Michael Tsarion on Race, Jordan Peterson, and Why Conspiracy Work is Spiritual Work |372|

Discussion in 'Skeptiko Shows' started by Alex, Feb 6, 2018.

  1. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,118
    I think he recognises things that others miss - such as the fact that you have to reach out to try to solve problems like NK, and that exporting most of the jobs (aka Free Trade) is a recipe for misery among the section of the population known in the US as the deplorables.
    By far the greatest disrespect I see right now, is disrespect towards a duly elected President.
    Well reporters have been extraordinarily rude to him, and he gives as good as he gets. I am sure that if you were to meet him, and not be rude to him, he would be polite in return. You see Jim and I see a man who almost certainly did not collude with Russia, but an attempt was made to frame him with that accusation (you should keep an eye on the #QAnon thread). Doesn't that amount to Treason? Wouldn't you be angry if someone tried to frame you?

    I mean sure teach your children to behave better, but really this amounts to staying out of politics. I remember my mother's advice to my brother (who expressed an interest in politics) to keep out of it because it is a dirty game. If I had children, I'd probably give them the same advice
    Well we both agree, there are examples on both sides, but the extraordinarily high-minded attitude of the left, is I think analogous to US preachers - simply not real. They will talk about racism while calling someone a 'brown slave', promote #MeToo while physically and psychologically abusing women. Doesn't all that make you wonder just how much of the political Left is genuine?

    You also need to think - how many senior Democrats really knew about this guy, if Trump - a private citizen back in 2013 - felt confident to put out a tweet like that? A large number of Democrats have clearly agreed - actively or passively - to try to force out DT by whatever means, although he is basically doing no more than implement the policies that he campaigned on. Back then, they had a chance to campaign on their policies, and didn't manage to persuade enough voters of their views. In normal times, they would have drawn in after defeat to work out where they went wrong - not attack the man selected by the people.

    For some reason almost all the media are heavily biassed towards the Democrats (i.e. not just anti-Trump) because they could investigate some of the senior Democrats. I mean, a political party that is not 'policed' by the media will very rapidly go bad.

    David
     
  2. Hurmanetar

    Hurmanetar New

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2015
    Messages:
    2,359
    Home Page:
    Wow this became DT thread 2.0.

    So glad I dumped Trump after he bombed Syria the first time.

    What appeared to be an outsider coming in to fuck with the cabal turned out to be merely a turf war between rival gangs... Globalist Trotskyites (Obama/Hitlery/MSM) and Globalist Fascist Zionists (Trump/Bibi). MIGA (Make Israel Great Again).

    Still glad I voted for him only because his win validated the "alternative" narrative... sadly that narrative was just a vehicle of convenience which he hijacked in order to win and then left smoking in the ditch immediately after inauguration.
     
    Laird, Trancestate and LetsEat like this.
  3. LetsEat

    LetsEat Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2016
    Messages:
    351
    Overly punchy threads like this really make the forum a drag to read. It looks like to me that people are taking out their frustrations on strawmen. Lets all try to treat each other with respect.
     
    Hurmanetar likes this.
  4. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,118
    Except that IMHO these were essentially staged - very few if any people were hurt, it would seem the Russians were informed in advance of the targets, so everyone could move out of the way, and the Russians are still hopefully getting Syria back under control. Peace is always going to be better than a religiously inspired civil war.

    David
     
  5. Hurmanetar

    Hurmanetar New

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2015
    Messages:
    2,359
    Home Page:
    ...it was last year when he said... "even beautiful little babies..." that I puked in my mouth a little and gave up all hope.

