BlueOak

There is no truth, as you are trying to define it in infinity, which encompasses all possibilities and none.

Also, annoyingly, I can't edit these earlier posts anymore, which is unfortunate; I didn't realize the edit window was so short! Oh well. It was a good concept to try to keep the thread organized.

UK Election Videos, Parties, and Polling Numbers Debate Thread here Thread Aim: A Broad Spectrum Coverage of the Election. Videos and Data; the other thread above is excellent for debate. Contents: 1, Party Videos 2, Early Polling Data 3, Important Election Updates - Please suggest videos or articles 4, Ongoing Polling Data and Videos - Please suggest polls 5, Final Election Results Starting with lesser known parties Alliance for Democracy and Freedom: https://adfparty.uk/ Rejoin EU: https://therejoineuparty.com/ Reform UK: https://www.reformparty.uk/ Plaid Cymru https://www.partyof.wales/ Sinn Fein https://vote.sinnfein.ie/ Democratic Unionist Party https://mydup.com/ The Green Party https://www.greenparty.org.uk/ The Liberal Democrats https://www.libdems.org.uk/ SNP https://www.snp.org/ Labour https://labour.org.uk/ Conservatives https://www.conservatives.com/ Monster Raving Loony Party https://www.loonyparty.com/

BBC Election Debate Highlights. Annoyingly, I haven't located a full clip of this, if anyone does please let me know. This is the BBC's general page for election coverage: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/crggn4j2lm0t LBC Debate analysis: GB News Comments: D-Day Question: D-Day Context

@creativepursuit The world does try to change others, not allow what is. This is a good synchronicity for me in this podcast below. Gratitude. Transactions have been on my mind of late, more than ever. His view is overly bleak and disconnected (and he calls out that I'd think that), but it is a necessary framing to the people he's talking to in the time we are in. To start with, he speaks to Gen Z's need for attention or validation and to the distant and overly cerebral world we inhabit. It's part of the ongoing collapse of anything but the necessities, which is part of the larger pattern we are in now. Life goes through contractions and expansions, like breathing. I see this through a long-term view of putting people back in touch with the earth, which is as real as it gets here. This was the first video I watched of his, the latest on his channel. It is true that when you are real with others, they usually can't handle it unless you prepare the ground/conversation/person first. Most people prefer fake happiness to an uncomfortable truth. Dopamine makes people go after shorter solutions, hard-wired into the brain, and the cerebral nature of our current existence has led to a large-scale addiction to short bursts of it. Fast solutions. It is false that humans, society, etc, don't have patterned problems (and solutions); he's completely wrong there. He just can't see them. I can see them most of the time now because I spent my life looking for them, certainly with a conversation with a person capable of reflecting on their life. True, we don't fix things outright with a prescription; we improve or worsen lives. It becomes people's (or my own) willingness to address the problems I can identify as an example. Prescriptions aren't inherently wrong, no more than a rock is; it just depends on how they are used, and I agree there has been an overreliance on them. He speaks a bit about the transactional nature I am still stuck in; I appreciated that and would like to hear an entire video from that perspective. His judgment about falling flat on the face when seeking a result is extreme, but it seems to be the reality I am in now as well. People do change their thinking I have, often. It depends on how much suffering you experience, and your willingness to adapt. Things tend to move in small adaptations and, for many, are driven by collective experience; he doesn't recognize this enough in his analysis: Everyone expands and contracts, inescapably in life, even if it's slow going. Time doesn't exist for infinity (which you are), so speed doesn't matter anyway. Yes. Internal peace, you don't go anywhere to find it - I especially liked that line. I would always like to see more videos on viewing experiences in a transactional nature as being a pitfall, and the allowance of what is over what I would want. I tend to think these things are eternally holding me and others back.

