"It sounds like bullshit but it's very serious. You're (in the US) and much of the rest of the world is heading for a civil war ...Let people duke it out on their own territories. "
That's only one longer term consequence explored for a paragraph. I could have chosen nicer ones, even positive ones. "
More positive than that?!?
Sometimes when people don't behave as desired, they are being stupid and could benefit from just listening.
Sometimes when people don't behave as desired, their goals are simply not aligned with those of the critic. I think it's one of the harder things for even smart people to incorporate into their thinking. "WHY would that dummy do x when x doesn't further my goal? He is so dumb."
One man's tragically avoidable civil war is another man's
A phoenix doesn't rise out of a pile of society's feces.
It rises out of a pile of society's ashes.
for most people. But has anyone here looked at the source of communism?
The obvious answer is Marxism, based on the ((revolutionary)) philosophy of Karl Marx
It's first "in real practice" manifestation was ((Bolshevism))
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about that
that's what the communist revolutionary forces called themselves in Russia
The ones that instigated the communist rebellion and slew the Tsar, his family, and millions upon millions of people
depending on where you source info, and what timeline is presented, well over 50 million people murdered
over 50 MILLION
There are books available on the issue
there is also plenty of info available online
the source of communism is a very worthy subject to make a rabbit hole out of
Is there something we should notice from the demographics of the murdering Bolshevists?
anybody care to answer yet?
A very easy to understand summary of the yugas
Well ..... if somebody else starts a civil war, do you have to fight it for them? For either side? Supporting either side would obviously be fighting the war for it's instigator(s).
And the characterization of that paragraph was deliberately chosen to trigger readers who allow themselves to be triggered by that particular phraseology into a mindset. Fix fell for it. And you ... it could be.
Ok Here's the same paragraph written for opposite triggering:
"The downtrodden minorities have been oppressed and dis-empowered enough. Previously shoved into prisons and sent to dire schools, they are learning to stand up for themselves and no longer giving ground to rich establishment white baby boomers with fat pensions funded by loans despicably shoved onto their kids. Sure some of them say this is wrong, but they all want the money so their talk is cheap. This can't go on and it will soon come to a head and lessons will be taught to the owners of the system."
Oh dear. Did that pull all the bad triggers for DOTS readers? Wrong audience folks! Sorry!!! What about this instead:
"First the neocons took Iraq under false pretenses about non existent weapons. Then the weapons wer found and concealed because they were the wrong make and source and that would have embarrassed the neocons and killed the story. This caused an expensive stalemate in Iraq. So they tried to start a capture of Ukraine. That failed. Messy stalemate there but better than not trying, right! Then they tried to take Syria. That failed too. Afghanistan ... not much progress and it will take decades to abstract those natural resources. Can't be done quickly. Neocons and family are signing contracts of asset ownership as fast as possible, but if the troops are forced to leave those neocon apparachik contracts will be toast the day after. They can't get done what they used to be able to do. Support for their stunts is falling gently to lower levels. They are being shuffled towards the sidelines while still being capable of dangerous stunts. But their control is reducing. the financial sector used to back their threats but now it's weakened and Wall St is being regarded as a cost centre by bigger money that can no longer be supported. Politicians are having to regard big financial sector funds as being helpful (as they always were!) but a now also a possible cause of dangerous future criticism, future career and PR damage and possibly prison sentences if regime changes do somehow come about."
How was that one? It plays to the TFMR-ite republertarianism with a little Rothbard-ish anti monetarism thrown in for good measure! Feel good? Riiight!!!! Lets's go! This post is getting there now!
But they are all simply word constructs and reality never altered one tiny little bit. Why should my, or your feelings alter when nothing changed. If MLK came back and spoke to us all, would his dream become yours?
Words and their control over the gullible. People will give their lives fighting for somebody who lied to them about what was right and worth fighting for. Always will. Always have done. Me when my pal signs up to the army, and I'm not in that wonderful institution, hje is not the quality of a pal he was before. he might turn on me now and say it's not his decision! Decisions ... Why do we use other peoples decisions instead of forming our own?
Because inside we are gullible and have the intellect of a seven year old WHEN we hand OUR decisions over to emotional stimuli. That's it plain and simple.
The paragraphs I wrote were emotive. Simple. Evaluate for yourself their effect and result. I didn't work them out, or carefully construct them, or consult my biography of Goebbels, Summers, MLK, Bandler, Grinder, Erickson, Cialdini, Machiavelli or McAlpine. I typed it up as fast as I can type, at conversational speed, with all the mistakes and lower efficiency that that entails. Spelling correction edit only.