    I understand that the attacks were mainly symbolic and that Russia was warned. It doesn't make it any better. I don't buy the 4D chess theory. Even if he was playing 4D chess, being an actor and going along with paper thin lies and false flag attacks is not what we elected him to do. It completely destroys any vestige of credibility both on the international stage and at home. Israel wants Assad out so Trump wants Assad out. That is all there is to it. ... IMHO... but what do I know? :)
     
    Laird, LetsEat and Trancestate like this.
  6. Michael Larkin

    Michael Larkin Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,030
    If I read you right, you don't care about effectiveness as much as behaviour. Presumably, you won't be politically motivated, so much as motivated by the character of individual politicians, is that right? So would you be as anti-Clinton as you currently are Anti-Trump? She too is allegedly an egotistical liar -- and much worse, a warmonger, thereby responsible for the deaths of many thousands of men, women and children.

    What's to stop the US from closing all its overseas military bases and concentrating only on defence within its own borders, instead of meddling in the affairs of people with dusky complexions on the pretext that their countries are somehow vital to US homeland security?

    It's one thing to speak of grabbing pussies, and another to be out and about fomenting mass carnage, which is what many maintain Hillary Clinton would be doing now if she had the chance. Maybe you share with me a disdain for her personal behaviour, but much more than that, for her track record of ineffectiveness as a politician? If so, we needn't argue. But, I can't get past the fact that you have implied you care less for effectiveness than personal morality. A cynic (not me, naturally) might conclude that the lives of many thousands don't matter as much as who presidents shag, or how many lies they tell.

    To me, this seems a curious inversion of morality that some might hold up as hypocritical, or worse, stupid. Speaking personally, I wish all politicians were both personally moral and politically effective -- good luck finding one, of the left, right or centre, who is or was.

    In the real world, politicians (and in general, people of power and influence) are usually (and almost necessarily) immoral rogues: to succeed in the system we've created and put up with, it's very hard for them to be otherwise. One can only hope that despite their moral failings, their wish to be remembered as effective in producing more good than ill will translate into reality.

    That's where the rubber meets the road; I do hope that you don't believe that only a Democrat could possibly be politically effective. Or, for that matter, a Republican. JFK, when asked why he was such a womaniser, candidly replied that he couldn't help himself. Had he not been assassinated, he might have gone on to be the most effective president of a mixed bunch. He made a good start by resisting the hawks in Washington over the Russian mIssile crisis. Without him, we might already have had World war III. Much as I'd like for him to have been more judicious where he placed his plonker, in the great scheme of things, many of us are alive today only because he was politically effective.

    Who knows -- many of us might still be alive tomorrow should Trump prove to be effective despite his many failings. For the moment, I for one am reserving judgement.
     
    Charlie Primero likes this.
  7. Laird

    Laird Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,300
    How about this guy? Pro-Life Congressman Tim Murphy Resigns After Allegedly Asking Mistress to Get an Abortion

    The Republican party seems no less prone to puritanical crusade(r)s than the Democratic party - it's just that its form of puritanism is "family values". Its members get caught out plenty in hypocrisy over this. You mention televangelists who condemn sexual immorality and then get caught with prostitutes, but you could equally well have mentioned anti-gay Republican crusaders who get caught soliciting or engaging in gay sex. And it seems likely that the majority of those televangelists would identify as Republicans anyway.

    You seem to be suggesting or at least strongly implying that the Republican party is fundamentally different in this respect. Are you? I mean, off the top of my head I can think of the Kenneth Starr investigation and the "birthers" as two examples on the other side - examples indicative of a Republican "willing[ness] to do whatever it takes to seize power, even if that includes bringing down a duly elected [Democrat] president".

    Just to be clear: I'm not contesting that the Democrats have their faults. I'm simply questioning your apparent unwillingness to acknowledge faults on the Republican side, and especially in the current president.

    Reducing the danger of another world war would be worth remembering him for. But if he's so concerned about reducing the danger of another world war, then why did he propose a huge increase in US military spending? How is increasing the capacity for war consistent with reducing its risk?

    Nothing that I can think of. It's an excellent idea, and I hope that it is on the President's agenda - but is it? Not a rhetorical question - I genuinely don't know the answer. It does seem at least to be inconsistent with proposing to increase military spending though. Surely closing overseas bases would reduce military spending?
     
