zazen

I can’t know and haven’t made a conclusive verdict on whether he’ll be good or bad for I/P. Like I said, it’s a chance on change people are making, not a guarantee. The fact he has people around him calling for no neocon warhawks is good to see. The fact he’s more decisive and can hopefully conclude the situation rather than let it prolong torturously for the Palestinians is also good. Hopefully he wouldn’t give carte Blanche to Bibi to ethnically cleanse the land as that would reflect bad on him - and he cares about his own image being tarnished. I think it’s a stretch to say he tried to overthrow the government, as much as it is a stretch when the right calls Kamala a communist. His rhetoric definitely stoked protests, just as a the current rhetoric is stoking protests against Trump. Overthrowing a government, in a country where your allowed to be armed - should entail going armed to overthrow it? Most people weren’t armed to the teeth and told to storm the capitol, as far as I know. The Democratic system was for sure stressed, but it wasn’t wrecked and we can’t equate it to a full on coup done with intent. It seemed to be more like a disorganised protest that spiraled out of control. Insurrections usually involve organized groups with weapons, planning, and a clear objective to dismantle or replace a governing authority. January 6th was violent and disruptive, but didn’t have the coordination or widespread use of arms that define an armed insurrection. Hyperbolic language is being used by both sides and it’s so polarising. It’s wrong of him to deny the 2020 result for sure.

Does someone have to spell things out every time they share something? I didn't realize there was a revolving door between the FDA and pharma to that degree - which is why I said it's a good idea to be on X where you can come across that kind of information which we wouldn't get from the mainstream. With your lofty high standards of requiring a case to be made with substantial evidence and explanations for the intent of sharing things we could accuse anyone of being dishonest and causing suspicion. Its just a forum, let’s keep it lighthearted.

You seem to think because someone is showing preference for one party over another, that they must then take on all of that parties positions (ie on Israel) including approval of the actions taken by its leader. Things aren't that black and white. I've criticized Trump and know he's flawed, like most of all politicians, and no single party can tick all the boxes unless your ideological and tribal. Language plays a powerful role in shaping public sentiment, and that's not exclusive to one side of the political spectrum. You’d agree that words matter when discussing right-wing rhetoric, so why dismiss the influence of inflammatory language on the left? When people are told someone is Hitler and tap into historic anxieties of some of the worst crimes what can we expect. I posted on 4th of November which I shared with you two pages back where you can see me being critical and not blindly supporting Trump. Some parts of it: ''We have to look very clearly and not get lost in personalities and popcorn politics that each sides fringes inflame. It's about which mental framework (of each party) is more conducive to a productive society, and which stifles it. Trump printed a lot of money in his term, and made plenty of mistakes - this time around I believe he has wiser minds around him who want to change a status quo that simply isn't working for enough people who are betting on change, even if it means they invite a chance of some chaos.'' ''Trumps politics isn't a blueprint for the long term, he's more of a antibiotic to the current swinging of America into a state of unhealthiness. He can't be the lifestyle, neither can the extremist MAGA supporters be the base for the longevity of America. But imo, its a much needed correction to get back on course - the danger is in over-correction. If the Democrats could auto-correct themselves, things would have been fine, but the ideological capture of leftism prevents that - and it has seeped into the institutions which require deep work. This is the enemy within.'' ''People are responding to conditions that transcend national boundaries, because bipartisan neoliberalism transcends boundaries to serve a transnational elite class of vultures - it hasn't worked well enough, for enough people. Young people are locked out of a housing market they're parents easily entered, student debt and health care costs are high, stagnant wages, the 2008 housing crash followed by bank bail outs, lies about war after war, poll after poll showing trust in institutions were already in the basement before Trump ever came https://news.gallup.com/poll/1597/confidence-institutions.aspx Trump didn't create a crises of legitimacy. Western institutions have long nuked their credibility before his cheeky grin rode down that gold escalator in Trump tower, and their burying the remains of it in the rubble of Gaza. Demagogues don't create the conditions they exploit.'' And from Hundreth on the previous page: ''He isn’t easily controllable, nor is he wise - but he has street smarts to deal with nonsense. If he has a council of wiser people around him to direct and rein him in, he’s the perfect vessel to spearhead change. He’s good at leadership, but not a good leader. Read that again, it’s key. This is why this time around with who he has around, ex-Dems and independents who are politically homeless are re-aligning and aligning with what they see as a chance on change, though not a guarantee. In general, the Dems are the institutional elite whilst the Republicans are made up of individual elites. Different factions of the elite, what Chris Hedges calls the civil war of the elites. Now if the status quo isn’t working, and hasn’t been for long enough causing populism to rise across much of the world - is change more likely to come through institutions and a establishment representing a neoliberal world order - held back by inertia, weighed down by a sprawling bureaucracy and maintained through ideological capture. Or individuals who have the will, charisma and now the perceived competence to make changes. It’s the machine vs the mavericks and misfits. A lot of Trumpers have excessively high expectations for what will happen, they may be disappointed but we’ll see. There are much larger cycles of economics and geopolitics that no candidate or party can undo - we move through cycles like waves - but that doesn’t mean we can’t tweak how that wave is surfed upon for the better or the worse.''

