic possession only meant ideological posession, why did Jesus ask their name and cast them out, why isn't Noam Chomsky or Tomi Lahren sent to exorcise them with debate instead of priests with crosses, holy water and incense? Because Nietzsche spoke of personal priorities and motivations as 'demons' and reality must conform to him?

Rationalism doesn't deny spiritual urges. It simply comes to conclusions such as the universe, earth and life taking billions of years to create, which was considered heresy to say instead of 7 days at one point. If the greater the body of knowledge grows, the greater the gaping god shaped gap grows, nobody is prevented from explaining it with a creator.  The inquisitors and Salem Puritans witch-hunt  are examples of allowing for God doing nothing at all to prevent the worst atrocity.

 It does not diminish anyone's spirituality to be rational which is always optional, unless they are all study and no practice.

If you're familiar with the prominent late 19th philosophers, you should apply Soren Kierkegaard; "when you label me you negate me". I already said from the beginning, unprompted,  that I don't approve of every BLM members action such as stopping traffic or harrassing people going about their business. Yet you continually put me in this preconceived box that would give no quarter, like yourself.

If anything fulphils Dostoevsky 'without god anything is permitted', it's completely unequal treaties because might makes right and being as one-eyed as a penis.




 
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 08:33:15 PM
Your radical theory makes assumptions. I have challenged those. You have not answered them.

For the 5th time, the experiments conducted in the US involved people saying their prayers at night in a Christian country. By scientists you used to claim were not incompatible with religion.

 This did not happen in bible banning USSR. They were not denied God.

What "radical theory"? That ideology was the driving factor behind the Communist and Nazi atrocities? Please cite a non-Marxist or non-Nazi who disagrees and I will consider it.

Quote
This is one reason why Nietzsche wrote beyond good and evil, to tell you american are not immune to everything you ascribe to only communists, such as the Viet Cong who were still Bhuddist.

Who said Americans are immune to ideological possession? If anything I have been saying the exact opposite - every human being is susceptible to it and, in reality, experiences it. We see it happening in American right now at both extremes, but you are unwilling to entertain the possibility that it might be happening on the left political extreme (which has completed shoved out the "moderates").

Quote
Speaking of the Bible and Christianity, if demonic possession only meant ideological posession, why did Jesus ask their name and cast them out, why isn't Noam Chomsky or Tomi Lahren sent to exorcise them with debate instead of priests with crosses, holy water and incense? Because Nietzsche spoke of personal priorities and mitivations as demons and reality must conform to him.

These are symbolic representations, in the following sense: "an artistic and poetic movement or style using symbolic images and indirect suggestion to express mystical ideas, emotions, and states of mind"

That was Dostoevsky's (and Jung's) whole point - no amount of rational argument will convince an ideologue to abandon their "cause", or stop worshipping their idols. They will always find reasons to "gain their point". Only spiritual guidance, i.e. deep introspection into our unconscious complexes, bringing them into the light of consciousness, can redeem us, i.e. repent and be baptized in Christ. Christ is the symbol of this individuating process. Rationalism is quite literally the antithesis of this symbol or the anti-Christ.

Quote
20th C rationalism doesn't deny spiritual urges. It simply comes to conclusions such as the universe and earth and life taking billions of years to create, which was considered heresy to say instead of 7 days at one point. The inquisitors and Salem Puritans witch-hunt  are examples of allowing for God doing nothing at all to prevent the worst atrocity.

 It does not diminish anyone's spirituality to be rational which is always optional, unless they are all study and no practice.

Of course it does. I already defined philosophical rationalism for you. It is NOT simply being rational or using your intellect, it is believing reality can only be explained in terms of reasoned out concepts rather than inner experience.

Quote
If you're familiar with the prominent late 19th philosophers, you should apply Soren Kierkegaard; "when you label me you negate me".

Kierkegaard was very similar to Dostoevsky in his existential thinking, and existential philosophy is diametrically opposed to rationalism. They were both huge influences on Nietzsche and Jung. Also thinkers like Rudolf Steiner, who wrote, Friedrich Nietzsche, Fighter for Freedom (freedom of the "soul").

The quote you mention is a perfect example of what rationalism tells us to do - only consider what we can label with our cognitive intellectual categories. I suspect you feel the need to defend rationalism only because it is undeniably linked with Marxism and you associate anyone who attacks Marxist ideology with alt-right, pro-Trump, pro-American patriot, or whatever cognitive categories you label everything on the "other side" with.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11153-019-09732-z
"While there has been considerable interest in the writings of Søren Kierkegaard and Fyodor Dostoevsky, both of whom are considered seminal existential thinkers, relatively little has been said about similarities in their thought. In this paper, I propose to read their philosophical and literary works together as texts that offer an elaborate model of an existential religious transformation. Both Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky sketch a path leading from the inauthentic, internally fragmented and egotistic self to the authentically Christian, humble and loving individual."

Quote
I already said from the beginning, unprompted,  that I don't approve of every BLM members action such as stopping traffic or harrassing people going about their business. Yet you continually put me in this preconceived box that would give no quarter, like yourself.