  8. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,118
    Well, I don't think Donald Trump is quite like any recent president (we probably all agree abou tthat :) )- he is no more Democrat than he is Republican. In order not to be left in the wasteland at the time of the election - another Jill Stein, if you like - he had to align himself with the Republicans, but there are those in his adopted party that hate his guts. Commentators have often said that the parties had grown together so that little choice existed - particularly as the Democrats became more militaristic - and Donald Trump really offers a new approach.
    Clearly he has had to fend off a lot of political attacks from all sides. In the early days he could probably have been easily ousted. However, I think his aim is to do deals - ultimately with Russia itself - deals that will reduce the weaponry. Now the things he said in the campaign are gradually starting to happen, and the NK changes seem to be becoming more solid. I strongly hope there will be a series of new agreements that will reduce tensions. I keep my fingers crossed regarding the Middle East. I know that on the campaign he did say that NATO was obsolete and that we could do a deal with Russia. He clearly understood that the situation in Ukraine/Crimea isn't really how it is normally represented.
    Well Trump has done some curious things that are clearly designed to shut up his critics at home. The two Syrian 'attacks' are of exactly this kind. Rather than engage in a complex argument as to which side in Syria did what, he reminded everyone what it felt like at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis (I am old enough to remember that clearly) and everyone was then relieved when he did something symbolic. He even managed to pull the same trick twice! I think if you want to know what Trump wants to achieve in the medium term, you should listen to his campaign rhetoric.
    Honestly, I think he had no choice. If he had just said he didn't believe the Syrians did those attacks (I don't - it would have been totally against their interests) a lot of Republicans would have joined with eager Democrats and forced him from power. Somehow he seemed to even keep his credibility abroad. I was expecting the BBC to point out scornfully how pointless those attacks were, but amazingly they didn't - the vision of nuclear annihilation seemed to knock common sense into them for a short period.

    Maybe he can play 4D chess - but he certainly pulled a stunt that was totally unpredictable, and worked - twice! Hurmanetar, I am pretty sure you know a lot of the story in Syria, the fact that the White Helmets are really part of the terrorist forces armed by the US (much akin to ISIS) and that they would gas their 'own' people at the drop of a hat if they could gain advantage from it. I am pretty sure the president knew that too, so before you blame him, I think you really should explain what he should have done instead of his 4D castling move!

    Remember that President Eisenhower famously spoke of the Military Industrial complex, and maybe it takes 4D chess to break that stranglehold.

    David
     
    Charlie Primero likes this.
  9. Laird

    Laird Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2015
    Messages:
    1,300
    David, no offence, but your response seems mostly to be avoidance. I'll sum up why as follows. You made three responsive comments. Here are my paraphrasings and contexts for each of them, plus a final (up to now) response (i.e. mine) for each:

    1. David: The Democrats are willing to do whatever it takes to seize power, including unseating elected Republican presidents.
      Laird: Sure, but so are the Republicans - e.g. see the Kenneth Starr investigation and the "birthers".
      David: Donald Trump is neither Democrat nor Republican (though he allied himself with Republicans for expediency).
      Laird: Uh, assuming that's even true, how is it in any way relevant to the point at issue? Are you conceding the point? i.e. that Republicans are as guilty of doing whatever it takes to seize power as Democrats.
    2. David: Donald Trump wants to be remembered for reducing the risk of another world war.
      Laird: A laudable aim, but how is increased military spending consistent with reduced risk of war?
      David: [Rambles and avoids the question other than (and I'm trying to be fair) to suggest Donald's intention to do deals, especially with Russia, to reduce weaponry.]
      Laird: Uh, that doesn't answer my question. To repeat: how is increased military spending consistent with reduced risk of war?
    3. Michael: Is there anything wrong with the USA closing overseas military bases?
      Laird: No! It's a great idea. But is it really on Donald Trump's agenda, and if so, how is it compatible with his proposal to increase military spending?
      David: [Rambles irrelevantly re Syria, the Cuban Missile Crisis, and Donald Trump's campaign rhetoric.]
      Laird: Dude, seriously? How does that in any way answer my question? Can you please stay on point? Here are a couple of follow-up questions: after over a year in office, how many overseas military bases has Donald Trump closed so far? And what schedule is there for (further) closures?