Your speaking in a hostile tone and wonder why I don't prioritise responding to you. I responded to Hundreth on the previous page because me and him have had good discussions, even heated ones before but in good faith. We were never rude to each other - claiming the other made stupid points, or accusing the other of shit stirring or comparing the other to a kid. You on the other hand are coming at me in a condescending way making assumptions of intent - I mirror back what I get so if I'm being snappy back that's on you. It's a general discussion thread as the title suggests, I don't have to bring breaking news. The topic is a loaded one, if people are triggered that's not my problem - all I suggested was people look at various media platforms to see opposing views to not be blindsided by a media machine that has a specific narrative it disseminates. It doesn't mean being totally anti-establishment, but establishment wary. People are in full panic mode and breaking down over the election, so its important to maybe see the other sides viewpoints as to avoid the hysteria which seems to be affecting you also. Your saying lets not pretend we need a courtcase to discuss the topic, then demand I bring forward evidence as if I'm in one lol ''I want you to bring evidence for that claim''. Geeking out over details to the point we derail the thread. If your implying that pointing out conflicts of interest is somehow dishonest or manipulative maybe your the one dodging. I'm not here to spoon feed every stat and citation because the basic premise is clear - that conflict of interest is a concern as it can influence things for the worse. Of course it doesn't always mean corruption, but that doesn't mean dismissing being wary of it and calling some one a shit poster for sharing information on it. https://www.oal-law.com/blog/5-largest-pharmaceutical-lawsuits/#:~:text=GlaxoSmithKline%2C LLC pled guilty for,%24956.8 million for criminal fines.

We have been too lost in polarized politics to notice a inversion has taken place in terms of where the bad actors and imperial core is being run from, behind and beside - and that’s the Democratic Party for the most part. Some have and have realigned themselves. There is such a difference in narratives of what just happened and how it’s being perceived - some view it as a coming golden age, a win against the dark forces of a deep state establishment. Others view it as a dark age that Hitler is ushering in. Neither are correct, but the right may be more correct. Liberals are generally blind to their own actions of censorship, silencing of dissent and clamping down on their political opposition through lawfare and a rhetoric that caused two assassination attempts. They can’t notice the projection and hypocrisy because of their feel good rhetoric. Because they dress their actions in the language of inclusion and progress, they're immune to becoming the thing they claim to fight. We've seen this before: 20th century regimes draped in red flags also promised liberation and equality, but delivered the opposite. That was the conclusion, to insisting on inclusion for the greater good. The lefts failure is due to the same false utopian premises they base their movement on much like how communism fails in the real world when reality grinds its operational gears, and human behaviour ie incentives prevent the outcomes their good intentions hope to achieve. When we put equality over and above quality, and sacrifice merit on the altar of equity - where do we expect people with talent or value are going to go? Where it’s valued. Every time we try to enforce equality through top down control, we create a new hierarchy - a bureaucratic aristocracy who try to equalise human nature - as if flattening mountain peaks is even possible.The competent people, the innovators and the mavericks won’t sit around waiting to be sacrificed on the altar of equity. They’ll leave for places merit still matters. It's just basic human nature, like water finding its way around a dam. The irony is: The more force we use trying to make everyone equal, the more inequality we create between places that embrace this ideology and places that don't. Just like the brain drain phenomena of geopolitics, except on a internal political scale.