There's no advantage in being an easy target to wind up. To trigger. To be encouraged to play somebody elses' games? Fight their battles for them to get wealthy and powerful. Give our life for their benefit? It's all downside if you or I let that happen.
Here's a fact: When anybody consciously does one thing while doing another thing at the same time. Conscious thinking mind does the intellectual job only and subconscious does everything else, and well as making you breath, sweat, keeping your heart beating etc. So if you're listening to the radio while driving you have an incredibly expert 6 year old doing all that while your frontal cortex is listening to some crap talkshow. Or the inner child is listening trustingly and innocently to the chatshow BS if you're driving a particularly difficult stretch of road and concentrating on that instead. while Now when you start thinking on something like where the money will come from for tomorrow's groceries, or when does this car need to be fuelled up adn where's the next gas station guess what? That consumes thought capacity. Your 6 -7 year old multipurpose subconscious is listening to the radio or watching the TV, even while maybe you're reading a book right in front of that TV. And it's credulous, easily fooled. A dupe. Easily converted, forever. And the problem with that is ... it's you.
So multitasking where propaganda is present is extremely bad for us.
So whenever you are doing A which required thought, everything else is being done on autopilot. And you didn't give all the instructions to your autopilot. Most of those instructions came from somebody else.
For this reason, most people are living somebody elses' life out, as instructed, and that includes the ones who claim loudly how awake they are!
That only stops when you open uip a new department in your brain. It fits into a new gap opened up between conscious thinker and subconscious doer of the other 99.9% of things. It observes both and functions as an alarm system for conscious thinker that something is being missed. It says: "Stop, play the recording back, it's not right, the instructions are either old, out of date, or slipped in from outside without my authorization. Adjust the autopilot instructions when this matter comes up again in the future. OK. Proceed." It's a triggering alarm.
And that doesn't even begin to start to sort out ego problems. But it's a big start nonetheless. People die for not having such a critical habit. Order followers are trained to not have it. Soldiers can't start a debate when the officer orders to charge towards the bullets! Do what the "expert" says! Just as we were and are trained and conditioned to disregard our internal critical watcher, or made to not even create one as we grew up and self-learned how to think. No lessons on that in school.
It's nothing about doing the right thing, or standing up for yourself or any of that BS malarkey.
It's nothing about standing up against other people. Either they are bigger and stronger and you stand up to get a beating and pay a cost, or you do as you're told, pay a different cost (which may be the same or lower) and avoid the beating. That's weighing costs not signing up for someone's cause! Unprogrammed thought is required to make good evaluations in such times and places. Most people are distracted by something and subconscious does it, according to the auto programming instructions. Whose instructions? Well that varies more than just about everybody thinks.
Open up that gap. Step out of conscious into the gap. Be watcher of both selves both outer thinking and inner self. Meditation helps some. The phrase mindlessness gets bandied about in connection with this but it's not quite the same.
It makes sense or it doesn't. I tried.
Rhythm and Price http://www.greenhobbymodel.com/rhythmnprice.html
This analyst - global markets
and now, more deep thoughts:
I would say there is a lot of truth in there.
I'll write something more specific, but my first thoughts are to address the examples, and I know that's not the guts of what you mean.
stackaloha wrote: Wordplay...
No. Not wordplay. Wordplay is voluntary. As in believing and going along with a conman or salesman's presentation.
I'm talking involuntary.
But don't let me spoil your day or divert your attention. Carry on connecting your dots.
thanks for your concern
my day is going quite well
but as far as I can tell
all speech is voluntary
whether affected by external influences of not. but let's be honest, everyone has both external influences and emotions
and (no offense intended) but as far as being influenced by a conman or salesman?
I'm not the one selling anything
I'm just trying to red-pill some people
like you said though:
"don't let me spoil your day" sir
Green Lantern wrote: Stackhola, Apologies to you also. That bit about the Fed and fake money, and none of it belonging to the people. Was sheer brilliance. You exceeded your GED educated and your homelessness. Where did you find that list? You obviously have a handle on what's going on. Thanks for sharing! DOTs is back to it's high level commentary on the deep financial shannigans of the cartel.
Apologies to you also. That bit about the Fed and fake money, and none of it belonging to the people. Was sheer brilliance.
You exceeded your GED educated and your homelessness. Where did you find that list?
You obviously have a handle on what's going on. Thanks for sharing!
DOTs is back to it's high level commentary on the deep financial shannigans of the cartel.
maybe I should let this kind of insult slide...
You are knocking me for being alone and homeless at age 15?
doing the best I could and getting a GED?
Is this a road you have traveled sir?
