Given the current level of development of our society, is Trump the better choice?

[What Am I]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

Thanks for sharing. It's an interesting perspective and worthy of consideration. I don't think it's odd. This is, after all, a spiritual existence. 

You and I share a common desire for the masses to wake up and evolve but we differ in what we consider potential catalysts for that to happen. I see Trump as a devolving mechanism. There is a case to be made that more people will start to take reality much more seriously by him being at the helm, but as far as him, his team, and his movement ushering in anything that will contribute to the masses awakening to spirituality and realizing our full potential, I just cannot see any logic for that.

It's a tricky thing to tease apart, because I don't think Trump himself would play any role of leadership in this more enlightened world. For me, in this niche goal of mine, it could have been anyone who's willing and able to defy the established order. And the results that I'm hoping for are inherent in the act of defiance itself, not dependent on who performs it.

It's a little embarrassing to discuss, because "conspiracy theory" has turned into a such a dirty phrase, but I believe strongly that secret societies have passed on in-depth knowledge of the perennial philosophy all throughout history. Secret societies which are currently at very high levels of control, interwoven within organizational human power structures. For many of them, their existence is recorded historical fact. It's only the question of their significance that's in contention. For those like us who are more discerning, when we see the writings of these secret societies symbolically discussing techniques of going inward and achieving a union with God, it can be taken much more literally.

The gist of what I'm trying to say is that it's not just us on the forum who are aware of the human spiritual potential. It's a big world out there, and there's stuff going on that would be difficult to believe from an ordinary vantage point. The UFO phenomenon falls into this discussion as well, with all its complexities (which I don't claim to fully understand). I hate that it's a conspiratorial line of thinking, but I'm absolutely convinced there's those on Earth who covet this knowledge (along with its benefits) and refuse to share it. The idea is to knock that knowledge loose, pretty much by any means necessary at this point.

For any mods who are looking, I can back off on the conspiracy talk. I could go so much deeper, but I know it's not appreciated here. These may be the conclusions I've come to after many years of research and direct experience, but I don't have to spread it around to participate in conversations.

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

The master of lies will not usher in a world of truth. It's just absurd as far as I can tell. Care to elaborate?

I hadn't considered it this way before. The paradoxical scenario of someone whose nature is so opposite from the desired result is kind of ironic and humorous in itself. It's not my hope that Trump personally ushers in a world where people become aware of what's spiritually possible, because I'm not sure he could ever even grasp it himself. I am hoping that the disruption of power opens a window for such an event to happen, by whatever form that may take.

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

It seems like you want it so bad that you’re willing to take anything different, even if that thing is the antithesis of what you want. It seems like a gamble of very low odds and very high risk. I think I get the idea, but the gamble has just as much, if not more potential to ruin all chances for what you want, does it not?

There is a good point being made here. Even if the populace is currently living in a curious shadow of ignorance as to their true nature, I may not have considered the extent to which it's possible for things to get worse. "Some change" is not necessarily equal to "good change." The eagerness for salvation can itself lead to ruin. Something to keep in mind, I guess.

Edited Monday at 06:44 AM by What Am I

[zazen]

17 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

Summary please?

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.

The two key issues are economic and security (border and domestic) - socio cultural issues are also important, but economics and security take priority. This is the problem of the left, prioritization. It's not that identity and inclusion don't matter - it's that they can't matter more than a society's foundations weakening, a societies bones becoming arthritic because its overweight from bureaucratic bloat weighing down its functionality and to which leftist politics generally adds to via expansion of the state. You can have the most inclusive team on the Titanic, but if no ones watching out for icebergs, everyone drowns equally. You can have ''soft on crime'' progressive policies, but what does this misplaced compassion matter if it renders the citizens incapable of walking safely at night, or the viability of a business staying open. For example - California reclassified non-violent offenses such as theft of property valued under 950 dollars to be a misdemeanor.

This is the symptom of late stage empires in decline. When empires grow in dominance, power and abundance, this brings decadence. Decadence leads to delusions and the luxury of being able to play with immutable laws of nature (economic, behavioral, and in today's case biological). Decadence allows the denial of these laws, which leads to decline. It's where feelings matter more than functionality, comfort over capability, and equality of outcome matter over merit and quality. Resources not going to foundational issues but that instead go to managing microaggressions, DEI and the pronoun police - is decadent. Forget deficit spending, we are decadent spending, and the bills coming due - just ask Boeing who dismantled their DEI team a few days ago. Decadence allows us to ignore reality, but not its consequences - and the con in consequence, is that it's sequenced into nature, and asserts itself eventually. 

