Akemrelax

Thanks! The articles are interesting. Will definitely check out the video.

I mean, now that I look around the forum I am starting to get your point. It's not really a "discussion" if only some particular point of views are discussed and taken seriously. To the right wing's credit, I do find their positions to be very understandable. I think it's understandable for citizens of a country to want lower immigration when the demographics are changing so fast. It's not that they are necessarily racists, it's that the culture and the atmosphere around where they live has changed so much in such a short span of time. Any country will have a similar or a bigger reaction if people who speak different languages and look different immigrate there in large numbers. It's understandable for people to want to stop illegal immigration. It's understandable for people to get annoyed with excessive virtue signalling when we are probably living in the least racist time in history, they probably think these things will auto-correct over time. Overall I don't think there is that big of a difference between the Left and the Right, the media is definitely sensationalizing it for views, and that's why USA gets presidents like Trump. I don't like Trump and his administration though, I think they are incompetent idiots pandering to racists. Conservatives deserve a better leadership. I find Canadian conservatives are way more civil. Although I am a progressive, I think most conservatives are normal people who happen to have a more pragmatic and cautious view of things. The US states are divided pretty clearly into red and blue, so the two parties can enact their respective policies in their states without much conflict with each other. If you think about it, the difference between the two is that they disagree on some social policies and some boring economic policies, that's it, nothing to get emotional or worked up about. I was taught to deal with situations as they currently are, if they change then that's great, if not then that's okay too; I don't expect the government or society to change any time soon, it's better to focus on the truly important things in life.

The comments under the video say that Leo is misrepresenting Libertarianism and that in actually he is describing anarchism or anarchy-capitalism. What are your thoughts on this? I think the video applies to everyone who supports “small government”.

Thanks, that’s what I was thinking. I’m not talking about USA civil war here. Leo answered it. The question was why anyone would outlaw slavery in the first place. The answer is most people simply move up the spiral which expands their identity to include slaves. Of course the slave holders won’t move up, but most people in society will.

But that doesn’t explain why a society will abolish slavery (if slaves make 15-20%). Slaves can’t fight because they are low in number and don’t have the means. What survival advantage would whites gain by freeing slaves? Only reason I could think of is that because of affluence the whites moved up the spiral and their identity expanded, so they thought enslaving people was “wring”.

@Leo Gura There is something which doesn’t make sense to me. So say in the beginning a group of friends created a gang/syndicate to oppress the people around them. Now they have monopoly of force in that community, and a hierarchy. Basically a tribe. Now the question is why would they give up that “privileged” position in the hierarchy? Because we see all societies democratize overtime. It this where spiral dynamics comes in? Do they realize over time that a blue society simply works better for most amount of people than a red/purple society? Also, you should do a video about Leadership. In your recent videos you mentioned some things about leadership which shattered a lot of my preconceived notions about it which I picked up from my culture. Now that I think about it leadership is not about being the most “moral” and “virtuous” person, it seems to be more about “selfishness”, at least at lower stages.

Soviet Union was not green. There, you fundamentally misunderstand the spiral.

Yes.

@louhad ??

You are making gross generalizations: Muslims = stage blue coming to convert us. Left = radical stalinist communists. I don’t blame you because that’s a basic reaction everywhere in the world (right wing reaction). But this won’t fly in a spiritual community, we know that we don’t have that many right wing ideas here, but I think most people are okay with that. You can still use the other sub forums if you want.

Actually the Hindi word would be poostuk. Pretty sure kitab has foreign origins, maybe Arabic or Farsi.

Yea, not to mention you have to enjoy the violence. I'm sure a lot of the fighters use their primal instincts to win a fight, which is different from a soccer player. A soccer player might be really passionate about winning but their primal instincts don't really come to surface because their life is not in danger. I would say primal instincts are inherently red.

@Serotoninluv Well, it seems Lincoln Project is a bunch of warmongering neo-conservatives.