You define what you are inside your mind. You don't exist outside of your mind; nothing does. The people telling you something here are parts of yourself. In this physical body, infinity masks itself in the concept of this form that you walk around as, held together by the mind. If you go one step further, the mind is also a concept we use to create this experience. Without it, there is infinity, which I've experienced as either an infinite love, an unending void, or infinite sorrow. Set an intent to experience infinity in a way you'll recognize, because experience is the only way we know anything for sure. I can tell you that nothing exists but this moment. No past, no future, just this moment you are having. Everything else is a thought in your head, holding together how we frame reality.

First off, remember that you are not anywhere; there is no one here and nothing to have. You, in this physical concept, created yourself in this specific way. You can identify what that is by how excited or energetic something feels: This will become important later. What defines a billionaire to you? -> What does that allow you to do? -> What does that require in your mind? -> Is the process of that what you want to experience daily? If you take this far enough, you'll identify why you'd want something. You can also identify what's wrong with your chosen method of getting it. Even if you convince yourself intellectually that this method is something you'd want to do, if no energy backs it up, you'll always be at a deficit when you attempt it. You either create energy in the experience you are having or use it; How do you tell what your intent in creating yourself was? What gets you excited or in a state of energy naturally? This becomes self-perpetuating; you are infinite, and when the form you are maintaining aligns with its intended purpose, you become your limitless nature.

1, Let me take your perspective and then offer a simplified question to it: I provide a burglar(person) I know to be looking at your home with tools, information about your home, some training to break in but not a specific time or day, and limited cover after he's done. Am I responsible for the robbery? You may argue the burglar(person) had many reasons, so I will say I unconditionally agree with any reasons you state here before you do. I could also take this a bit further and say I had a hand in the criminals(people) having that identity in the first place, because I want the area's property value lower or, more accurately, to be in my favor. If it helps to unbias this analogy, dropping 'criminals' and 'burglars' to say 'people' in its place, the point remains the same. If Iran did not directly plan this, they helped set the conditions for it to happen, provided the training and tools, stoked fanaticism, and pushed a new Islamic imperialism not only into the region but also aligned with BRICS to topple Western world power. The best you will come back with is others do this too. I will answer yes. The only way to change it is to highlight that everyone does it, and it's a flaw in all global interactions, rather than excusing it or pretending it's not happening. It's not about sides but the human need to create an opponent and use it to make destructive foreign policy or geopolitical gains. 2. It's a militia force; it takes a lot of training, preparation, and a strong officer core to form a disciplined, organized force; no soldier is disciplined without it. In this execution, they fundamentally underestimated the response they got. If anyone with any planning or sense were in charge of that operation, they would have seen this response a mile away. The first thing the person next to me said when this happened was that Gaza was going to be leveled. It didn't take a genius to see it. You can't have it both ways. You can't tell me Iran is not incompetent while also saying everyone is incompetent, which is it? If you are arming, training, and supporting a large proxy force to exert your influence over an area, and it goes on a rampage of mass murder, taking hostages in one of the biggest acts of terror I have ever seen, and you miss the organizing, planning, and logistics of the operation, you are incompetent. That word is insufficient; you are grossly negligent, bordering on incapable. Anyone can be assassinated; anyone can get hit with friendly fire, especially in an urban warzone. US foreign policy goals in the Middle East are brain-dead. The US lost in Syria to BRICS. As for intelligence services worldwide, not knowing an attack was coming? I covered that. Let's call it speculative and leave it at that.