I wrote more in depth before which I’ll share separately but heres just for you bro. It’s a tough one as I’m not for Trump - I’m politically and ideologically homeless. But if I had to pick I’d bet on Trumps team - not Trump. It doesn’t mean I agree with everything about the guy - far from it. The same mainstream machine that lies about Israel lies about Trump - I’m not saying he’ll be good for Palestine but the current administration is not engaged enough at all to conclude it, but rather overlook and excuse it. Perhaps Trump is more decisive and can make a deal as he did with the Abraham accords, this time involving Palestinian aspirations as the key Arab players involved have said thats a prerequisite. Maybe that’s better than a prolonged situations of a shit show we have now - Kamala can’t even podcast for 3 hours and we expect her to broker peace amongst wolves? Sometimes real positive change comes wrapped in a package that the mainstream gatekeepers have trained us to reject. Sometimes the "wrong" people end up doing the right things, even if for their own reasons. The establishments propagandists want us so afraid of being associated with the "bad tribe" that we reject any challenge to their power, no matter how legitimate. The real question isn't whether there will be self-serving elements in any new power structure - there always are. The question is whether the public gets served to a good enough extent in conjunction with the elites, compared to the current status quo where they feel they don’t. A lot of people this time aren’t necessarily voting for Trump (except for die hard fans) as much as they are voting for his team and / or against the Democrats and what they have become / stand for. Just because someone votes one way or another, doesn’t mean they stand for everything the party does or with everyone in it. It’s an overall assessment on which side you align most with, aligning on wanting some of the same things but not all of the same things - which explains why supposedly different people come together in that party. Trumps first term appeal was because he was blunt, called out the disaster of wars and to end them (which he didn’t really), spoke to and for the nation rather than a transnational elite that have interests beyond their own nation. He’s a smooth talker who’s a master of self-promotion, posing as an outsider when he’s an insider - but just because you’re inside the club, doesn’t mean you obey the rules. He uses the establishments tools but rejects its rule in terms of how to speak or act. The establishment will say they’re defending their allies and interests in Syria, he’ll just bluntly say we’re taking the oil. He isn’t easily controllable, nor is he wise - but he has street smarts to deal with nonsense. If he has a council of wiser people around him to direct and rein him in, he’s the perfect vessel to spearhead change. He’s good at leadership, but not a good leader. Read that again, it’s key. This is why this time around with who he has around, ex-Dems and independents who are politically homeless are re-aligning and aligning with what they see as a chance on change, though not a guarantee. In general, the Dems are the institutional elite whilst the Republicans are made up of individual elites. Different factions of the elite, what Chris Hedges calls the civil war of the elites. Now if the status quo isn’t working, and hasn’t been for long enough causing populism to rise across much of the world - is change more likely to come through institutions and a establishment representing a neoliberal world order - held back by inertia, weighed down by a sprawling bureaucracy and maintained through ideological capture. Or individuals who have the will, charisma and now the perceived competence to make changes. It’s the machine vs the mavericks and misfits. A lot of Trumpers have excessively high expectations for what will happen, they may be disappointed but we’ll see. There are much larger cycles of economics and geopolitics that no candidate or party can undo - we move through cycles like waves - but that doesn’t mean we can’t tweak how that wave is surfed upon for the better or the worse.

