Lews Therin

"beyond the green idea that any mention of eugenics is immoral" When green is the stage of moral relativism? You are essentially looking at one aspect of the system, "inteligence" and trying to optimize it for that, that is the the Orange way of life. I would say this idea of your is in between Blue and Orange, with shades of red, since the idea of taking what you want to optimize and enforcing on others is a low Blue, Blue/Red way of dealing with stuff. Yellow would recognize that there are too many unknown factor for this to work. Once there was this guy who raised foxes for their pelts, he tried to breed only the most docile foxes to make his work easier. In the end, the pelt of the foxes ended up changing as well, so that it was no longer the product he wanted. Same thing would probably happen with your breeding programs, not to mention other forms of backlash from the people who are being coerced. This is literally everything Yellos know NOT to do. If a yellow person wanted to prevent IQs from dropping they would first try to conduct vast researches into the cause of the problem, it might be that high IQ people are having less babies, it might have to do with pollution, it may be both. If it is true that high IQ people are having less babies, try and find out why, then make policies that fix those problems so you can align your interest of having more high IQ people to their interests, whatever those are.

Why would this be yellow?

i was waiting for him to adress the question that it seems logical that if we can't perceive nor eat it, it can't perceive nor it us, the video didn't talk about this. I went to the comments and somebody pointed it out. Not to say there are no risks, but apparently that isn't nearly as dangerous as the guy makes it seem, it won't be capable of devouring us from the inside or anything like that, it will have to find a way to build it's nutrients from inorganic matter, which is more complicated than what most simple bacteria do. We will probably still find means of having a single person be able to wipe out all life, but apparently not so fast.

Each type of measure is useful in a certain context to help with a certain issue. The problem is when people turn said measure into an ideology and try to apply it to everything else. Argentina’s problem was public debt and lack of trust in the currency. he is cutting expenses, less expenses mean more money to pay the debt, less debt makes the currency more trustworthy. There is a cost of course, less money is flowing from the government and so the economy is cooling. That doesn’t affect their capacity to make money as much because they are an exporter of food and other basic products. But it does affect the population, as agrobusiness’s money usually doesn’t circle around a lot. So he is fixing the problem, the question is if his political capital will last long enough for the debt to be paid, since an increase in poverty can make the people angry.

Dude, you are talking like a propagandist of some sort. The media? It isn't the media who is telling us this, it is the rebel leader himself, all you have to do is look at the speach he gave, that was not a secularist speach, i could easily see the ayatolah saying those exact same words when he came to power in Iran. That it is not to say it will allign with Iran, stage blue can hate stage blue just as well as any other stage, but that guy is pushing for orange values. Also, saying that a country is unique is meaningless. Afghanistan was unique, so was Iraq, so was Brazil in 1964 and germany in the 1930s. Uniqueness doesn't mean much, every person is unique, and yet the illness one can suffer, so can the rest of them.

Just to register my view, i also, as everyone else here, hope the best for the Syrian population, but i find it very hard to believe there will be any sort of democratic government there in the near future. This is not a stage orange world, it is a blue world with a few orange great powers in it, and even they aren't free of blue. Brazil had a coup attempt not even 2 years ago. Trump tried that in the US and may try again soon. Democratic institution are very hard to build and maintain, and syria would have to build them from the ground up. We saw movements that carried the banner of democracy fail time and time again to build those, so i see no reason to be very hopefull the a self-proclaimed islamist leader, who did his first official speech in a mosque filled with took great care to shove as many blue memes he could within said speech will be very devoted or even capable of building those orange, democratic institutions. But i disagree that the west wants a "weak syria", as a weak blue syriamay go back to being friends with stage blue iran. I think Israel and the US are much more worried about making sure the new rulers are west-aligned than that they get cheap oil. The iraq war happened in an era were lots of people thought "history had ended" and stage orange had won, so it was all about cheap prices. Now people are aware that stage blue is far from trancended, and so, to the measure it doesn't hinder the west's capacity to function economically, i believe most would choose to pay a price a little bit higher in order to secure allies against iran, russia and china.