When the pie shrinks, it deranges politics and society. So the question is: what ideological framing underpinning each party helps grow that pie better. A society can't print its way out of debt. It needs to grow out of it. You can't print prosperity, it needs to be built. You can't legislate your way to abundance. Production, discipline and unity isn't just policy - it's survival programming written in the blood of every fallen civilization. It's the immune system fighting off the virus of decadence. Strength isn't optional and reality isn't democratic. Conservatism isn't a return to the past (although a faction do want to regress) its a turn to the past to see where we deviated and to remember what made a nation rise. The so called progressives ironically wouldn't have the luxury of dabbling in progressive policy if it wasn't for a more conservative past. But now we must revisit the principles that made a nation strong, and integrate them. It's about taking two steps back from the cliff of decadence and decline, so we can progress down the line.

Any politics or frameworks that abides by the principles of what is productive yet humane, is the better one imo.  If progressive policies work so well, why are countless businesses and people leaving California? Going to Texas and Florida. Why should those policies and the ideological framework underpinning them be scaled nation wide? Progressives believe in state enlargement , because their framework requires it - they enable a bureaucratic priesthood that regulates a nation into just being regular. That's what Kamala stands for - Keep America Mediocre And Lacking Ambition. Dems would rather have a department for the pronoun police whilst Republicans will have a department of government efficiency.  A nation doesn't always lose its greatness by having barbarians at the gates, it loses it one regulation, one permit, one decadent policy policing human nature - at a time. America calls itself the land of the free- yet it's the country with the most laws.

This is how the managerial / administrative / permanent state kills a nation. First, it creates agencies to regulate everything. Then it staffs them with bureaucrats who's job depends on them saying no rather than yes to things. Then they require constant expansion to justify their existence. Instead of governing, they end up suffocating and stifling. Businesses can't thrive in a maze of regulatory quick sand only corporations can afford to navigate. And the backbone and health of a nation is its middle class. A nation so obsessed with controlling outcomes regulates itself into paralysis.

Americans need to remember who they are - citizens, not subjects, subject to a higher authority. The state is supposed to serve the citizens, not suffocate them. Across the pond in UK, we are subjects under the monarchy. Though rarely exercised, the King has the power to decline the formation of a new government during the tradition called ''kissing of hands'' where permission to govern is sought. Though only ceremonial today, it has a odd affect on the psyche of a nation.

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.

The juicy part on modern day leftism starts at 33min, before that is the origin story.

Edited Monday at 06:03 PM by zazen

[Kid A]

@zazen  What are your thoughts on Scandinavia and the fact that we are happier with our lives than Americans, according to UN’s happiness report?

[Buck Edwards]

People like this want to vote for Trump. 

 

[josemar]

They're killing our squirrels!!

 

 

[zazen]

4 hours ago, Kid A said:

@zazen  What are your thoughts on Scandinavia and the fact that we are happier with our lives than Americans, according to UN’s happiness report?

Smaller nations, much like smaller boats, are easy to navigate and more nimble. Larger nations and empires are massive cruisers bloated and slowed down by the sheer scale of their own ambitions. Scandinavia, whilst a admirable Viking boat, isn't comparable to the US which is a battleship cruiser. Smaller, more homogenous, socially cohesive high trust societies that organise well like in Scandinavia, with natural wealth (ie Norwegian oil) and elements of capitalism to ensure productivity and efficiency - produce a higher quality of life and happiness.

This doesn't vindicate leftist politics and policies at scale, with many diverse interest groups competing with each other. Especially with a cultural DNA that is rebellious and suspicious or wary of centralised government such as that in America. The reason China is able to pull off a larger state apparatus is due to its cultural DNA that goes back thousands of years. Their conception of state authority is as a benevolent patriarch daddy, the gatekeeper of the mandate of heaven. Where as Americans view state enlargement and overreach like an abusive unrelated step dad. Their faith in a just government comes from their Confucian roots which emphasises civic duty and the collective, rather than the individual. This allows them to harmonise and not have such friction, especially around a more homogenous identity.

A cultural foundation has to be there for such things to grow from more organically - otherwise their seen as an imposition, and the power of such state machinery is abused if there isn't much social cohesion to begin with. Because why would a bureaucrat care as much if they use the power of the state to torment their fellow citizens - if they don’t view them as kin (related in some way - we are naturally kinder to kin). Of course we’d say we should be, but tribalism is a hard ass instinct to rid ourselves of.

Sweden has one of the highest gun crime death rates in Europe now and the right wing are gaining traction. Reality asserts itself eventually. 

Edited Monday at 06:05 PM by zazen

[zazen]

1 hour ago, josemar said:

They're killing our squirrels!!

 

 

On 03/11/2024 at 4:46 PM, zazen said:

“The function of agencies is to reduce your agency. That’s the link between something as seemingly trivial as killing an innocent squirrel and the unraveling of civilization itself. One might appear minor, the other apocalyptic, but both are driven by the same impulse: the impulse to regulate. Agencies are designed to regulate; the term itself means, at its root, “to make regular.” Having a squirrel as a pet? That’s not considered regular. And make no mistake—that’s what this is all about.