You approve of their ideology, maybe unconsciously. That is why you either ignore or downplay everything they do, hence your equally unprompted comment, "Nothing could be more irrational than this fight to keep BLM off of the fuselage".
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 26, 2020, 08:44:02 PM
Quote
The experiments conducted in the US involved participants saying their prayers at night in a Christian country, by scientists you used to claim were not incompatible with religion. This did not happen in bible banning USSR. They were not denied God, yet they were willing to torture and kill when told to do so, proving atheist ideology has no monopoly on atrocity.

This just further supports Nietzsche's point about the "death of God" in the West (which was the region he was obviously concerned with), which you keep denying for who knows what reason. Maybe because Nietzsche was such a devastating critic of socialist ideology, you want so desperately to prove him wrong.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 26, 2020, 09:38:22 PM
 
Stop reducing yourself to a polarity simpleton and tuning out everything I say critical of the left, communism, Marxism to negate me by labelling me. My  stance is u are the one helping the Marxist  aim of destabilization and defeat by ensuring a house divided can not stand. I simply enjoy the decline, call me an anarchist instead.

The evidence of your eyes and ears: churches, mosques, temples, synagogues and an ever expanding industry of self help books full of that dangerous new age and eastern philosophy you warned against are spirituality in action. Yes Hitler and Stalin burnt them all, but they're gone and we still have what you say is rationalism, not throttling all transcendent soul urge.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 26, 2020, 09:51:21 PM
May I ask what the gospels or modern day exorcists are symbolising by casting out demons?

Your theory was the major wars of the 20th C were caused by nihilist and rationalist ideology, and that these cause greater atrocity and casualties.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 27, 2020, 01:50:49 AM
Your theory was the major wars of the 20th C were caused by nihilist and rationalist ideology, and that these cause greater atrocity and casualties.

Yes, the ideas here are:

1- Rationalism & Nihilism are the cause of Wars.

2- Wars today are more destructive because they are driven by Rationalism & Nihilism.

The problem is neither of these suppositions is true despite what Nietze might have thought before descending into madness.  The main causes of WW1 & WW2 was to gain control over the thermodynamic supplies of fossil fuels.  Rationalism & Nihilism are not the CAUSE of all this mayhem, they are an effect of it.  Nietze didn't "predict" these outcomes, he just was extrapolating on what was occuring in his own time.  He was to a large extent correct,but that doesn't make his reasoning correct.  WW1 & WW@ were fought over the Energy resource.  18th & 19th century wars were fought over the Food resource.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 27, 2020, 09:03:48 AM
Your theory was the major wars of the 20th C were caused by nihilist and rationalist ideology, and that these cause greater atrocity and casualties.

Yes, the ideas here are:

1- Rationalism & Nihilism are the cause of Wars.

2- Wars today are more destructive because they are driven by Rationalism & Nihilism.

The problem is neither of these suppositions is true despite what Nietze might have thought before descending into madness.  The main causes of WW1 & WW2 was to gain control over the thermodynamic supplies of fossil fuels.  Rationalism & Nihilism are not the CAUSE of all this mayhem, they are an effect of it.  Nietze didn't "predict" these outcomes, he just was extrapolating on what was occuring in his own time.  He was to a large extent correct,but that doesn't make his reasoning correct.  WW1 & WW@ were fought over the Energy resource.  18th & 19th century wars were fought over the Food resource.

RE

The fact that the Renaissance, Reformation, Scientific Revolution, etc. elevated Reason and Rationality to an exalted status, to the exclusion of the "spirit" or "soul", is not even debatable. Everyone, including the empiricists and rationalists, admit that this is what happened. Poets like John Milton and Shakespeare (two of the best in the English language) wrote about the negative effects of this transition extensively. If anyone was truly ahead of their times, it was people like them.

You also have philosophers like Immanuel Kant, who wrote A Critique of Pure Reason, and influenced generations of idealist philosophers which came after him. Then you have the era of the Romantic poets, such as William Blake, Coleridge, Wordsworth, Emerson etc., who were absolutely responding to the rationalist domination of their times. So no, we do not need Nietzsche to see this rationalist specter haunting the West well before his time. He and a few others were good at diagnosing exactly where it would lead, though.

For Phil, or anyone else who thinks WWII was primarily a manifestation of material hardships and NOT ideology, please explain WHY the Germans decided to ramp up their extermination campaigns as they were losing the war, taking resources from the war effort to the effort of murdering people en masse before the allies got there. Explain WHY Hitler wanted to see the entire German nation and people consumed by fire at the end, and WHY he and Eva Braun killed their children and themselves in a bunker while the German cities burned. If you cannot see that these behaviors are the result of ideological possession, then I don't know how else to explain it to you.

https://www.orwell.ru/people/blake/wb_en#:~:text=British%20poet%2C%20painter%2C%20visionary%20mystic%2C%20and%20engraver%2C%20who,and%20considered%20Newtonian%20science%20to%20be%20superstitious%20nonsense. (https://www.orwell.ru/people/blake/wb_en#:~:text=British%20poet%2C%20painter%2C%20visionary%20mystic%2C%20and%20engraver%2C%20who,and%20considered%20Newtonian%20science%20to%20be%20superstitious%20nonsense.)
"British poet, painter, visionary mystic, and engraver, who illustrated and printed his own books. Blake proclaimed the supremacy of the imagination over the rationalism and materialism of the 18th-century. He joined for a time the Swedenborgian Church of the New Jerusalem in London and considered Newtonian science to be superstitious nonsense. Misunderstanding shadowed his career as a writer and artist and it was left to later generations to recognize his importance."