Stage Green mostly. with some yellow, but she raises a few good points of people's denial. There is nothing here to help directly integrate into a cohesive global system (Yellow), but you need to see the problems stated in green before you can address them. She'd need to look beyond her own country even more into a global dynamic to go further. The main point(s) I would take away is that Islamic and socialist imperialism is trying to emerge, which is something I hadn't put into words before directly to link them, beyond just saying BRICS. That would be mostly China and Iran, with some Russian elements. I don't think she fully considers culture in her argument; that is, it's cultural in Iran for men to look at women as lesser, and though I can hate that, the Western world has moved away from externally trying to change countries towards their values. In fact, there has been a lot of influence the other way on Western values: In this context, something the manosphere at its worst in the West has been pushing for is to treat women as lesser. Before anyone defends the entire ideology, I have watched a few balanced speakers from the manosphere's general perspective, who I appreciated, but that is the most harmful element I've seen. I'd equate it to the women who use their husbands as bank accounts and sleep around. We need to increase the family's value, not devalue or emphasize value judgments on any individual part of it. If the family functions healthily, that's what matters. It is fair to say that Islamic and Soviet propaganda telling us that by helping to protect women from getting raped, we are imposing imperialist ideals is rife now, and something I hadn't considered. Its never stated directly as that, but that's what it equates to. At the same time, BRICS are trying to impose their imperial ideals. If it's a purely an ethical decision, all reasonable efforts that don't result in a large war should be made to stop women getting raped, regardless of the external circumstances or risk. Maybe that's just a male perspective inside of me to protect, but it's there. Israel was goaded by the Iranians into doing what they've done, probably going further than even Iran thought. Again, nobody makes the argument that thousands of Hamas teenagers in Gaza moved as one without a lot of coordination and leadership, because on its face that statement is lacking. Iran's propaganda will be working overtime, and I need to be more cognizant of that in the overall world dynamic. Despite the horrors being inflicted in Palestine, the new BRICS alliance and its member's external wars have, in part (Yes America too), brought this new reality into being.

1, Because all far-right governments or leadership require an opponent to exist. If these regions settle down, those in them will lose power or influence. So either Iran directly planned this or created the conditions for it to exist (alongside all other involved actors). If it is the latter, they had a massive failure on their end. Having missed this huge movement of manpower, logistics, and planning without their knowledge. So much so, it begs the question: why are they still supporting them now? Answer: Because it aligns with their interests to do so. 2, Having a large number of teenagers in their ranks. I was using their age, their more disorganized militia nature, and the fact that any large action in a region as heavily watched as this one, makes the case of how unlikely it is would have escaped everyone's notice. I suppose I could choose to believe everyone is incompetent instead.

If Hamas doesn't do what Iran wants, Iran will stop arming, training, and funding it. It won't support an organization that doesn't align with its interests. Iran's whole approach is to use these proxies to maintain its influence over the region, thus distancing itself while simultaneously achieving its goals. Thank you for the article on Hamas; it was informative. Your article highlights 12-15 as children but shies away from directly saying it: Generally, Hamas considers 16 to be an adult, so this still aligns with teenagers being the bulk of the force, as the average was 18 or lower for males in the region: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_child_suicide_bombers_by_Palestinian_militant_groups However, it does indicate those younger than 16 would be in non-combat roles for the most part. The US's primary goal is money, maintaining trade connections, and the dollar underwriting world currency. The USA foreign policy is essentially Stage Orange personified. They do this by creating countries that are friendly to this policy, essentially democracies, when possible because they share similar values and encourage stable economic development in their trading partners. Some countries can't sustain a democracy, but they can still block their rival's influence by picking the right leader (and still buying their guns or products/contracts).