Not to speak on Leo's behalf but I'm pretty sure he is condemning him exactly for talking about IQ being related to race. Not really, historically Indians had a appreciation for dark skin tones, evident by their dark skinned gods and goddesses. It would be foolish to think that European colonialism and Muslim conquests (who were fair skinned) had no impact on beauty standards.

Hey, Every time I go on YouTube I see one of his songs on the top trending list. Why are people listening to him? I find it disgusting that people idolize such people? Where is the outrage about him? He is a sex offender, pedophile, felon, and a vile human being. Why is no one saying anything especially in today's me-too, politically correct, time period? This is what Wikipedia says about him: "In 2015, 6ix9ine pled guilty to a felony count of use of a child in a sexual performance and received a four-year probation period and a 1,000-hour community service order. In 2018, he was arrested on racketeering, weapons, and drugs charges. He pled guilty to nine charges including conspiracy to commit murder and armed robbery in February 2019, and was given a two-year prison sentence after testifying for the prosecution." "Hernandez was involved in a child sexual performance charge from 2015.[41][85] In October 2015, Hernandez pled guilty to a felony count of use of a child in a sexual performance. He was charged with three counts of the offense after a February 2015 incident in which he had physical contact with a 13-year-old girl and later distributed videos of the incident online as part of a music video. Three videos are described in the criminal complaint against Hernandez. In the first, 'the child engages in oral sexual intercourse with the separately charged defendant Taquan Anderson, while the defendant, Daniel Hernandez, stands behind the child making a thrusting motion with his pelvis and smacking her on her buttocks. The child is nude in the video.' The other videos show the child sitting on Hernandez's lap while Anderson gropes her breasts, and later sitting naked across the laps of Anderson and Hernandez."

I think you assume that there is no other motivation other than competition. This is a very Blue/Orange way of looking. Look at the motivation of Jesus Christ or other historic figures, they are motivated by Love. Love, positive motivation is way stronger than negative motivation, competition.

I think what you are describing is colorism: prejudice against dark skin tones within a racial group. @Leo Gura Racism is about discrimination based on physical characteristics (skin color, eye color, features, etc.). Ethnocentrism is about discrimination based on nationality and culture (American, German, "Western", Chinese, Hindu, etc.). They usually coincide but technically I would call someone who discriminates based on physical features a racist. For example, if a Chinese person discriminates against a black person who grew up in China (aka is culturally Chinese), then I would call that racism not ethnocentrism. Of course, there are degrees to ethnocentrism and racism. Regardless, I don't think it's a good idea to confront people by calling them these names, it usually doesn't work. I do agree that world wide more than half the population is racist and ethnocentric like you described. In the USA it might be more about ethnocentrism, for example, "don't marry a black person because of cultural differences" and not "don't marry a black person because they are genetically inferior". This ethnocentrism might bring with it implicit biases (implicit racism) as well. But yea, not a good idea to confront them head on. I think if you look at history different civilizations have been at the top at different times. Maybe during the Dark Ages, the Islamic civilization of at the top, or maybe during BCE India was at the top.

@Serotoninluv Have you read any of Charles Murray's books? "The Bell Curve" perhaps?

@Serotoninluv Aren’t you a sciences professor? Does anything Stefan says hold any truth? How prevalent is this type of thinking amongst your colleagues? Do they actually study race and IQ seriously?

Yes but most people will see right through him whereas Molyneux will fool a lot more people because of his pseudoscience and calm demeanour. Molyneux can fool people like Sam Harris really easily, something Alex would not be able to do. Sure, but most people don’t agree with Molyneux, hopefully.

How so? As far as I’m aware, Alex Jones is not a racist. He never said Blacks are immutably less intelligent and have the “warrior gene”. To me that kind of racism is more dangerous than being violent. Every ideology is violent to some extent.

This ones gonna be funny.

Jordan Peterson introduces him to his audience.

I can’t believe you don’t know this. Eugenics and race and IQ has a huge audience online.

Some of you are too attached to metal. UFC is a good example of Red.