"To see a world in a grain of sand
And heaven in a wild flower
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
And eternity in an hour."
(from ‘Auguries of Innocence’)
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 27, 2020, 09:11:49 AM
May I ask what the gospels or modern day exorcists are symbolising by casting out demons?

Your theory was the major wars of the 20th C were caused by nihilist and rationalist ideology, and that these cause greater atrocity and casualties.

Exorcism symbolizes the act of confronting your demons and dispelling them, which is why we still use that same language when talking about people confronting their psychological states, character flaws, etc. I never said rationalism had a monopoly on ideologies, there are clearly religious ideologies as well. It is no coincidence that the most violent conflicts within the Church happened with the protestant reformation, which very much embraced rationalist modes of interpreting scripture.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Eddie on October 27, 2020, 09:20:39 AM
(https://lh3.ggpht.com/Qotm9ILbRyNbxZwkkOeI7QiM1PJvSxQEBZpHzNcTnYf6cCKQKdoK2qroH30)

I think your take on the Nazis here is correct. When I read your comment, it made me think of Lee Miller and her photos. This is the mayor of Leipzig, his wife, and his daughter....all who committed suicide rather than face the end of their ideology.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 27, 2020, 11:19:27 AM
(https://lh3.ggpht.com/Qotm9ILbRyNbxZwkkOeI7QiM1PJvSxQEBZpHzNcTnYf6cCKQKdoK2qroH30)

I think your take on the Nazis here is correct. When I read your comment, it made me think of Lee Millar and her photos. This is the mayor of Leipzig, his wife, and his daughter....all who committed suicide rather than face the end of their ideology.

I wonder what they took?  Give me a double dose.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Eddie on October 27, 2020, 11:22:37 AM
Cyanide, I think.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: John of Wallan on October 27, 2020, 12:12:42 PM
Your theory was the major wars of the 20th C were caused by nihilist and rationalist ideology, and that these cause greater atrocity and casualties.

Yes, the ideas here are:

1- Rationalism & Nihilism are the cause of Wars.

2- Wars today are more destructive because they are driven by Rationalism & Nihilism.

The problem is neither of these suppositions is true despite what Nietze might have thought before descending into madness.  The main causes of WW1 & WW2 was to gain control over the thermodynamic supplies of fossil fuels.  Rationalism & Nihilism are not the CAUSE of all this mayhem, they are an effect of it.  Nietze didn't "predict" these outcomes, he just was extrapolating on what was occuring in his own time.  He was to a large extent correct,but that doesn't make his reasoning correct.  WW1 & WW@ were fought over the Energy resource.  18th & 19th century wars were fought over the Food resource.

RE

I will take an each way bet: Ideology of individuals may start and flame conflicts including WW2, who then justify the unjust with their ideologies to others. Hitler sold the war as a way of getting out of unjust reparations after WW1.
Surely some ideologies stop wars?
Rationalism should prevent or stop wars I would think.

JOW
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 27, 2020, 01:02:42 PM
Your theory was the major wars of the 20th C were caused by nihilist and rationalist ideology, and that these cause greater atrocity and casualties.

Yes, the ideas here are:

1- Rationalism & Nihilism are the cause of Wars.

2- Wars today are more destructive because they are driven by Rationalism & Nihilism.

The problem is neither of these suppositions is true despite what Nietze might have thought before descending into madness.  The main causes of WW1 & WW2 was to gain control over the thermodynamic supplies of fossil fuels.  Rationalism & Nihilism are not the CAUSE of all this mayhem, they are an effect of it.  Nietze didn't "predict" these outcomes, he just was extrapolating on what was occuring in his own time.  He was to a large extent correct,but that doesn't make his reasoning correct.  WW1 & WW@ were fought over the Energy resource.  18th & 19th century wars were fought over the Food resource.

RE

I will take an each way bet: Ideology of individuals may start and flame conflicts including WW2, who then justify the unjust with their ideologies to others. Hitler sold the war as a way of getting out of unjust reparations after WW1.
Surely some ideologies stop wars?
Rationalism should prevent or stop wars I would think.

JOW

This is why I give so much credit to critics of rationalism like Dostoevsky and Nietzsche. They were much further removed from the worldviews before rationalism became dominant, kind of like we are now. We are so steeped in the momentum of rationalism that it's hard for us to even figure out why it's a bad thing, even after the 20th century world wars and atrocities.

Rationalism (philosophy) - the theory that reason rather than experience is the foundation of certainty in knowledge.