This is a forum where we can discuss things in real time, not a court hearing where we’re expected to bring air tight court room grade evidence - as if we have no right to ask questions or point out something that doesn’t sit right. Even if it was a court room - who elected you judge lol. Chill. Regarding FDA, I’m pointing out a conflict of interest to the tune of 90%, that the next administration seems to be aware of and looking to change, hopefully for the better. There’s thousands of drug recalls for products that were supposedly safe, and countless lawsuits revealing that side effects were downplayed or that clinical trials conveniently left out critical data. Additionally, there’s so much we can do to prevent the need for drugs which can come with many side effects. Nothing shit about that except shitsmearing open discourse and suspicion. I shared more in depth posts I’ve made regarding the macro phenomenon of this election - you can engage with that if you want as it’s more interesting than the details - but you haven’t. This is what a shit post is btw:

They’ll organise mass protests in January to get the national guard to come in and contain the chaos - then call Trump a facist dictator for doing so. They’ll try to undermine his term just like they did his first one with lawfare and the Russia hoax rather then let him run the country. Why this time may be different:

@zurew @Socrates Whats wrong in what was shared? Trump calling for unity and to help alleviate the debt of the Harris Campaign? https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4982339-dnc-official-calls-harris-campaign-a-disaster/amp/ Theres different perspectives which seem to be on two different time lines of history - maybe USA needs a two state solution. Its good to know the other side. I’ve posted before about understanding the issue more deeply which I’ve shared above and below: Neoliberal capitalism is doing exactly what its critics have warned about - concentrating wealth while causing mass discontent that goes beyond borders and even continents. The media machine serves these parasitic vampire elites by gas lighting the public into thinking its raining while they're being pissed on. The lived reality hugely differs to the portrayed one which is why when Trump blurts out 'fake news' so many resonate with it. The global nature of populist movements counters the idea that these grievances are just installed and not true. How did Trump and Tucker cause farmer protests across Europe or give rise to populists in Brazil - was their a demagog conference where they taught their best tricks in demagoguery? People are responding to conditions that transcend national boundaries, because bipartisan neoliberalism transcends boundaries to serve a transnational elite class of vultures - it hasn't worked well enough, for enough people. Young people are locked out of a housing market they're parents easily entered, student debt and health care costs are high, stagnant wages, the 2008 housing crash followed by bank bail outs, lies about war after war, poll after poll showing trust in institutions were already in the basement before Trump ever came https://news.gallup.com/poll/1597/confidence-institutions.aspx Trump didn't create a crises of legitimacy. Western institutions have long nuked their credibility before his cheeky grin rode down that gold escalator in Trump tower, and their burying the remains of it in the rubble of Gaza. Demagogues don't create the conditions they exploit.

I would recommend people start spending some time on X and see the type of discussions and information being shared as to not be blindsided by reality.

Chamath Palihapitiya and Naval Ravikant

Great video. @Nemra I think you commented before watching it, don’t think you’d comment like that after bro. Condescending is the reason the left will continue to lose men to the right. LFG

Shameful. Even Sky News uploaded and then took down their reporting once they decided how they want to run the story. They don’t give news, the spin it to their interests. The same news that has been misleading the public on Ukraine and recently the US election hyping the citizens up for a Kamala win. Heres the Sky News reporting they took down (and why X is important): https://x.com/asawinstanley/status/1855243480928260514?s=46&t=DuLUbFRQFGpB8oo7PwRglQ

@Nemra We can just hope and see now. Wikileaks, Elon, Ron Paul and many others are sounding the alarm on who to get and not get into position. The only reason they can do this and think it’s possible is because Trump isn’t establishment. The point being: theirs a chance at change actually happening vs a establishment party with Kamala who’s just the face of the establish ie a puppet.