Do you have any expertise on this?
are you putting me "on discount" because I spent time being homeless after being kicked out and abandoned after rejecting my ultra-religious upbringing at age 15? I think it was fairly brave of me tbh. It certainly wasn't easy... I can tell you that.
I have not and am not inclined to give to many details about the why's of it
I can say
You have derided and insulted me previously in such a way that leads me to believe you generally don't like Blue-Collar people...
Well, GL, I can tell you that us Blue-Collar people are my favorite kind of people. Although I generally get along with any/all kinds.
Very judgmental for such a person such as yourself that tries to present as "enlightened" .
smdh at your self-righteousness
Redpill away. My day is over and it's evening here.
Nice car by the way, in your avatar.
Why exactly did you see in a Hitler-Porsche collaboration car type, so as to choose it as representation of your username?
Just curious ...
After we figure out your early Nazi car preferences we can move onto the Marxist and Bolshevick sources and origins you want to talk about so much. They're all out of a certain era for some reason. If you're not aged over a hundred years old and reminiscent of youth, you are fascinated with those times, eh?
PS: I saw the big rear window. It's not an early type. But hey - just pulling your leg with some wordy words. And you're redpilled, so you never got annoyed, right?
I wouldn't be needling you back to see if you can take what you dish out .....
Actually I like the whole presentation of that "rough road" warning sign on the wall, along with the way the VW and the horizontal stabilizer were integrated into the quirky wall and roof.
If they had used an Aston Martin in their creative bit of construction, then my avatar would include that instead
Edit: Just saw your edit. I can take it. Needle away if that's what you want to do
just don't go mentioning to the hippies in the USA that they are driving "hitler-mobiles"
because they get really fragile really quickly lol
"After we figure out your early Nazi car preferences we can move onto the Marxist and Bolshevick sources and origins you want to talk about so much. They're all out of a certain era for some reason. If you're not aged over a hundred years old and reminiscent of youth, you are fascinated with those times, eh?"
thank you for your permission to post freely, wasn't sure I could carry on without it! Much obliged!
ps: kinda funny that the quote of you above is a gross misrepresetation of the timeline that encompasses all of the questions I have presented... good one bro
You made me think of a video: Porsche Vs Volkswagon Beetle (Top Gear)
Sort of triggered the memory of it in my mind for some strange unaccountable way!
Spoiler Alert: The Beetle wins! But you'll have to watch it anyway to see how.....
1)Read Macleans magazine from the early 1900's to see who funded
2)"She loves her husband's money, but she knows that only the fascist can conquer her tilt"
3)The pen is mightier than the sword
Silver66 Rage against the dying of the light
I loved that essay.
If I fell for something, it was a lesson learned. Interestingly enough, I think my reply incorporated both of your versions.
I love the imagery of driving while listening to the radio, in fact, most of that post hit pretty close to home for me.
I noticed about a year or so ago, that listening to a propagandist like Rush Limbaugh, while at work, or driving, didn't inform me of anything, and literally fed me false beliefs that needed to be challenged later. I think you nailed it when you pointed out that this becomes particularly relevant when I'm not really even paying attention to the narrative. It just seeps in.
This past year, I've been carefully selecting what it is that I choose to listen to, both day and night.
My iPhone transmits via Bluetooth podcasts of my choosing, to my headphones while I am mindlessly going about my day, and of course, you all know that I am a YouTube addict at night. But here's the thing, these are conscious decisions that I now make, as opposed to choosing a menu from pre-approved indoctrination platforms via the radio or television.
When you ask "which side would I fight for", presupposes that I have to choose a side. I know that I don't.
I'd say that over the past year or so, I've become decidedly less alarmist, as most of the news we are fed is clearly designed to incite fear.
Knowing full well that that is probably the most un-resourceful mental state possible, I seek ways to avoid that.
There's plenty of reasons to stay positive,
For one, it promotes sound judgment, and good mental health, but additionally, there's plenty of evidence to support a view that does not include Armageddon, or the end of the world.
I distinctly remember trying to decide if we would be a offed by a nuclear cataclysm, or sky daddy's revenge.
My current world view doesn't even consider either scenario a possibility.
So, now I just seek out ways to live long, and prosper, and help others to do the same.
As I'm sure you both are well aware, your posts were sailing clear over my own head just a couple of years ago.
Now either you guys have made a conscious effort to dumb it down for guys like me, or I have covered some ground in catching up. Most of the time, you guys make sense now. Although admittedly, I don't necessarily always agree.
Then again, I haven't found anybody that would fit that category.
Many of the narratives I found senseless two years ago, now hold deep meaning for me.
Incorporating these new concepts into my life will take some time, but at least I have that as an intended goal.