A lot of people in the West subscribe to the above, knowingly or unknowingly, secular or religious. It is baked into the cake of our culture. I have a hard time articulating exactly why the above is so dangerous without referring to brilliant thinkers who came before me. It's probably why we keep going on this merri-go-round of posts about it.

Check out Dostoevsky's Notes from the Underground. To call it brilliant is an under-statement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notes_from_Underground
Themes and context
"The narration by the Underground Man is laden with ideological allusions and complex conversations regarding the political climate of the period. Using his fiction as a weapon of ideological discourse, Dostoevsky challenges the ideologies of his time, mainly nihilism and rational egoism.[6]

In Part 2, the rant that the Underground Man directs at Liza as they sit in the dark, and her response to it, is an example of such discourse. Liza believes she can survive and rise up through the ranks of her brothel as a means of achieving her dreams of functioning successfully in society. However, as the Underground Man points out in his rant, such dreams are based on a utopian trust of not only the societal systems in place but also humanity's ability to avoid corruption and irrationality in general. The points made in Part 1 about the Underground Man's pleasure in being rude and refusing to seek medical help are his examples of how idealised rationality is inherently flawed for not accounting for the darker and more irrational side of humanity.

The Stone Wall is one of the symbols in the novel and represents all the barriers of the laws of nature that stand against man and his freedom. Put simply, the rule that two plus two equals four angers the Underground Man because he wants the freedom to say two plus two equals five, but that Stone Wall of nature's laws stands in front of him and his free will."


Political climate
"In the 1860s, Russia was beginning to absorb the ideas and culture of Western Europe at an accelerated pace, nurturing an unstable local climate. There was especially a growth in revolutionary activity accompanying a general restructuring of tsardom where liberal reforms, enacted by an unwieldy autocracy, only induced a greater sense of tension in both politics and civil society. Many of Russia's intellectuals were engaged in a debate with the Westernizers on one hand, and the Slavophiles on the other, concerned with favoring importation of Western reforms or promoting pan-Slavic traditions to address Russia's particular social reality. Although Tsar Alexander emancipated the serfs in 1861, Russia was still very much a post-medieval, traditional peasant society.

When Notes From Underground was written, there was an intellectual ferment on discussions regarding religious philosophy and various 'enlightened' utopian ideas.[7] The work is a challenge to, and a method of understanding, the larger implications of the ideological drive toward a utopian society.[1] Utopianism largely pertains to a society's collective dream, but what troubles the Underground Man is this very idea of collectivism. The point the Underground Man makes is that individuals will ultimately always rebel against a collectively imposed idea of paradise; a utopian image such as The Crystal Palace will always fail because of the underlying irrationality of humanity."


Of course the big difference between Dostoevsky, Nietzsche and us today, is that WE have Dostevsky, Nietzsche AND the atrocities of rationalist ideology in the 20th century to look back at. So there is very little excuse for sticking to this rationalist mode of thinking, no matter how much the culture continues to reinforce it.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 27, 2020, 01:17:29 PM
Of course the big difference between Dostoevsky, Nietzsche and us today, is that WE have Dostevsky, Nietzsche AND the atrocities of rationalist ideology in the 20th century to look back at. So there is very little excuse for sticking to this rationalist mode of thinking, no matter how much the culture continues to reinforce it.

What do you propose to replace it?  Irrationalist Thinking?  How do you propose we change the thinking methodology of 7.8 B Homo Saps currently walking the earth?  I doubt this could be legislated into existence.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 27, 2020, 01:19:45 PM
Cyanide, I think.

Sadly this is not available OTC at 3 Bears.  :(

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 27, 2020, 01:28:10 PM
I did not say WW2 was a "manifestation of" material hardship. I said about 4 times that there are numerous examples that simple territorial disputes, hardship and need for resources were responsible for the start of WW1 , the war in Pacific, and our own global MIC.

 The charred remains purported to be Hitler were tested in the USSR and found to be a woman. There are credible sightings in Argentina where many Nazis escaped. Not being taken alive, either to make it a quick end, or avoid a fate worse than death is cfs and does not require any ideology anyway. If the generals wanted to surrender and plenty of Germans surrendered on the field, that should, by your reasoning, also explain a converse lack of rationalist philosophy. 

You need to quote Shakespeare etc saying that the Age of reason and enlightenment disallow or dispell the Church, belief in God, Belief in afterlife, belief in ghosts or demons. The evidence of your eyes today suggests rationalism never made a dent in man's spiritual expression. You simply have the choice to be openly atheist instead of tried for heresy now.

If you say speaking of "demons" is a symbolic representation of "demons", then symbolic must mean literal.

The 21st C practice of talking about addictions as demons, does not involve casting out by Jesus or exorcists. Casting out and exorcism are involved in the removal of a seperate, sentient entity.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 27, 2020, 02:54:55 PM
Of course the big difference between Dostoevsky, Nietzsche and us today, is that WE have Dostevsky, Nietzsche AND the atrocities of rationalist ideology in the 20th century to look back at. So there is very little excuse for sticking to this rationalist mode of thinking, no matter how much the culture continues to reinforce it.

What do you propose to replace it?  Irrationalist Thinking?  How do you propose we change the thinking methodology of 7.8 B Homo Saps currently walking the earth?  I doubt this could be legislated into existence.