    In addition, David, you failed to respond to my point that Republicans are just as much "puritanical crusaders" as are Democrats (albeit that the Republican crusade is over "family values"), and that, per the example I provided of Congressman Tim Murphy, your claim that members of the GOP who have had to resign in disgrace were not participating in a puritanical crusade is false. David, do you concede this point?

    David, if you are to respond again, please address the actual point(s).

    Addendum: David, you wrote of Donald Trump that:

    Oh? And how do you propose that that could have happened? That is to say, by which legal means?
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2018
    dpdownsouth likes this.
  10. Hurmanetar

    Hurmanetar New

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2015
    Messages:
    2,359
    Home Page:
    I don't see how bombing Syria eased tensions in the region! It seems like it was a sign alright... a sign to the zionists/neo-cons/deep-state that he intended to make good on his other campaign promises ("at least take the oil!"). Who was relieved? The MSM which is an extension of the CIA... and John McCain... I remember he said something with a smug smile like "order has been restored in Washington" or something like that right before we bombed Syria the first time. It was a sign to Israel to step up military action in the region... It was a sign to Russia that we're f'kn crazy, so go home.

    Of course he did... we elected him because he appeared to not give a damn about appeasing the corrupt interests in Washington.

    That would have been a far better outcome. At least he would have gone down in history as a martyr (political or otherwise) for telling the truth at a critical moment in history and resisting to the bitter end.

    They are all (BBC, CNN, etc) extensions of the military intelligence... they are all in place for propaganda purposes... to keep people shooting in the right direction. Of course the BBC would be as happy as Brian Williams about the "beautiful weapons" raining down on Syria.

    define: worked. ... Israel is basically green lighted to go to war with Syria (and Iran) now. They are stepping up military actions in the region. We're continuing to protect ISIS. We're continuing to destabilize Syria. Tensions with Russia continue to rise. No thinking person around the world will trust us anymore. Are you saying it worked because we're suddenly good buddies with dictator Kim?

    Tell the truth.

    The MIC is just an amplification via technology of the same problems that have always existed throughout history: corruption of hierarchy through lack of truth and lack of empathy. To defeat it we need truth and networking. We need someone to ascend the hierarchy and chop off the giant's head. Everyone thought Donald was our David based on his rhetoric, but now he's there and he's just the new boss same as the old boss - screwing around with Bathsheba and sending his men out to die for him when it was time for kings to go to war. This is not to say we need to do away with hierarchical power, but it has to be balanced and kept in check to prevent eventual nuclear annihilation.
     
    Vortex, Trancestate and dpdownsouth like this.
  11. Silence

    Silence Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2016
    Messages:
    347
    You didn't. You just created a nice strawman though. What I believe is that effectiveness and behavior aren't mutually exclusive.

    I'm also not affiliated with either party. (Another strawman you seemed to create.)

    I happen to agree with your sentiment regarding the lack of quality men and women in the political environment. Unfortunately, it seems the environment favors those who's most motivating trait is ambition for power/fame. Not sure what there is to do about it. I'm afraid it "is what it is".
     
  12. Silence

    Silence Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2016
    Messages:
    347
    All bold for that one huh? :)

    We'll agree to disagree. I think you are spending too much time focusing on a small, but likely vocal if you go looking for them, minority. I live here and the "disrespect" being shown Trump isn't any more than what was shown to Obama, Bush, and Clinton. It simply changes population subsets depending on who's in office.
     
    Hurmanetar likes this.
  13. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,118
    Well OK that is the nub of our difference - I'd rather he ducks and weaves and gets somewhere - you would rather he hoes down as a martyr, achieving nothing.