1, Yes, the leaders are adults, as is the case with most armed forces of any nature. There is little proof of anything in a militia or irregular force; however, the data indicates you are wrong. Again, 40% of Gazans were 14 years old, and the median age was 18 before the war; this will be skewed lower for males in a conflict zone. Therefore, any fighting militia force taken from the population will be of that age on average. I am happy to read or see if you have data that says otherwise. If not, I will draw logical deductions over your feelings or opinions, with no offense intended. If you want to dismiss this as data speculative, fine, but they are still a militia force, and any movement or organization of a large force, especially a disorganized one, will involve much communication and planning. That's just how it works; people don't all mass one day, press a button, and everyone arrives armed and ready on the spot on the same day at the same time, with the same plan. 2, Iran has different levels of influence over its proxies; they arm and use Hamas to exert their influence over the region: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_support_for_Hamas https://theconversation.com/how-much-influence-does-iran-have-over-its-proxy-axis-of-resistance-hezbollah-hamas-and-the-houthis-221269 I am genuinely surprised you are making this particular argument, but if you are, please, by all means, link some sources that are beyond your personal opinion; perhaps you have information I don't, and if so, I'd be glad to hear it. Who arms and trains Hamas: https://www.npr.org/2023/10/26/1208866508/irans-foreign-minister-on-the-hamas-attack-and-the-war-that-has-followed https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/28/world/middleeast/israel-hamas-weapons-rockets.html https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-guns-weapons-missiles-smuggling-adae9dae4c48059d2a3c8e5d565daa30 These sorts of articles and sources can be pulled forever. 3. Yes, but democracies prefer democracies. When they can create them, they do, but they'll settle for dictators aligned with them if not just to deny an opponent. Generally, people in this world try to make it like they are rather than accept it for what it is.

@Karmadhi All countries make a big deal about meddling in their elections or government when it doesn't align with their current aims. This is very true when someone tries to stop a democracy from forming, for example, or alter a nation towards a conflict they aren't interested in fighting. Other examples might be corruption or the theft of secrets and technology. Yes, the famine left lingering anger, and I would agree with that. On Russian hatred pre-2014: Please provide clips of this or articles from before 2014. If you are finding it difficult to search for them, give me some search terms for incidents, and I'll do a bit for you. I am good at locating data. I am assuming at this point you've listened to a rumor, not an actual demonstrable fact. This is okay; I am only going by Ukrainian reporters who talk about the time before the war being relatively peaceful, that there wasn't a language barrier because almost everyone spoke Russian from ex-Soviet families or schools. 'They wanted to be part of Russia.' Now, you are referring to the sham elections carried out at gunpoint in the middle of a war, after torture, deportations, and death? Prior to this turmoil, everything was peaceful. Let's be very blunt: This is the 8th war to rebuild Russian control and influence over former USSR territories, and it is an effort of democratic forces to create a democracy in Ukraine. That's it, that's the opposing goals. The people don't matter; asking the average person for their honest opinions on life would boil down to living safely, comfortably, and in peace. That would be a universal constant the world over. It's the leaders that have ambitions, things to lose or gain, and driving forces beyond that to shape these countries for better or worse. Yes, the US, China, Iran, BRICS, and NATO are indirectly involved. This is still a European war. It's being conducted in Europe in a move for Russia to strengthen its position in Europe and for the European powers to resist their expansion. It's a tale as old as the continent is, and it's been done many times before. It was a clever trick for awhile to make it about the US vs Russia in people's minds, but this is European land. The US is the biggest guarantor of Europe because it is their leading trading partner. As a result, Europe provides a large amount of wealth to the US, and the US is a large arms dealer. Whatever major conflict comes about, the US and Russia will be giving arms to someone involved. You sum up the problem with neutrality next: nobody remains neutral on a border between two major powers. Ukraine will either be under Russian influence or the EU's.

