Forestluv

For sure. Someone could say “Thank you” and not really feel it. Another person may feel gratitude and appreciation, yet not express it in words. It reminds me of the different love languages. Some people may express gratitude through acts of kindness, rather than words. This is one thing that threw me off with my narcissistic ex. She would tell me that she expresses caring and gratitude differently than I expect. For example, she had three children, was working a full time job and a part-time graduate student. She would tell me, that creating time to see me was an act of caring, gratitude, giving etc.

I may be too charitable. I’m reflecting on the Vaush’s video on freedom of speech that was recently posted on the forum. Several times the caller said that this was just Vaush’s personal view, why should he get to say which speech should be banned and who gets to regulate it. This opened the door to relativity. Each time Vaush responded something like “Of course it’s just my belief. Everyone advocates for what they believe to be true. I’m not saying I would be regulating speech. I’m saying there could be a some entity that regulates speech”. So, he had a very basic awareness of relativity, yet then he went straight back to stating how we can construct philosophically sound positions and had a very absolutist tone that his views are objectively correct. One thing I like about Vaush is how intellectually tight and precise he can be. It’s like an INTP on steroids. My mind is much more fluid and at times I appreciate someone that is intellectually hyper grounded, structured and precise.

I’m introverted and I don’t claim that I would ever be able to match his charisma. Part of his charisma is that it is amazingly intuitive and spontaneous. Yet there are still some things I can observe about him and develop to an extent. For example, I’ve never seen anyone handle Candice Owens the way Russell did. In particular, I watched how he was able to disarm her. I became aware of new dynamics of communication that I’ve been using in my own communication. I’m not saying that I can do it at Russel’s level, yet I can have a genuine, playful, non-threatening demeanor and I find watching Russell helps my expression.

That is one strategy. I suppose it’s possible to pull off. They can try to portray all the protests as “bloodlusty anarchist rioters” that threaten our American way of life. And Trump is the strong “Law and Order” president to defend them. This works to an extent. About 38% of the population believes this. The strategic mistake I think Trump is making is that he wants to divide the country into two groups and his group is the smaller group. His escalations will work to excite his base, yet I don’t think he will be able to attract regular, moderate Americans. This is the group he is losing from 2016. Average Americans are not buying the narrative that all protestors and the entire blm movement are “bloodlusty anarchist rioters”. I think a better strategy would be for Trump to acknowledge that there are some peaceful protestors, they have a right to peacefully protest and that he respects that right. He could stress that there are also a lot of violent protestors and he doesn’t want things to get out of hand. I think this approach would look more sane to average Americans. The question of whether he can effectively distract attention away from his coronavirus mismanagement depends on whether people see the protestors as mostly violent and a serious threat - a threat more serious than the coronavirus threat. If suburban women are scared that some terrorist group called antifa may actually enter their community, they may overlook the mismanagement of the coronavirus. However, if most people see the protestors as mostly peaceful with some vandals spray painting confederate statues, they will get very irritated that Trump is focusing on this rather than the coronavirus crisis. So far, it looks like Trump is losing this narrative battle. With this strategy, Trump needs to escalate and provoke protestor violence. A couple months ago, Portland was having large protests with considerable vandalism. Then the protests fizzled out. A couple weeks ago, the protests were down to a couple dozen protestors. There was no need for Trump to send in a federal militia. When the federal militia entered and started tear gassing, beating and kidnapping regular people, it inflamed the situation and re-escalated. The protests went from a few dozen people to tens of thousands of people again. . . . Yet can Trump sell it as violent rioters in Portland to win suburban votes in Iowa and Ohio? To me, that is a big gamble. Especially when people are more concerned about losing their jobs and school closures in the coronavirus crisis. As well, I think a lot of people are getting tired of Trump’s con artist games.

Nearly all progressives have significant Green and perhaps some Yellow sprinkles. Neo-liberals are Orange centered. One of the problems in the U.S. is that there are only two political parties, so very different ideologies get grouped as “Democrat” and most Americans don’t make distinctions. In Europe, progressives and neo-liberals would be two different political parties. AOC and Biden would not be in the same political party in Europe.

Do you really not see Trump’s authoritarian tendencies? Yes, he is trying to expand his policing authority through executive decree. This has clearly been described by legal experts, such as in the legal journal “Lawfare” as well as attorney John Yoo. Trump and the DHS are planning to bypass congress and expand their federal militia throughout America by an authoritarian executive decree. Turn off FoxNews and observe what’s happening. And notice how you brushed aside the substance of what I’ve written to you in this thread to a lazy statement of “It’s official. . . We have completely Lost our minds”. That dismissal will allow the mind to turn a blind eye. https://www.lawfareblog.com/dhs-authorizes-domestic-surveillance-protect-statues-and-monuments https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-congress-supreme-court-bush-waterboarding-john-yoo-a9629306.html

Of course, that is the playbook. Trump and his sycophants want federal authoritarian rule. It will likely get worse over the next few months. The legal journal Lawfare just published an article about how the DHS is planning an expansion of this authoritarian “law and order”. As well, attorney John Yoo has stated that Trump’s team has spoken to him about how to skirt Congress through executive loopholes and execute law and order by decree.