    David
     
  14. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,118
    Well in the early stages it wasn't clear what effect Mueller would have. Gradually it has become clear that certain people in the DOJ and the FBI were corrupt and have been forced out. Follow Jim Smith for a few more details.

    Laird, you and I are having a discussion, I am not being cross-examined by you - I answer as I see fit. Mention of the Cuban Missile Crisis is at the heart of this because it points the way to what could happen in the worst case. You might escape because you live in Australia, or it might just take a little longer for the radioactivity to reach you.

    David
     
  15. Silence

    Silence Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2016
    Messages:
    347
    And again, the false binary choice here. Are there not other choices which could include effective leadership outcomes with ethical, honest, and polite behavior?
     
  16. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,118
    Trump was faced with the following dilemma:

    1) Claimed chemical attacks in Syria were probably faked, or inflicted by Assad's opponents in an attempt to bring the US into the war in Syria in a big way. What possible use would it have been for. This was corroborated by Robert Fisk, a well respected reporter who went to the area in question:

    http://eaworldview.com/2018/04/uk-journalist-given-access-to-douma-to-deny-chemical-attacks/

    2) For some reason this aspect of the various chemical attacks has never been explored by the mainstream media.

    3) The current hatred for Trump in the US means that there seem to be politicians who would prefer war in Syria, rather than follow Trumps desire to leave Syria alone.

    4) Likewise, the 'chemical attack' in the UK also seems to have been faked in some way:

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/03/the-novichok-story-is-indeed-another-iraqi-wmd-scam/

    (Craig Murray is a former UK ambassador who resigned his post on a matter of principle).

    Given this situation, President Trump's action was to use a form of military force that did not hurt anyone (I think) and really made no difference on the ground. This had the effect of defusing the situation and avoiding an obvious attempt to bring the US into serious conflict in Syria - possibly escalating into conflict with Russia.

    David
     
  17. Hurmanetar

    Hurmanetar New

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2015
    Messages:
    2,359
    Home Page:
    Well that's not the totality of our difference... you believe he still has good intentions and his ends are justifying his means. I don't believe he ever had good intentions and it is business as usual in Washington. The leftist Trotskyites constant attacks is what gives him right cover to "duck and weave" out of his campaign promises and the MIC is happier than a pig in slop.
     
    Trancestate likes this.
  18. David Bailey

    David Bailey Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2013
    Messages:
    4,118
    Well, of course you might be right (BTW what does MIC stand for?) but at the very least:

    1) The hero you thought you had would have been vulnerable to the chemical attack scam.
    2) To persuade me, you would have to show me at least one thing (other than Syria) where you think he has seriously deviated.

    He couldn't have promised symbolic attacks in his campaign, could he - the tactic would have been neutralised immediately.

    I mean, I think you and I agree that the chemical attacks were not done by Syria, or on behalf of the Assad regime. I think we also know that one way or another, that fact is being filtered out from as many people's awareness as possible. The news does not discuss it, the reporters don't ask the obvious questions, etc. Given that situation extraordinarily unorthodox situation, the president has to use some equally unorthodox responses.

    When I said 'duck and weave' I did not mean with respect to his campaign promises, I meant in dealing with the 'Deep State' that want to trip him up.

    David
     
  19. LetsEat

    LetsEat Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2016
    Messages:
    351
    lets not forget that Trump has greenlit hidden troop movements and unleashed generals (many of which are probably CIA/deepstate who he claimed to be against) to do whatever they want. Now we're just barely hearing we have been fighting a war in Africa due to some leaks.

    Trump was supposed to drain the swamp, instead he is merely passing even more illegal war powers to the next president and I very much doubt we will get another 'outsider' in the chair.
     
    Hurmanetar and Trancestate like this.
  20. LetsEat

    LetsEat Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2016
    Messages:
    351
    He could have waited an entire day before bombing the sites to let the incoming impartial investigators to examine the site, and then supported the results in both cases.
     

Share This Page