@Raze Are both sides (all countries on this planet) responsible for what happens to one. Yes, finally, it gets reflected to me; that’s exactly how it works on Earth. Nothing is in a vacuum; every action of every country shifts things for the others and directly creates what comes next, especially in its immediate neighbors or geopolitical opponents created by duality. If people realized this, we’d have a better functioning global system without fear of ‘globalism', which exists anyway; people recoil from the idea they are not directly responsible for every decision they take. In truth, they are always part of a pattern; you and I are right now. On Israel: The more radical elements of the government require war and fear to sustain themselves. I’ve covered that all far-right governments are functionally similar in that respect. I don’t believe anyone thought the scale would be this because the fallout from fostering that violence was devastating for both. On Hamas: Hamas is a gang of teenagers; the average age in Gaza is 18: 1) https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25993-the-reasons-why-gazas-population-is-so-young/ 2) https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2023-11-14/population-religion-and-poverty-the-demographics-of-israel-and-gaza - 40% of it was 14. You can bet that it will be younger for men in a conflict zone, and younger since the war. Thousands of teenagers were organized into a strike. You are telling me you think it likely that the people behind the militia didn’t know about it? Either they failed monumentally in their leadership role to report on, influence, or control their proxy forces, or you're mistaken. Like most involved countries, Iran will have agents in that region right now. 1. Intelligent agents know about an army about to strike, let alone a militia. See America and England’s warning to Ukraine. 2, Have you met teenagers or tried to organize them to do anything at any time? It’s a nightmare; they can’t sit still, they want to tell everyone what they are doing, there’d be messages all over the place, and it’d be near impossible not to know. This is not 5 friends getting together to cause violence or mischief, it's a large force being pulled in at once. You are intelligent; if you deduce from the above the apparent implication of that statement on other countries and their intelligence services, yes, you’ll be right. Not to say any of them could stop it when it was in motion, but to claim everyone was in the dark over a known flashpoint is so improbable to me that I cannot believe it. I also would expect nobody to know the scale of it properly or what would happen next. This is a conjecture, however, so you can dismiss it at will. Instead, we can say Iran and Israel (and every other far-right government around the world) foster the conditions for conflict to occur so they can stay in power and leave it at that. You telling me America’s far-right government ripped up the nuclear deal only makes the previous statement more likely, not less. I’m not playing favorites here; the entire world shifted right and continues to do so; this is the natural implication of it: conflict. As for you saying countries react differently, yes. They react according to their ability and goals. America’s was a profit and a democratic world order. Iran’s is an Islamic Caliphate. Russia’s is the restoration of the USSR. Europe’s is maintaining its financial hegemony. China is One China, securing as much of the surrounding territory as possible and trade connections overseas. BRICS goals, as a whole, are replacing the Western world order. NATO’s goal is to secure democratic prosperity and security. Africa has goals, Asia has goals, South America has goals. All of these goals are not above threatening other countries to achieve them, but recognizing them as existing is crucial to achieving if not peace, then at least lasting stability,

By the attack on Israel's civilian population by Iran's proxy militia. Any far-right regime requires war or an opponent to sustain itself. The region was becoming quieter and more settled from an international audience perspective. Iran requires violence to sustain its militia groups; the more fanatical ideals of an Islamic caliphate over the region need an opponent. It is the same with the government of Israel or any region on the planet, without an opponent, they would not be as radical or be able to push their influence outward. People have explained to me that this is more reflective of the militias themselves than Iran as a whole, and I concede that, but again, there is no way thousands of teenage militia were organized into a collective force without significant leadership and coordination. Even if we assume the unlikely scenario that Iran had no knowledge or involvement in this, which I find hard to believe given the size and unprofessionalism of the fighting force, they are still partially responsible for: 1) creating the conditions for this to happen, 2) supplying the necessary tools, and 3) failing to control their own proxy force in a monumental lapse of leadership. There has been a push for Islamic imperialism for a time; the same is true of Chinese Socialism. I can describe this now as connecting the dots; this requires an opponent, and often a war to sustain itself. You can see this in how American imperialism worked; the opponent allowed the military-industrial complex to flourish and maintain power in their government. This is true of Russia, and it may be true of the far-right governments in Europe that are required to meet Russia's threat; you can see them gaining more power by the month also.

Exactly. I often lack a Middle Eastern-voiced perspective. The world would be a better place if more were heard globally and given similar platforms.

I am open to listening to anyone. Can you give me, from your perspective, three unbiased Islamic speakers. - I realise nobody is unbiased, but it indicates they are at least trying to factor in more than their own perspective into their words.