I have not tried to shame or guilt you as being at fault. Rather, I am trying to show you your fellow peaceful Americans that are being tear gassed, beaten and kidnapped by a Federal militia. One strategy of an authoritarian regimen is creating blindness or fear of their fellow citizens. If an authoritarian militia entered Wisconsin and treated your and your family like the citizens in Portland, I would be fighting just as hard for you and your family. This is not about republican vs democrat or conservative vs. progressive. This goes much deeper into authoritarian rule. Open your eyes and observe what is happening to your fellow Americans in Portland. Tens of thousands of your fellow Americans are gathering together because they are being mistreated by an authoritarian militia. And the federal government wants to expand this federal militia to cities across America. If Obama was doing this against those he perceived as opposing him, you would be outraged. Put aside partisan politics and look at what the federal government is doing. It doesn’t matter if it is a republican or democrat-led government. Look objectively as if this was happening in another country and you had no party affiliation. Again, this is missing the point. I acknowledge that there are people doing graffiti and vandalism and that there should be proportional consequences to this crime. That is not the point. The point is the federal militia tear gassing, beating and kidnapping peaceful, ordinary citizens. Your fellow Americans. The videos and accounts from regular Portlanders is indisputable. Tens of thousands of regular citizens are not gathering and singing “Hands up, Please don’t shoot me” in support of vandalism. They are demonstrating against authoritarian violence against their community. This is how fascism starts. Authoritarians blind citizens to the treatment of their fellow citizens. Authoritarians instill fear of fellow citizens. Yet you wouldn’t stand up for me if I was peacefully protesting and got tear gassed, beaten and kidnapped without cause by a Federal militia. You would turn a blind eye as you are doing now. Yet I would fight for you if you got treated that way. We are all in this together.

This myopic view is totally missing the point. No one is saying that there shouldn’t be consequences for graffiti and minor vandalism. If someone did graffiti and minor vandalism on my home, that person should face consequences that is proportional to that behavior. Yet if someone did graffiti and minor vandalism to my home, it does not justify a Federal militia entering my neighborhood and tear gassing, beating and kidnapping my neighbors. THAT is what so many people are upset about. Can you not see your fellow Americans? This is how it starts. It’s happening right now. This is it.

There is a dynamic of “proper assimilation”. White supremacists are generally ok if people of color assimilate properly and “know their place”. If LeRoy the black garbage collector is subordinate and friendly to white people as he collects their trash, most white racists won’t have a problem with him because he “knows his place” and is staying in his place. The problem is when LeRoy gets elected to city council are starts talking about racial inequalities within the community. That will upset certain white people.

I misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying the context. I agree that graffiti and minor vandalism does not justify a draconian, authoritarian response. I think graffiti and minor vandalism is inappropriate and action should be taken to stop it, yet it does not rise to the level of an unidentified federal militia exerting violence against ordinary, peaceful citizens.

Never in the modern era has a candidate been consistently outside the margin of error in polls, until this year with Trump. Yet being deeply unpopular is insufficient to lose an election. Trump still has powerful pieces on the game board and I don’t count him out. I hope there is a free and fair election with high voter turnout. If so, I don’t see Trump winning. Yet that is a big “if”. . .

@Nak Khid No one is saying that there are not incidents of graffiti and vandalism.That is not what regular people in Portland are protesting. Myopically looking at that graffiti and vandalism distracts from something much more dangerous occurring. This is part of Trump’s playbook toward authoritarian rule. Be mindful about unintentionally empowering that underlying agenda. . .

There are plenty of videos and accounts of an unwelcomed Federal militia tear gassing, beating and kidnapping peaceful protestors and regular people throughout the city of Portland. A few of which have been posted in this thread. There is a reason why tens of thousands of peaceful, regular Portland citizens are gathering together and singing “Hands up. Please don’t shoot me”. If your cognitive dissonance is so strong that you cannot see this, I don’t think I can help you. I can see the graffiti and vandalism to Federal buildings. I acknowledge that it exists and is inappropriate. Unfortunately, that is all that Trumpers can see. They cannot see that there is ALSO inappropriate authoritarian Federal violence targeted against peaceful, innocent protestors - even when presented with that actual violence. This is a myopic view and it will allow the invasive plants of authoritarian violence to grow and spread. It is no longer theory. This is what the early stages of authoritarianism an fascism looks like. This is it. America is not some special place that is immune from these forces of authoritarianism and fascism. EVERY American should be concerned about what is happening, regardless of party affiliation. As I said, not previous Republican president would have stood for this activity. When this has happened in an undeveloped country, the U.S. has always condemned it and threatened sanctions or military force.