@Joshe @What Am I Sometimes real positive change comes wrapped in a package that the mainstream gatekeepers have trained you to reject. Sometimes the "wrong" people end up doing the right things, even if for their own reasons. The establishments propagandists want us so afraid of being associated with the "bad tribe" that we reject any challenge to their power, no matter how legitimate. The real question isn't whether there will be self-serving elements in any new power structure - there always are. The question is whether the public gets any crumbs from the table at all, or if they're just supposed to survive on empty virtue signals while their living standards get crushed into dust. Theres also a difference between the economy and personal finances. The economy can be booming in terms of GDP and stocks on Wall Street but that doesn’t translate to Main Street for the average Joe who feels they have to skip the $5 coffee so they can afford their groceries.

Yes, but leadership ability isn’t that same as good. Is a pickup artist good at leading women? Yes, but that says nothing of his morals or goodness. We can’t deny Trumps charisma - he can go to a rally and talk for hours then go on a podcast the same night - and it’s captivating for a lot of people. He’s friends with British royalty and many world leaders including Shinzo Abe from Japan. There’s no doubt he’s a likable character. He’s a New York smooth talker with the gift of the gab. Trump is a agent of chaos, a bit too decisive and at the whim of those around him. This time, due to the team and people around him - people have much more trust in him being able to lead towards better outcomes. And many smart people have jumped on board from tech ceos to entrepreneurs. Even Naval Ravikant who is very wise - check him out. A lot of Trumpers have excessively high expectations for what will happen, they may be disappointed but we’ll see. There are much larger cycles of economics and geopolitics that no candidate or party can undo - we move through cycles like waves - but that doesn’t mean we can’t tweak how that wave is surfed upon for the better or the worse.

Damn, even Owen. All these people seem to be “undeveloped” and blind according to the left. I doubt the left will even be able to recover due to ideological capture which is like having blinders on. The ones that do see where their shortcomings are , are ridiculed and exiled from the tribe. The left are spiritually feminine and retort to feminine tactics of violence such as shaming, guilting and social exclusion. They are more collectivist (feminine) and organise better, but aren’t as great at leadership (which the right is better at).

If people started moving from the right to the left would we start questioning their sanity the same way? The lefts failure is due to the same false utopian premises they base their movement on much like how communism fails in the real world when reality grinds its operational gears, and human behaviour ie incentives prevent the outcomes their good intentions hope to achieve. When we put equality over and above quality, and sacrifice merit on the altar of equity - where do we expect people with talent or value are going to go? Where it’s valued. Every time we try to enforce equality through top down control, we create a new hierarchy - a bureaucratic aristocracy who try to equalise human nature - as if flattening mountain peaks is even possible. The competent people, the innovators and the mavericks won’t sit around waiting to be sacrificed on the altar of equity. They’ll leave for places merit still matters. It's just basic human nature, like water finding its way around a dam. The irony is: The more force we use trying to make everyone equal, the more inequality we create between places that embrace this ideology and places that don't. Just like the brain drain phenomena of geopolitics, except on a internal political scale.

Liberals are too ideological that they haven’t noticed a inversion has taken place in terms of where the bad actors and imperial core is being run from, behind and beside - and that’s the Democratic Party for the most part. Some have and have realigned themselves.There is such a difference in narratives of what just happened and how it’s being perceived - some view it as a coming golden age, a win against the dark forces of a deep state establishment. Others view it as a dark age that Hitler is ushering in. Neither are correct, but the right may be more correct. Liberals are generally blind to their own actions of censorship, silencing of dissent and clamping down on their political opposition through lawfare and a rhetoric that caused two assassination attempts. They can’t notice the projection and hypocrisy. Just because people you admire move to the right, it doesn’t mean they like everyone amongst the right or share the same beliefs as the fringe extremes - just like liberals on the left don’t always share the far leftists beliefs. It’s more a matter of alignment on wanting the same things, but not all things. And right now, the right are generally more sensible in what they want so more people are aligning with them - less wars, less government overreach, less tax and regulation hindering business, safer streets and stronger borders, less focus on identity politics which racialises everything and is more divisive and discriminatory, less wokism being pushed, and mainstream media and health agencies to be held accountable for misinformation and malpractice. It’s a red pill at mass scale, metaphorically and literally as the Republicans sport the colour red.