@Vercingetorix What skin in the game? what did these people feel? What did they experience that would suggest trump is a better choice? Policy wise trump makes no sense, he claims he will simulataneously end inflation and create tariffs which are inflationary as well as deport immigrants, which is also inflationary. He claims he wants to stop immigrants from taking people's jobs, but he convinced republicans to vote gainst a bill that created restrictions on asylum seeking. He claim he will bring about peace, but his proposal for ukraine involves having them ceed land to an aggressive invader, what will send a message to the world that invading to take land is back on the menu. He has no cohesion of thought or strategy, when asked about his plans for healthcare, all he could say was that he had the "concepts of a plan", but said nothing more on it. ANd how the fuck can you say others don't have skin in the game? are you claiming we live in another world? that we are aliens that can't comprehend life on earth? It is the billionaire who inherited his wealth who has "experienced first hand what is going on"?? give me a break

Man, i was about to right a post just like this one, but of a person a personally admired a lot, Liv Boeree. She wrote this on her Substack: https://livboeree.substack.com/p/reflections-on-the-election This tilted me so much when i read it, she was one of the people that got me interested in systems thinking, she has a whole damn podcast about it where she has interviewed Schmacktenberger and other great thinkers. I almost lost my apetite, and it is seriously making me rethink lots of what i believe. She based her arguments on the idea that the Dems wanted the country to be humble, whereas Trump represented pride and boldness. She further elaborates that she considers humbleness to be associated with shame, which is supposedly one of the lowest emotions and can lead to envy and attempts to bash on those who actually try to improve the world. (i don't particularly disagree with shame being a horrible thing to feel, though i think that the model she presented is BS, as it places anger way above shame, and anger can very well just be a cover up, and therefore can be "lesser" than shame) How could someone who clearly has a lot of tier 2 in her claim that being narcisistically pridefull is better than being humble? It almost smells like accelerationism to me This made me question if i am just morally lucky? The Dems clearly have a clearer big picture view, but how can someone who knows so much about "big pictures" like Liv fall for it? Shouldn't i have also fallen then? Did i resist just because my mind was already colonized by the other side?

is this a movie or do you have any credible sources for that?

having an impulse isn't enough to classify a religion A religion is a a survival oriented ideology that claims to base it's premises of of spiritual truth. So if God is a word you use to describe the fundamental nature of reality, and you use "God's will" to say that you can't eat pork, drink alcohol, have abortions, be gay or whatever else, that's religion. You are trying to ascribe you personal values to reality itself. Leo says that if you do this or that you may end up unhappy, and those are based on his personal view, but i haven't seen him those values he has to be based on the will of something higher. So not a religion.

What did you do as a volunteer? can you go more in depth about how was the experience and what insights you got from it?

I just saw the news that Henry Cavil might be threatening to leave thee WH 40K show over lore retconning, and that got me thinking. I've considered myslef a progressive person for at least half a decade now, and have been in countless internet discussions defending progressive values and trying to get conservatives to see that many times the hate they show for progressive values for "ruining x or y tv show" is unjustified. That bad writing precedes "wokeness" and not the other way around. Also many times went on to defend that the goal of these large studios is not to "push woke or lgbtq agenda" but simply to maximize profits, and in a world of inequality, equality and social justice just sells well. But today as i started writing my typical answers on the youtube comments, it felt phony, so i stopped. i just couldn't write that Amazon's sole goal in making female individuals in one specific, previously male-only faction was just profits. The odds of if causing backlash as we have seen happen with so many shows was, to my eyes, far greater than any potential of soeone loving that specific piece of lore change. Now, the memetic theory lens can't be discarded, the green meme inhabits everyone, including the hollywood execs, but is it possible that is to the point they would risk sacrificing earnings, just to feel they are doing their part in moving us towards a more equalitarian future? Or are they just that disconnected from the real world that they see one show after the other crash and burn due to reactionary backlash and yet just keep on believing that theirs is the one that will succeed? Today for the first time i was made to consider that maybe for influence that goes beyond the one that money can buy, in the sense that if any company made a "woke" show that hit like game of thrones, they could tie themselves to the "green meme" and thus have their future secure as long as these memes keep expanding. What is this about?, i feel really kind of clueless. Is it just capitalists making bad calls in the pursuit of short term profits? Is this a result of progressive values and the "green meme" starting to take the reing from the Orange/modern values that have ruled us so far? Is it something else?

Tell me you can't undertand nuance without telling me you can't undertand nuance. Oops, my bad, you essentially spelled it out that you can't undertand it.

What now? Vtubers aren't any worse than any other category of content creators.

So, as the title poses, is there any truth to it? My standard response would be that no, but there is a quote by Ken Wilber that i love that says "no one is smart enough to be wrong 100% of the time", so it seems that this system probably has at least some truth in it. Now, the next question would be, what is that truth? It could be something related to developmental psychology, and Spiral Dynamics, as in, they saw people in different stages and assumed those stages were hereditary traits since the child of a butcher had a higher likellyhood of being a butcher than a warrior's son. But is there anything beyond that? are there people who are born to be spiritual teachers while other will focus on making or trading things? If so, are these things set in stone? could someone rise or fall from a specific course? Anyways, just spitballing, would like to hear everyone else's opinion on this.