It sure does keep life interesting...
We must be on the same wavelength, I pulled out my Chinese translator, and got the same result.
She loves her husband's money, but she knew that only fascists to conquer her tilt.
"Well ..... if somebody else starts a civil war, do you have to fight it for them? For either side? Supporting either side would obviously be fighting the war for it's instigator(s)."
No. No. No. No more of that. We choose to be on our own side.
"Ok Here's the same paragraph written for opposite triggering:"
I do have to address the examples briefly even though they are not the heart of it. None of the three is triggering in the least. Each of the three is a simple observation containing essential truth and a resultant prediction. You could add many more from various perspectives and not lose any truth or validity. In details, sure, the various narratives will rely on conflicting details and interpretations, but in essence, they can each occupy a space in their respective person(s) and all be true. Or true enough to the respective groups that it makes no difference. Now maybe here is where I differ, not sure if others feel some need to weigh those perspectives against each other and reconcile some accommodation or determine a 'correct' one. They seem to try to create some fusion of interests or whittle away, discrediting and burying, conflicting interests to come to a 'universal' interest. I don't because they are separate people with divergent interests. I respect that. And each group's interests are legitimate. Divergent, yet legitimate, interests. The presence of conflict does not necessarily mean that either side's interests are illegitimate. It's the efforts to 'fudge' all of those various interests into one (Amerikwa for example), that is illegitimate.
"If MLK came back and spoke to us all, would his dream become yours?"
To be fair, "his dream" wasn't actually his the first time around. He was a plagiarist, and he had Communist handlers ushering him along.
"Me when my pal signs up to the army, and I'm not in that wonderful institution, hje is not the quality of a pal he was before. he might turn on me now and say it's not his decision! Decisions ... Why do we use other peoples decisions instead of forming our own?"
I'm not trying to be a smartass, but for brevity I'll use the same formulation from my other post:
'Look at my buddy. Making HIS choice to join himself to something HE considers bigger than himself. Now he's not as good of a friend to ME. He is so dumb.'
"There's no advantage in being an easy target to wind up. To trigger. To be encouraged to play somebody elses' games? "
Absolutely not any advantage. Huge understatement. Triggerability removes IQ points. However, above applies. So much 'these fools are playing somebody else's game' really just means 'these fools are not playing MY game'. I don't mean you personally, just in general. Especially in a place where too many of us 'have seen through the lies' and yet have all seen something different there.
Here's a fact. When anybody consciously does one thing while doing another thing at the same time. Conscious thinking mind down the intellectual job and subconscious does everything else, and well as making you breath, sweat, and keeping your heart beating. So if you're listening to the radio while driving you have an incredibly expert 6 year old doing all that while your frontal cortex is listening to some crap talkshow. Now when you start working out something hard, like where the money will come from for tomorrow's groceries, or when does this car need to be fuelled up adn where's the next gas station guess what? Your 6 -7 year old multipurpose subconscious is listening to the radio or watching the TV, even if you're reading a book right in front of that TV. And it's credulous, easily fooled. A dupe. Easily converted, forever. And the problem with that is ... it's you.
Powerful. Feels true. I'm sure in many ways it is, but perhaps not in a way that relates to the 'objectionable' stances that meet so much resistance. Because most opinions I have run contrary to the bulk of messages I've been given. Not in alignment with them. I was properly trained, like most, by every teacher, professor, after-school TV special, PSA announcement, newscast, movie, pop culture, music, HR department seminar, government, corporation, advertisement, etc ... to be a good little egalitarian. As was everyone here. And I was. When you write about brains becoming zombies off of a diet of other people's interests fed to them so continually that they don't even feel it going down, I think, false modesty aside, I'm the LAST person here that can be reasonably accused of that.
"Soldiers can't start a debate when the officer orders to charge towards the bullets! Do what the "expert" says!"
Thank goodness no.
Here's where I get to be the beneficiary of Hollywood's programming:-) "If our soldiers hadn't made such sacrifice of free will (and even life) then we Americans would have never saved the world from Nazis" To argue against me there, facts be damned, is to be immoral in 'Murrica. (that reminds me that you might or might not understand the heavy handed equality training children are raised with in the US - I guess if you had a different impression of what is taught, we could touch on that in more detail).
'war is hell' will lose to 'are you saying we shouldn't have fought WWII" every time.
BAH, had more, but I lost it. ...some 'good points', 'meditation is challenging, probably an indication it's good' and a few other things ... o well.
You take care too.
Odd. I got "She loved her husband's money, but she knew only fascism could conquer her inclination." Anybody here that can ask a native speaker?