It’s similar to grass roots resistance like in Palestine. They can’t and will never destroy it unless they resolve the foundational issues. Good YouTube watch btw. As always, few of us on the forum have been right in our assessment of Israel, BRICS, Ukraine and this political shift right. Elon literally just wants to go to Mars, but the government got in the way, including a woke mind virus that got in the way of him and his own child. He just dealt with the establishment like some side quest whilst running multiple large companies - legend.

I’m seeing Democrat women saying they’re not gonna sleep with men ie a sex strike due to the election. This only exacerbates the problem. This tweet dives into why the Democrats are in a bit of a pickle: ”The democrats have been so successful in teaching their base to hate young men that now, if any one of them smarts up and starts even asking how to appeal to them, trained man-haters will quickly step up and bark about how men are horrible, masculinity is horrible, anything young men like is horrible, employing their Pavlovian collection of snarl words for the purpose. They hate young men more than they love their platform. They hate young men more than they want to win. They hate young men more than they love anything else in the world, including themselves. Democrats can't pivot. They can't. Because their base won't let them. Since a woman will almost always vote for whoever her man votes for, the democrats have nailed their destiny to the political clout of single women who hate men. Well, newsflash, single women who hate men tend to have abortions instead of kids. So where are the future generations of democrats supposed to come from? The third world? Nice try, but you can't import them unless you win elections in the meantime. Their tactics worked so well for a short period of time because their political base was frothing with hateful energy while the men were still half asleep. But now that their opposition is waking the fuck up, they have nowhere to expand their appeal to. This is why I recommend to my fellow right-libertarians and conservatives... never interrupt your enemy while they/them are making a mistake. Goad them. I'm sure you can think of lots of fun ways to do that.” The right will out-demograph, out-birth and out-grow the left. Demographics, is destiny.

For Democrats their weak point isn’t in distribution, it’s in the product - in what’s being sold. Democrats control nearly every mainstream channel from cable networks to the press. Hollywood, academia, corporate media etc. The inconvenient truth is that everyone hears what Dems have to say, they’re just not buying it. Dems and the liberal establishment pour millions into propaganda and crafted narratives and people see through it. The message simply doesn’t resonate. They’ve become so detached from the lives of ordinary people, busy in virtue signaling - that the working class and backbone of America are tuning them out. Their so inclusive that they exclude one of the biggest demographics out there, which means they are now excluded from running the country. Liberals haven’t noticed that an inversion has taken place in terms of where the bad actors and imperial core is being run from, behind and beside - and that’s the Democratic Party for the most part. You had the Cheneys backing and campaigning along side Kamala! If they realised this they wouldn’t be in such a melt down and perhaps maybe even consider that malignant forces are being challenged and possibly defeated - if Trump and his team can even do such a thing. The Establishment ie The Democrats love wars, but not the warriors it sends out.

@Davino Good points, I’ve witnessed how religious people mechanically gesture out of a belief it will bless them in the after life, but also met many who do genuinely care and also have green values. I think if people met more people around the world from developing countries they”d be surprised and think twice before psychoanalytically boxing each human into a certain stage. The framework is decent in general but not exhaustive of the whole human. @Talinn https://www.hhs.gov/about/leadership/rachel-levine.html @Nemra RFK has a speech condition. He’s written on holistic health and reps out pull ups. He’s got chesticles so big his pronouns may as well be her/she. Humour aside: The RFK comparison captures the cultural discontent between liberals who want to dismantle conventions and conservatives who want to dismantle the cultural institutions that do so.

Exactly. Progressing into what? This image is key to understanding why the Republicans not only won, but won bigly.