RE

Well humans have evolved for hundreds of thousands of years, and rationalism has been around for 500, so I am ultimately optimistic. The earlier states of consciousness are not gone, in fact the irrational collective unconscious is omnipresent and easily accessible. Our responsibility now is to rediscover this within ourselves and integrate them with our rational intellect.

As much as I praise Dostoevsky. Nietzsche and other similar thinkers, Carl Jung was in a league of his own. He managed to figure all this stuff out AND provide a roadmap towards the integral development of soul, which he called "individuation". The problem is he wrote so much stuff, covering so many topics and in no particular order, some of his earlier writings were only published after his death.

I find his most accessible writing to be Modern Man in Search of a Soul. It's also relatively short at 9 chapters. But if you want to be scared out of your skull for Halloween, then take a swing at Aion: Phenomenology of the Self.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 27, 2020, 03:28:21 PM
I did not say WW2 was a "manifestation of" material hardship. I said about 4 times that there are numerous examples that simple territorial disputes, hardship and need for resources were responsible for the start of WW1 , the war in Pacific, and our own global MIC.

What specifically about WWI do you feel is clearly attributable to simple territorial disputes?

 
Quote
The charred remains purported to be Hitler were tested in the USSR and found to be a woman. There are credible sightings in Argentina where many Nazis escaped.

. Not being taken alive, either to make it a quick end, or avoid a fate worse than death is cfs and does not require any ideology anyway. If the generals wanted to surrender and plenty of Germans surrendered on the field, that should, by your reasoning, also explain a converse lack of rationalist philosophy. 

OK, well, the burden ia certainly on you to back up that craziness.

You conviently ignored the part of diverting resources from the war effort to the extermination camps. What rational explanation do you have for that? Maybe the camps were actually spaceships that he used to escape to Saturn where he and his kids still live today?

Quote
You need to quote Shakespeare etc saying that the Age of reason and enlightenment disallow or dispell the Church, belief in God, Belief in afterlife, belief in ghosts or demons. The evidence of your eyes today suggests rationalism never made a dent in man's spiritual expression. You simply have the choice to be openly atheist instead of tried for heresy now.

This is ridiculous and you know it. I dont think you even believe half the things you say here, just coming up with absurd reasons to "gain your point" as it were.

Quote
If you say speaking of "demons" is a symbolic representation of "demons", then symbolic must mean literal.

The 21st C practice of talking about addictions as demons, does not involve casting out by Jesus or exorcists. Casting out and exorcism are involved in the removal of a seperate, sentient entity.

I never said that. Its a symbolic representation of confronting inner psychological complexes which possess your ego. If you find the symbolic interpretations unimaginable, then you are a living example of rationalist ideology at work, even in so called believers.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 27, 2020, 04:14:24 PM
Well humans have evolved for hundreds of thousands of years, and rationalism has been around for 500, so I am ultimately optimistic. The earlier states of consciousness are not gone, in fact the irrational collective unconscious is omnipresent and easily accessible. Our responsibility now is to rediscover this within ourselves and integrate them with our rational intellect.

Although humans have been evolving for Millions of years,  it's only since the transition from Homo Neanderthalensis we can consider ourselves "sentient" and so further along on the trail to "sapience", so you're talking around 60K-80K  years ago.  Written material, Artwork etc only maybe 40K years.

So we haven't been around al that long,maybe 50K years where you could call us "human' or "rationalists".  For only the last !0K do we have any written history at all, which is almost impossible to verify.  I do not believe rejecting Rationalism will make that big a difference to the future of humanity.  I also don't see a viable substitute.   Many will die and whatever is left of this species will live a much simpler life.  Nietze will not even be remembered in 1000 years.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 27, 2020, 05:43:12 PM
"This is ridiculous and you know it. I dont think you even believe half the things you say here, just coming up with absurd reasons to "gain your point" as it were."

Either that, or this applies to yourself. We determine which it is by virtue of my answering every question put to me, not picking and choosing diminishing last lines of defence.

Bosnia / Herzegovina were disputed by Serbia and Austria-Hungary. All the alliances were in force because each country was alone vulnerable to attack due to millenia of invasions and fueds. Napoleon had conquered Europe as far as moscow in living memory at the time. Everyone was afraid of a repeat, hence the alliances and arms race. Nothing new here and a continuation of a pattern dating to 1066, never mind Vikings.

You don't get to denounce rationality ad infinitum and then argue for absurdity/craziness/ridiculous as a reason to reject anything, least of all while trying to fit reality to the ravings of a melancholy madman. Insisting on correlation as causation despite better explanations and numerous exceptions to the rule in your theory, makes it a superstition and another example of rationality being tenuous and optional for the vast majority in any century.