Of course, the statists will insist on quibbling over legalities, debating who did or didn’t or should have had the proper license to keep wildlife. A license, after all, is just another permission slip from the government, a formality they expect you to obtain before doing anything outside the “regular” sphere. But that’s beside the point. The real reason we have these endless agencies, laws, and layers of bureaucracy is that if governments limited themselves to essential tasks, they’d quickly run out of things to do. And when that happens, people might start asking some uncomfortable questions, like where exactly that hefty cut of every paycheck is going.

So here we are, with agencies grasping for purpose, justifying their budgets by meddling in people’s lives. They’re driven by a bias toward action—after all, inaction doesn’t give them power or money. And they lean toward NO, because YES doesn’t give them power or money, either. Can I launch a rocket? NO, it might disrupt a seal or endanger a shark. Can I paint my house purple? NO, it might affect property values. Can I create a bank account under a pseudonym? NO, it might help you evade taxes. Can I care for an abandoned baby squirrel? NO, it might carry rabies. The reasons they give are little more than a thin veneer of excuse, masking an underlying desire for control.

When government agencies regulate everything, you’re left only with what’s regular. What everyone else does. It’s insufferable—and frankly, Patrick Henry would be up in arms by now, as we all should be. But it doesn’t stop there. This isn’t just high-handed or dystopian, or even simply tyrannical. It’s worse. It’s civilization-destroying.

Why? Because civilization and progress are rare and delicate achievements, requiring a unique set of conditions. History shows that most societies have stagnated, spending generation after generation toiling in the same ways, struggling to subsist. Civilizational progress, that rare jewel achieved by only a few societies, requires an environment where trying new things is easy and free of friction. It demands novelty, innovation, the pursuit of the untested. Things that aren’t normal. Things that aren’t regular. And when everything is made regular, innovation dies.

It’s not regular to keep a pet squirrel, just as it wasn’t regular to shine high-frequency radiation through people for imaging, or to channel lightning into experiments, or to treat infections with mold, or to attach wings to a bicycle and try to fly. Every innovation that has separated us from famine, poverty, and disease started as an abnormal behavior that made others uncomfortable. Liberty gives rise to technology, wealth, civilization, and quality of life—everything worth having. And bureaucracy takes it all away.

In this case, that bureaucracy led to the death of a small, innocent, loving creature. Not just death, but murder—done with premeditation and malice. Peanut was happy, never having known anything from humans but love. Peanut, without a hint of malice, couldn’t understand why he was being taken from the only home he knew, to a place of execution. He didn’t know what he’d done wrong. He died confused, alone, and terrified—all so a few petty, spiteful officials could justify their jobs and feel important. The harm they caused may seem small in the universe, but it was not small in Peanut’s universe, and it can never be undone.“

 

[Hardkill]

OP, are you trolling? 

The radical right-wing justices on the Supreme Court have given the president absolute immunity for "all official" acts. That means that if Trump becomes president he will have much greater power as president compared to any other president in US History.

The economy tanked so badly during Trump's last year as president. The economy right now is not perfect but it's the strongest it has ever been since the 1990s. Look at the GDP growth reports for each quarter since the beginning of 2021. Look at how low the unemployment rate has been for years. The percentage of those aged 25-54 years old in America who hold a job is the highest it has ever been in the history of this country except when compared to the period from 1997 to the middle of the year 2001. Plus, the percentage of those aged 55-75 years old in America who hold a job is the highest it has ever been in the history of this country. Biden presided over the creation of approx. 16 million jobs, including all of the 9.4 million jobs that were lost from the pandemic when he first took office and the new 6.6 million jobs that never existed before the pandemic. Also, Biden and his party have already created the most amount of very good paying jobs for the working class, middle class, and working poor due to their passage of historic pieces of legislation including the infrastructure bill, the Chips and Science and Act, and the landmark IRA. Also, the inflation crisis ended over a year and a half ago and wages/salaries have been outpacing inflation for most everyday people in the country for over a year and a half.

 

Biden and the Democrats saved most of Ukraine from being taken over from Russia: 

 

He was found guilty of raping an innocent woman, he's been indicted over 90 times for grave crimes he has committed and was already found guilty on 34 counts for a case involving election interference:

Btw, remember how there was widespread civil unrest during Trump's last year as president after the murder of George Floyd:

 

Moreover, women's reproductive freedoms are on the line:

 

Also, don't ever forget what happened on January 6 all because Trump refused to concede the 2020 election: 

 

Plus, Trump doesn't give a damn about climate change, whereas Biden, Harris, and Democrats passed the largest bill for dealing with climate change ever in US history and brought back a lot of pro-environment regulations:

 

Edited Monday at 07:52 PM by Hardkill

[Hardkill]

Most people in America are so Trump.