I never said it was. I’m am not referring to Federal agents simply protecting Federal property. There is much more going on. In this regard, the Way is not for unwelcomed militia to tear gas, beat up and kidnap peaceful demonstrators and innocent civilians. Notice the selective awareness. . . Here are some of the people “Federal agents” have teargassed, beaten and kidnapped. These are regular people in Portland coming out together to protest the fascist violence of an unwelcomed militia into their community. They are not protesting the protection of Federal buildings agains graffiti and vandalism. They are protesting fascist violence. This is what “Love is the Way, not force“ looks like . . . “Hands up. Please don’t shoot me. . . “

To me, this is a manufactured stunt. It’s a skill, yet I’m not impressed by this type of skill. I’m much more impressed by the inter-personal skills of someone like Russell Brand. I would put that mastery at a much higher level than this. Just my preference. To each their own.

When I’m confused about a topic, one thing I‘ve found helpful is to get grounded with an easier related topic I can get a handle on. For example, if I am confused about Absolute Love, I may try to get grounded in Absolute Perfection. I can observe around me that everything Now is Perfect as it is. If my mind gets confused on this and asks “Why call it Absolute Perfection? Why not Absolute Imperfection?”. . . Rather than immersing into rational confusion, I may try to get grounded in something easier to get a handle on. For example, I can look around me Here and Now and observe Absolute ISness. Everything is obviously Absolute ISness. It makes now sense for my mind to think “Why don’t we call everything around me Here and Now Absolute Not-ISness?” This doesn’t make sense and it’s easy for my mind to get grounded in the actuality of Absolute ISness. That grounding can provide a foundation to get a new perspective. My mind may realize “Ahhhh, yes everything Here and Now is Absolute Perfection!!”. This is a method that is helpful for my mind to work through certain things. Other minds may be structured differently.

Numbers and opportunity are also factors. A few years ago, volunteers cleared out all the invasive plants in a meadow within our nature center. There was now plenty of fertile soil, space and sunlight for wild flowers to flourish. . . Last week, I went back to that meadow. One single invasive plant got in their and took over the whole meadow. It’s now dominated by the invasive plants.

He clearly doesn’t have the skills to be a good trip sitter as he made the issue about himself and was unaware of how his behavior could impact someone while they are tripping. For me, being a trip sitter is more like being the back stage crew at a concert. I let the musicians do there thing and occasionally tweak the lighting and sound effects. If the band invites me onstage for a song, that’s great - yet I’m not going to barge my way on stage to alter the show and be the center of attention. I would keep in mind that the guy likely has his own issues. Perhaps he had good intentions. Yet I still would be cautious of having him around at the show. It’s like being at a concert with someone who won’t stop talking and ruins the show for other people. The guy may be ok to take a hike with, yet I wouldn’t want to go to a concert with him. . . I’d also consider how serious I make the issue. From one POV, it’s like someone who can’t juggle. Oh well, he sucks at juggling - I can be light-hearted with him about his juggling suck-ness. Yet if he tries to juggle Grandma’s precious vases, someone needs to step in.

Yes, it can be awkward to add relative qualifiers - yet I also think it’s important to be aware of one’s intellectual as well as energetic relationship to the views their mind holds. I could give an intellectual explanation about relativity and how my views are relative. Including the view I express right now. Yet what is my relationship with those views? Am I actually holding them as if they are objectively true? Am I emotionally and energetically attached and identified to them as if they are objectively true? Can I let go of my closest views like a hummingbird that flies away? Consider people like Jordan Peterson, Sam Harris and Vaush. Each one of them can give a decent description of relativity. They have an intellectual awareness of relativity. And if called out on it, they would acknowledge that their own views are relative. Yet that then gets brushed aside and they continue communicating as if their views are objectively true, because their underlying relationship with their views has attachment and identification to those views as being objectively true. They will resist presenting their views as relative - not for the sake of clarity, rather due to their relationship with the views. I’ve had many conversations with people that may intellectually acknowledge “yea, it’s just my relative view” and then they continue to argue as if it was not a relative view. In terms of SD, one line of Yellow development is intellectually understanding relativity. Other lines of development into Tier2 is that one’s intuitive, emotional and empathic energetics become aligned with relativity. There is a new sense of flexibility and fluidity in multiple modes of being.

He can give a good speech off a teleprompter. I hope he can keep it together for four months.

I have the same concerns. Yet Biden did ok with a 2hr debate with Bernie. And the expectations game is key. By repeatedly suggesting Biden is senile, it sets the bar low. All Biden has to do is not look like he has dementia and it’s a win. I’d like to see Warren was debating Trump. . . Biden was my 4th choice of the candidates, but oh well.

I agree on these points ?

Penguinz0 cracks me up. His Karen vids are hilarious.

@Nak Khid You said polls are notoriously wrong on outcomes. That is incorrect. If you said there was a rare case in which a subset of polls were off in one specific election, then that would be fair. Over history, polls have provided very valuable information. They are not “notoriously wrong on outcomes”. If they were, politicians would not invest so heavily in polls and base their elections around them. The fact that Pew Research actually wrote a long essay explaining how it’s possible that a some polls were off In 2016, is indicative that polls are generally accurate. They didn’t write an article explaining why weather patterns failed to predict the election.