I guess it's hard when studying the old memes ... especially foreign ones ... to be sure the translation is perfect. I would have assumed he'd speak Japanese anyway, tbh. Translator, maybe? Found some good Napoleonic memes as well.
stackaloha wrote: Green Lantern wrote: Stackhola, Apologies to you also. That bit about the Fed and fake money, and none of it belonging to the people. Was sheer brilliance. You exceeded your GED educated and your homelessness. Where did you find that list? You obviously have a handle on what's going on. Thanks for sharing! DOTs is back to it's high level commentary on the deep financial shannigans of the cartel. maybe I should let this kind of insult slide... You are knocking me for being alone and homeless at age 15? doing the best I could and getting a GED? Is this a road you have traveled sir? Do you have any expertise on this? are you putting me "on discount" because I spent time being homeless after being kicked out and abandoned after rejecting my ultra-religious upbringing at age 15? I think it was fairly brave of me tbh. It certainly wasn't easy... I can tell you that. I have not and am not inclined to give to many details about the why's of it I can say You have derided and insulted me previously in such a way that leads me to believe you generally don't like Blue-Collar people... Well, GL, I can tell you that us Blue-Collar people are my favorite kind of people. Although I generally get along with any/all kinds. Very judgmental for such a person such as yourself that tries to present as "enlightened" . smdh at your self-righteousness
Yep. This is the guy who berates me, lectures me, insults anyone who would even acknowledge my humanity, all about all the "hatreds" he projects onto me.
Well, if empathy like that doesn't convince me to break down and declare 'i love the multikult and the multikult loves me', 'diversity is our strength' ... what would?
I didnt' see the answer. Looks like somebody else picked up on the samething.
argentus maximus wrote: I wouldn't be needling you back to see if you can take what you dish out .....
argentus maximus wrote: That's a theme GL has introduced as a shock tool to get people to see a point which is nothing to do with what it stands for.
That's a theme GL has introduced as a shock tool to get people to see a point which is nothing to do with what it stands for.
I just need to quote a small portion for you to know which post I am referring to. First a brief reply to Sierra. His preference
Sorry you feel that way re: brevity and clarity. AM's response shows me he played the game of charades and got it all. A man can wave his arms so much in a game and almost spell it out and still loose. And his skill set has shown, he can read in between the lines, and look at a deeper level of what's going on. So I feel no need to readjust my style for individuals sake.
So very good AM. Quite good as usual when you choose that method of analysis. Not that the other doesn't have merits. I will correct one observation. Since it is about myself, I might have some insight that is more difficult to deduce but understand how you came to that conclusion.
I agree with you on how consciousness functions and I'm certainly aware of it. And my method depends on the person. Fix is a good example. They pick on his content but there is no person here that has shown a willingness to readjust/recalibrate if a better explanation presents itself. That quality is humility. The rest might not believe it especially if he is going at them. But to be able to do that in public is a sign of humility which shows advanced stages of ego dissolvement. His little esoteric quote about when the student is ready, speaks to that form of disolvement. It doesn't mean a perfect human being.
So reading this mysterious Valentines writings, I wonder how much this "monk" knew about the evolution of the soul for such alchemy to takeplace it's going to require much more heat than one can take in a single lifetime.
But that depends on what paradigm you are affiliated with when it comes to such touchy topics such as evolution of the soul.
In other cases, my method doesn't have a rats chance of working. I know that. I know the rules of engagement in business of allowing the other guy to save face. And the difference between my conversations in real life and here is that here the people here paid the entrance fee to the fairgrounds and decided they wanted to play geopolitical and financial talk games. the old guy in the coffee shop or the guy at the bar just wants to tell his story. And after a few gentle prods if you see he is immovable, you let it go. Or maybe use your technique of a subtle hint or planting a seed that might germinate some time down the road.
Rather than a strategy, it's more of a cognitive dissonance. And I'll own it. I saw it in Thoreau and I saw it in Jonathan Swifts writings. Both wrote extensively about the nature of humanity. Neither liked what they saw much. And probably some of it was their own bagage. Not that they were wrong, only in competition with it.
But why a man would play a game he is not very good at, and put more chips on the table than his hand merits, and then when it might seem like the house as a better hand, he turns over the whole table and they never show you what a poor hand they were bluffing on. And then there is just the wrong assumption of a persons cognitive ability to look at something from a different vantage point.
So not a strategy to trick the universe into moving faster. Otherwise, very good.
Most will not have trouble decoding the GL part. I do sense from the response that others might not find themselves within the commentary as with past commentaries, and it remains an amorphous reference. But I won't bear that burden.