Harris represents the new change our country really wants and will really fight for justice:

How about Tim Walz?! He's a true populist and has a great sense of humor!

 

Also, listen to Obama's fiery speech:

 

Edited Monday at 07:34 PM by Hardkill

[zazen]

US politics is wild 

Edited Monday at 08:23 PM by zazen

[Yimpa]

 

[Lyubov]

is choosing a fear based, lie based world view ever the better choice? 

[Jodistrict]

I felt better about Trump when RFK joined, because RFK is the only politician who gives me the feeling that he really cares and he is very smart, knows the government like the back of his hand, and has specific plans for regulatory reform.  

[Hardkill]

32 minutes ago, Jodistrict said:

I felt better about Trump when RFK joined, because RFK is the only politician who gives me the feeling that he really cares and he is very smart, knows the government like the back of his hand, and has specific plans for regulatory reform.  

He wants the government to eliminate fluoride in water. 

He's a fucking weirdo.

Have you listened to Obama's latest speeches?

Edited Monday at 10:17 PM by Hardkill

[Hardkill]

2 hours ago, zazen said:

US politics is wild 

This guy's talking points were weak and played into the notion that MAGA supporters are out of touch with reality.

Trump and MAGA are really on the defense.

Most moderates, Independents, and undecided voters increasingly see Trump's party as extreme and truly disturbing.

Edited Monday at 10:28 PM by Hardkill

[What Am I]

10 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

He wants the government to eliminate fluoride in water. 

He's a fucking weirdo.

Have you listened to Obama's latest speeches?

I can't speak on the scientific merits of including fluoride in the water, but it's probably not the strangest thing in the world to wish for a purer expression of H2O along with its common minerals.

Did Obama say something about RFK? Curious what it was.

[Zega]

It's not just him but the whole republican party is seeking to dismantle agencies like the EPA and put loyalists like Kennedy in charge of systems that they are wildly underqualified to run.

This is what Hitler did.

If you look at Hitler's speeches and compare them to Trump's then you will see a clear parallel. It didn't start with concentration camps and gas chambers and it's not hyperbole to make the obvious comparison so many others have made before me.

So you ask, given our level of social development is Hitler the better choice?

No...no he isn't. If we weren't the most powerful country on earth and the circumstances were wildly different then maybe, but we're talking about a man easily manipulated by people like Putin, Jinping, Orban, Jong Un, and pretty much anyone else who will butter him up.

Hello?

What are we even discussing here?

We are a stage Orange society and Hitler would be the obvious step in the wrong direction. 

[strange-connections]

I actually can see where you're coming from. I contemplated for a long time about my vote and realized even if I choose the candidate with more conscious values, I may still be overestimating both America's level of development and other countries. If we move too fast, conflict will inevitability occur. I think if you choose to vote based on this thinking, it would require some advanced statistical analysis that none of us have access to.

However if you vote based on intuition, I think the easy answer is Kamala. Although I think Trump is helping bring more blue Americans to stage orange thinking (and even beyond that in certain areas like him supporting weed legalization) , and he honestly strikes me as more authentic to himself than Kamala and I think because of this he can be swayed possibly with the help of Elon to create some kind of restructure of government that is uniquely industrious. But this is also risky.

Regarding policy, it's pretty obvious to me as young person that Biden's policies are significantly more conscious. His inflation reduction act was huge for shifting the American industry and economy to focus on renewable energy, which makes more sense long-term economically and for the environment. I have already seen the effects of this act in my city Seattle, with our improved transit infrastructure and we have more plans to do so. Trump and all republicans are against this act. But it is a perfect example of a good liberal policy, that focus on the future rather than the past. 

Im getting a hint you live in blue/orange state or city since you mentioned fuel and grocery prices. You should do your own research into how you implement more renewable energy into your life, as this would save you a lot of money in the long term. That is just the culture where I live and it is exciting, we have huge electrical vehicle rebates and everyone in the city is excited about our transit plans , but I might have a different perspective if I was raising a family on a single income instead of a 20 year old college student.

[Jodistrict]

1 hour ago, Hardkill said:

He wants the government to eliminate fluoride in water. 

He's a fucking weirdo.

Have you listened to Obama's latest speeches?

Wanting to eliminate flouride from the water doesn't make you a weirdo, especially considering that flouride is one of the most toxic chemicals known to man.  Even though they claim small amounts are "safe" it is a policy worth reviewing.  

[josemar]

1 hour ago, Hardkill said:

This guy's talking points were weak and played into the notion that MAGA supporters are out of touch with reality.

Trump and MAGA are really on the defense.

Most moderates, Independents, and undecided voters increasingly see Trump's party as extreme and truly disturbing.

Only one more day until you can stop the cognitive dissonance and repeating lies you heard from your lying leftist news sources... 

Hang in there, relief is near...