The polls, early this year. Thank you. I'll make a note of the dates to title the data. The videos are the most relevant stories of the moment. The party breakdowns were taken directly from their channel and, where possible, from its promotional message. I am going to do another set of polls as they come out. For example, there is a swing for reform and a further fall for conservatives in a yougov poll that dropped two days ago. So one poll has them about even, but you need several to get confirmation of anything. June You Gov Poll: https://yougov.co.uk/elections/uk/2024 If anyone has any polls to share, or any news videos to share, by all means, that'd help flesh the thread out. Also updated with a leaders ITV Debate: Nigel Farage replaces Richard Tice as Reform Leader

To be frank I put a lot of effort into that. It's not the same thread; its purpose is video coverage, statistics data, and polling information. How many threads are you going to see on the US election or various wars? Dozens, all from different angles and perspectives.

Partially, the universe is you in a verse. So if reality is structured in a universe, you would need to maintain you in that verse. Certainly, for duality to reflect anything, you need to be present in it. Reality can be structured in other ways. One clear one most of us here could imagine, or, if we are fortunate, describe, would be a single unity. Another might be a trinity, rather than a duality. If I can conceive that in this limited mind, then you can be absolutely sure our bigger self can create it in a nanosecond. Time and physics work here in perfect harmony, but they are so in-depth that we could have created them differently elsewhere and probably have done.

Good update as always. @Twentyfirst It's about many things, mostly summed up by two spheres of influence pushing against each other, like most wars between nations that are not due to a civil breakdown.

There was Russian suppression and violent intimidation, which led to the uprising, but you'll have to give me specific instances to investigate before that. As far as I have been told there wasn't hatred, but the region generally dislikes Russian's meddling in their elections and the constant posturing or projection of fear Russia tries - which is understandable, nobody would like it. Generally, democracies want stable democracies. Yes, they work towards that goal. You don't see people annoyed? Georgia comes to mind, as does Chechnya and, to a certain extent, Belarus. It's a matter of how much meddling goes on and how open it is. Are you saying people like others messing around in their elections, or are okay with it? See America's reaction to Israel and Saudi Arabia openly doing so. They didn't let them become independent because those regions were part of Ukraine. They were fine until Russia's militia started working in them, mostly the militias were manned by Russians in the beginning. All done because Ukraine's proxy government was overthrown as an excuse for war. The US has invaded to topple dictators in several countries within the Russian sphere of influence. That's what great powers do, and it's what Russia is trying to do here. Making a case for the equivalency doesn't change anything or make it better. Why are you so focused on making a moral case against the US again? This is a European war. I understand to keep their moral convictions, people must see someone else doing something wrong and say okay, they are bad, so I'll use that to make a point. It falls apart, though, because it's not US troops there, not US land, and the US is more reluctant than the people closer to it. - I don't make a case for morality as the center of a point, or rarely any part of what I say unless I'm being lazy. It's not very helpful because it's a cyclical my values vs your values argument. Even in the absolute best-case scenario, if I give you that, EU policy is going to change if they have to double their military size for a large border with Russia. People don't pay all that money into their military and not use it; Sadhguru makes that point quite well; the way to peace is to defang the warmakers. That won't happen in a large border with a belligerent neighbor. Someone painting a token government in Ukraine and letting Putin call the shots like Belarus isn't enough - Belarus's posturing and weak government is somewhat likely to get a coup against it for the proliferation of nuclear weapons and threats to use them; that's the sort of threat that won't be ignored.

Reserved for Results

Ongoing Polls and Data June Polls YouGov Poll: June 4, 2024 Labour: 40% | Conservative: 19% | Reform UK: 17% | LibDem: 10% | Green 7% | SNP: 3% | Plaid Cymru: 1% | Others: 2% https://yougov.co.uk/elections/uk/2024?constituency=E14001452 Reform is still predicted to get a low number of seats with the voter spread.

Important Election Updates: Please feel free to suggest some! Depending on breaking news or headlines and your ideas, these will likely get swapped around. ITV Leaders Debate Sunak vs Starmer Nigel Farage replaces Richard Tice for Reform UK Leadership £2,000 Pound Tax Claim First Minister of Wales No-Confidence Vote Conservative - Reform Possible Shift