How many divisions of troops were diverted to the camps where gold and other valuables were stolen and spent on the war effort, while the inmates were also forced to work for the war effort? Even without the cost/benefit equation there, nobody is saying Hitler did not have a hateful ideology. If he had the objective of winning the war and exterminating the Jews, of course he would step up efforts to accomplish the second when it was clear the first was out of reach. He also diverted resources in late 1944 with the allies closing in, to sending an expedition to the Indus valley in search of original Aryans to re-seed the master race. You can view all this as the same pattern of behaviour he exhibited while in jail for an attempted coup. He didn't think his hopes were dashed, but wrote mein Kampf detailing what he would do when he came to power.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 27, 2020, 06:39:39 PM
Well humans have evolved for hundreds of thousands of years, and rationalism has been around for 500, so I am ultimately optimistic. The earlier states of consciousness are not gone, in fact the irrational collective unconscious is omnipresent and easily accessible. Our responsibility now is to rediscover this within ourselves and integrate them with our rational intellect.

Although humans have been evolving for Millions of years,  it's only since the transition from Homo Neanderthalensis we can consider ourselves "sentient" and so further along on the trail to "sapience", so you're talking around 60K-80K  years ago.  Written material, Artwork etc only maybe 40K years.

So we haven't been around al that long,maybe 50K years where you could call us "human' or "rationalists".  For only the last !0K do we have any written history at all, which is almost impossible to verify.  I do not believe rejecting Rationalism will make that big a difference to the future of humanity.  I also don't see a viable substitute.   Many will die and whatever is left of this species will live a much simpler life.  Nietze will not even be remembered in 1000 years.

RE

You are mixing up rational thinking (which hasn't been around that long, maybe 1500 BCE) with "rationalism" (1500 AD). We could just call it "utopianism" to make it more clear what we are referring to. We don't need to replace it with anything, it will evolve out humanity of its own accord. Rationalist systems always fail miserably because they deny the true underlying reality. We just need to be conscious of its allure and its dangers in the meantime, and do what we can to transform ourselves at an individual level. We need to remember that we do still have a "soul".
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 27, 2020, 06:55:14 PM
"This is ridiculous and you know it. I dont think you even believe half the things you say here, just coming up with absurd reasons to "gain your point" as it were."

Either that, or this applies to yourself. We determine which it is by virtue of my answering every question put to me, not picking and choosing diminishing last lines of defence.

You are not doing that at all. When I bring up WW2, Hitler or Stalin, you start talking about WWI, the "war in the Pacific" and the Military Industrial Complex (yeah, that last one is right on topic...).

Quote
Bosnia / Herzegovina were disputed by Serbia and Austria-Hungary. All the alliances were in force because each country was alone vulnerable to attack due to millenia of invasions and fueds. Napoleon had conquered Europe as far as moscow in living memory at the time. Everyone was afraid of a repeat, hence the alliances and arms race. Nothing new here and a continuation of a pattern dating to 1066, never mind Vikings.

So a bunch of nations who were creating alliances to prevent all out war on the continent ended up going to all out war on the continent because the alliances kicked in after some archduke was assassinated? Yeah, sounds exactly like rationalist ideology to me.

Quote
How many divisions of troops were diverted to the camps where gold and other valuables were stolen and spent on the war effort, while the inmates were also forced to work for the war effort? Even without the cost/benefit equation there, nobody is saying Hitler did not have a hateful ideology. If he had the objective of winning the war and exterminating the Jews, of course he would step up efforts to accomplish the second when it was clear the first was out of reach. He also diverted resources in late 1944 with the allies closing in, to sending an expedition to the Indus valley in search of original Aryans to re-seed the master race. You can view all this as the same pattern of behaviour he exhibited while in jail for an attempted coup. He didn't think his hopes were dashed, but wrote mein Kampf detailing what he would do when he came to power.

Why did he want to exterminate the Jews if not to win the war and create a better world for Aryans to live in? Instead of going through all of these endless rationalizations, why not just admit that he set out the goal to either create Utopia or, even more likely, to destroy anything and everything. When you put your faith in Utopia, and it doesn't work out, as you know it won't work out, at least unconsciously, then the only hope left is to cease being, and take as many people with you, as a fuck you to Being itself.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 27, 2020, 09:55:44 PM
"This is ridiculous and you know it. I dont think you even believe half the things you say here, just coming up with absurd reasons to "gain your point" as it were."

Either that, or this applies to yourself. We determine which it is by virtue of my answering every question put to me, not picking and choosing diminishing last lines of defence.

You are not doing that at all. When I bring up WW2, Hitler or Stalin, you start talking about WWI, the "war in the Pacific" and the Military Industrial Complex (yeah, that last one is right on topic...).

Quote
Bosnia / Herzegovina were disputed by Serbia and Austria-Hungary. All the alliances were in force because each country was alone vulnerable to attack due to millenia of invasions and fueds. Napoleon had conquered Europe as far as moscow in living memory at the time. Everyone was afraid of a repeat, hence the alliances and arms race. Nothing new here and a continuation of a pattern dating to 1066, never mind Vikings.

So a bunch of nations who were creating alliances to prevent all out war on the continent ended up going to all out war on the continent because the alliances kicked in after some archduke was assassinated? Yeah, sounds exactly like rationalist ideology to me.

Quote
How many divisions of troops were diverted to the camps where gold and other valuables were stolen and spent on the war effort, while the inmates were also forced to work for the war effort? Even without the cost/benefit equation there, nobody is saying Hitler did not have a hateful ideology. If he had the objective of winning the war and exterminating the Jews, of course he would step up efforts to accomplish the second when it was clear the first was out of reach. He also diverted resources in late 1944 with the allies closing in, to sending an expedition to the Indus valley in search of original Aryans to re-seed the master race. You can view all this as the same pattern of behaviour he exhibited while in jail for an attempted coup. He didn't think his hopes were dashed, but wrote mein Kampf detailing what he would do when he came to power.

Why did he want to exterminate the Jews if not to win the war and create a better world for Aryans to live in? Instead of going through all of these endless rationalizations, why not just admit that he set out the goal to either create Utopia or, even more likely, to destroy anything and everything. When you put your faith in Utopia, and it doesn't work out, as you know it won't work out, at least unconsciously, then the only hope left is to cease being, and take as many people with you, as a fuck you to Being itself.

You chose to go to WW1 asking what territorial dispute, not I. I include all of the 20th C large scale conflict. I know the Pacific theatre of WW2 did not involve communists or socialists, but still happened between a monarchy and democracy. Fat man and little boy on Hiroshima and nagasaki, carpet bombing Korea and Vietnam and the mountain leveling MOAB trump dropped on day 1 in office, fit Nietzsches visions. Nothing does better than the 20-21st C trillion dollar budget, 800 base, full spectrum dominance, end of history, MIC.

Killing jews could not win the war unless an allied soldier also died for every one starved, worked, or gassed to death.

I suppose MAGA is promising, if not creating utopia, no different to  Ceasar keeping up the bread, circuses and orgies. Nihilism and Utopianism don't mix well. Concepts of Autarky and Lebenstraum for the Reich are as old as the concepts of tribe/race/country, territory and resource acquisition.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 28, 2020, 05:01:18 AM
"This is ridiculous and you know it. I dont think you even believe half the things you say here, just coming up with absurd reasons to "gain your point" as it were."

Either that, or this applies to yourself. We determine which it is by virtue of my answering every question put to me, not picking and choosing diminishing last lines of defence.

You are not doing that at all. When I bring up WW2, Hitler or Stalin, you start talking about WWI, the "war in the Pacific" and the Military Industrial Complex (yeah, that last one is right on topic...).

Quote

You chose to go to WW1 asking what territorial dispute, not I. I include all of the 20th C large scale conflict. I know the Pacific theatre of WW2 did not involve communists or socialists, but still happened between a monarchy and democracy. Fat man and little boy on Hiroshima and nagasaki, carpet bombing Korea and Vietnam and the mountain leveling MOAB trump dropped on day 1 in office, fit Nietzsches visions. Nothing does better than the 20-21st C trillion dollar budget, 800 base, full spectrum dominance, end of history, MIC.

Killing jews could not win the war unless an allied soldier also died for every one starved, worked, or gassed to death.

I suppose MAGA is promising, if not creating utopia, no different to  Ceasar keeping up the bread, circuses and orgies. Nihilism and Utopianism don't mix well. Concepts of Autarky and Lebenstraum for the Reich are as old as the concepts of tribe/race/country, territory and resource acquisition.

Oh yes, who can forget the "cold" war, the penultimate battle of ideologies. Cities were nuked, never ending wars were started, a literal wall was built to keep people from escaping from one ideology to another, and humanity came close to nuclear holocaust not once, but twice! Yep, material hardships and territorial disputes can explain all of that  ::)

Today, we have... a never ending pandemic and "systemic racism"  that takes priority over everything else and justifies extreme policy measures like lock downs and "defund the police" (attempts at Utopia), censorship of news stories which challenge or support the personifications of ideology, violence against people who don't tow the party line, cancellation of the pperceived opposition and elimination of anything that serves as evidence the Utopian vision is fatally flawed, like how the Soviets (and more recently Venezuela) stopped reporting starvation as a cause of death. Open your eyes... people wearing MAGA hats are the least of our problems.
GA
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 28, 2020, 05:02:05 AM


You chose to go to WW1 asking what territorial dispute, not I. I include all of the 20th C large scale conflict. I know the Pacific theatre of WW2 did not involve communists or socialists, but still happened between a monarchy and democracy. Fat man and little boy on Hiroshima and nagasaki, carpet bombing Korea and Vietnam and the mountain leveling MOAB trump dropped on day 1 in office, fit Nietzsches visions. Nothing does better than the 20-21st C trillion dollar budget, 800 base, full spectrum dominance, end of history, MIC.

Killing jews could not win the war unless an allied soldier also died for every one starved, worked, or gassed to death.

I suppose MAGA is promising, if not creating utopia, no different to  Ceasar keeping up the bread, circuses and orgies. Nihilism and Utopianism don't mix well. Concepts of Autarky and Lebenstraum for the Reich are as old as the concepts of tribe/race/country, territory and resource acquisition.

Oh yes, who can forget the "cold" war, the penultimate battle of ideologies. Cities were nuked, never ending wars were started, a literal wall was built to keep people from escaping from one ideology to another, and humanity came close to nuclear holocaust not once, but twice! Yep, material hardships and territorial disputes can explain all of that  ::)

Today, we have... a never ending pandemic and "systemic racism"  that takes priority over everything else and justifies extreme policy measures like lock downs and "defund the police" (attempts at Utopia), censorship of news stories which challenge or support the personifications of ideology, violence against people who don't tow the party line, cancellation of the pperceived opposition and elimination of anything that serves as evidence the Utopian vision is fatally flawed, like how the Soviets (and more recently Venezuela) stopped reporting starvation as a cause of death. Open your eyes... people wearing MAGA hats are the least of our problems.

Utopianism and nihilism go hand in hand. Just ask someone who has projected their ideals on a spouse only to find out the spouse is just another human like they are. The rational response in a modern culture without meaning is existential despair. Reminds me of Hillary supporters after the 2016 election.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Phil Rumpole on October 28, 2020, 11:47:24 AM


You chose to go to WW1 asking what territorial dispute, not I. I include all of the 20th C large scale conflict. I know the Pacific theatre of WW2 did not involve communists or socialists, but still happened between a monarchy and democracy. Fat man and little boy on Hiroshima and nagasaki, carpet bombing Korea and Vietnam and the mountain leveling MOAB trump dropped on day 1 in office, fit Nietzsches visions. Nothing does better than the 20-21st C trillion dollar budget, 800 base, full spectrum dominance, end of history, MIC.

Killing jews could not win the war unless an allied soldier also died for every one starved, worked, or gassed to death.

I suppose MAGA is promising, if not creating utopia, no different to  Ceasar keeping up the bread, circuses and orgies. Nihilism and Utopianism don't mix well. Concepts of Autarky and Lebenstraum for the Reich are as old as the concepts of tribe/race/country, territory and resource acquisition.

Oh yes, who can forget the "cold" war, the penultimate battle of ideologies. Cities were nuked, never ending wars were started, a literal wall was built to keep people from escaping from one ideology to another, and humanity came close to nuclear holocaust not once, but twice! Yep, material hardships and territorial disputes can explain all of that  ::)

Today, we have... a never ending pandemic and "systemic racism"  that takes priority over everything else and justifies extreme policy measures like lock downs and "defund the police" (attempts at Utopia), censorship of news stories which challenge or support the personifications of ideology, violence against people who don't tow the party line, cancellation of the pperceived opposition and elimination of anything that serves as evidence the Utopian vision is fatally flawed, like how the Soviets (and more recently Venezuela) stopped reporting starvation as a cause of death. Open your eyes... people wearing MAGA hats are the least of our problems.

Utopianism and nihilism go hand in hand. Just ask someone who has projected their ideals on a spouse only to find out the spouse is just another human like they are. The rational response in a modern culture without meaning is existential despair. Reminds me of Hillary supporters after the 2016 election.

By taking hunger or territorial dispute from explaining exactly what I said it explains as exceptions to how war and revolution started  and applying it to ongoing control, you are only supporting RE "ideology comes later".

What ideology were the cities nuked under?

How is a monarchy in Japan a rationalistic ideology?

How is the Ottoman Empire in ww1 not a caliphate and subject to rationalisticism or nihilisticism?

 What you are saying is making election promises by any political party or independent candidate is utopian, therefore rejecting democracy. What should replace it?
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: RE on October 28, 2020, 02:06:58 PM
What you are saying is making election promises by any political party or independent candidate is utopian, therefore rejecting democracy. What should replace it?

Watson makes many criticisms of political systems and ideologies, but he never presents a plausible alternative, or any way to get his vision implemented.  He's just a nay-sayer.

RE
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 28, 2020, 04:48:06 PM
What you are saying is making election promises by any political party or independent candidate is utopian, therefore rejecting democracy. What should replace it?

Watson makes many criticisms of political systems and ideologies, but he never presents a plausible alternative, or any way to get his vision implemented.  He's just a nay-sayer.

RE

The whole point here is to get rid of Utopian thinking, not to replace Utopian vision with an equally untethered Utopian vision.
Title: Re: Ships in Horrible Storms
Post by: Ashvin on October 28, 2020, 05:03:07 PM
What ideology were the cities nuked under?

The ideology of displaying a huge show of power to an ally in a war that is ending because you are already preparing for the new war with the former ally that's about to begin. It only makes logical sense, don't you see?

Quote
How is a monarchy in Japan a rationalistic ideology?


Why can't a monarchy subscribe to rationalist ideology? Japan was clearly pursuing their own Utopian vision in the far East, and they committed horrendous atrocities in China in their attempts to achieve it.

Quote
How is the Ottoman Empire in ww1 not a caliphate and subject to rationalisticism or nihilisticism?

Why not? Modern (post 15th century) Islamic cultures have had a repeated tendency of envisioning the establishment of global religious utopia. After all that's why it became the Ottoman Empire.

 
Quote
What you are saying is making election promises by any political party or independent candidate is utopian, therefore rejecting democracy. What should replace it?

No, simply endorsing incremental change through political policies is not a vision of materialist perfection.