Now Aubrey Marcus … what is going on?!

[Nemra]

18 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

we have to rely on AI to govern us than perhaps we have to look in the mirror

I don't think the AI could or even should govern us at this moment. But if it could do that in better ways a few years later, then why not?

Edited November 11 by Nemra

[_Archangel_]

These are the finest equilibrists, walking the thin line between grifting and being batshit crazy.
"we were tired of the lies" is pure tragicomedy, comical perversion of The Truth.

But It's important to note that They just do not misinform like evil ghouls, just for the sake of it. -  in order to spit the hottest bullshit, they need to have some kind of moral justification that makes the lie digestible to their souls.
Some They believe, some They lie about in the name of a possible "Greater Good". It's a pattern that in general is very common with conservatives.

So, even though Man is a Bullshitting Animal, it can only tollerate so much lies, and some lies end up becoming truth to their eyes.

[sholomar]

 

On 11/9/2024 at 8:16 AM, Hello from Russia said:

Meh you guys are so tribalistic it makes me want to vomit

Thank you. LOL.  It's clear to me why people turned against the left. It's the suffocating, Karen-like moral/intellectual superiority/nagging they've been constantly doing for years now.  Shaming people for voting against them, calling them stupid and dumb.  They just come across as insufferable to me, insisting their path is the only path forward for the species. 

Maybe they'll be proven right and Trump will destroy the country, but I doubt it. If it happens, it happens.  Observing all this theatre has made me see how counterculture movements form, it's because the status quo become insufferable with their attempts to nag and control the masses, which promotes the movement as a way to rebel from the "Karens" trying to nag the populace to death. The left became entrenched in the institutions and turn into naggy Karens shaming everyone every time they dared criticize the most looney of policies such as transgender surgeries for 8 year olds, etc. This is the result.

Edited November 11 by sholomar

[Nemra]

Trump is like Jesus; he makes people find their true selves.

[Loving Radiance]

On 9.11.2024 at 9:48 AM, Thetruthseeker said:

I recently posted how disappointed I was to see Elon, Russell Brand and Rogan side with and endorse Trump. Now Aubrey? I can not tell you how disappointed I was to see him post this. 

Through some difficult times, Aubrey was an online inspiration for me. And I will always be indebted to his teachings. It was a goal of mine next year to go to his ‘fit for service’ retreat in Arizona. 

I just can’t wrap my head around how he can call Jordan Peterson, Tucker Carlson and Candace Owen’s heroes! And say the republicans stand for Truth, freedom, love, peace etc 

At this point all I need is @Leo Gura to turn round out of nowhere and say stuff like this and I’ll lose all faith in people. 
 

Seeing Aubrey say this has nearly made me start to think ‘am I the delusional one missing something here?!’

it’s also made me question psychedelics and the spiral dynamics model. Aubrey was clearly more psychologically developed than 95%, if not 99% of people in the world, and still he seems to have lost his way and fallen into a trap. What’s the point in all that development, if then you think Candace Owen’s is a hero?! 

I like having mentors and people who inspire me, it helps me towards a next chapter in life. But at this point i feel disillusioned by so many … it feels like there’s no one out there (apart from Leo) worth following and they become selfish and power driven in the end. They side with what serves them.

Maybe it’s a deep lesson that I can only follow my own path and not put any emphasis or trust in anyone I see online. 
 

 

Because of ideology and epistemology (being dumb in critical thinking, bias, and sense-making).

[zazen]

The man himself:

 

[Heaven]

10 hours ago, Nemra said:

Trump is like Jesus; he makes people find their true selves.

😂😂🤣

95% of the people are selfish. Expect more and you are destined to be disappointed.

[Consept]

25 minutes ago, zazen said:

The man himself:

 

I can't take him seriously when he talks about it being a new era of truth but then votes in a guy that still either believes or lies about the previous election being stolen. As well as up to 80% of the right believing it. If I'm charitable to Marcus and say that he doesn't know how many believe this lie or he believes the lie himself then that makes him incredibly stupid to not know or take into account such an obvious point of contention 

[Alex M]

43 minutes ago, Consept said:

I can't take him seriously when he talks about it being a new era of truth but then votes in a guy that still either believes or lies about the previous election being stolen. As well as up to 80% of the right believing it. If I'm charitable to Marcus and say that he doesn't know how many believe this lie or he believes the lie himself then that makes him incredibly stupid to not know or take into account such an obvious point of contention 

I've not watched the video. But based on what you mentioned. He's just making himself look foolish. Joe Rogan did the same. I saw him coming out with some silly shit, saying oh, look, the person with the most votes actually wins. Can you believe it? No shit. As you said, I can't take these people seriously; they are that foolish.

[zazen]

Some quotes from his substack two months ago if Trump was to win: https://charleseisenstein.substack.com/p/trump-and-the-tempests-of-hate

Charles offers 6 principles for the next administration: 

1. Reframe divisive issues in terms of compassion  

2. Generously acknowledge the views of all sides

3. Find the transcendent centre

4. Focus on systems not individuals

5. Amnesty not vengeance, redemption not punishment 

6. Stand consistently for peace 

''Ultimately, we seek not a revolution against the system, but a revolution of the system.''

''One might ask, why not offer these six principles to Kamala Harris as well as Donald Trump? Of course, I recommend them to anybody. However, an Establishment candidate can apply them only in facsimile, otherwise she will not remain part of the Establishment. She can campaign in the name of compassion, extending it to favored groups, unaware of what dominant narratives conceal as they maintain and advance a global system of enormous injustice and suffering. The six principles unravel those narratives. Their practice transforms us into agents of a revolution of and not against the system. And we quiet the tempest of hate that threatens to tear society apart.''

Perhaps this is whats driving people towards the Republicans - the fact that everyone feels we need change and that an entrenched establishment are unable to change because well, their established. Only individuals outside the fold can, or those within it but willing to not play by the rules. Of course this poses a danger however.

Edited November 12 by zazen

[BlackPhil]

3 hours ago, Consept said:

I can't take him seriously when he talks about it being a new era of truth but then votes in a guy that still either believes or lies about the previous election being stolen. As well as up to 80% of the right believing it.

Not saying the election was stolen 2020 but where did the extra 10-15 million votes for Biden come from? Serious question.

65,853,625 votes for democrats. 62,985,106 votes for republicans 2016.

81,284,666 votes for democrats. 74,224,319 votes for republicans 2020.

71 819 593 votes for democrats. 75 115 826 votes for republicans 2024.

Republicans now just got a little more  votes than they did 2020.

It sure is strange Biden got such a crazy high amount of votes 2020. More votes than Obama. And now suddenly those extra 10mil+ votes are up in smoke again this election.

Edit: And oh btw, Hillary also claimed election 2016 was stolen from her so that is not unique for Trump:

They tried to get Trump impeached over and over. Accusing him of winning because of Russian interferance and so on.

It becomes abit hypocritical when you only point out Trump not accepting election results when the democrats did the same.

It's only a problem when your opponent does it right? When your own team does it it's no big deal. I get it.

Edited November 12 by BlackPhil

[Etherial Cat]

3 hours ago, zazen said:

 

 

I’ve never seen a better fit for the word ‘delulu’ in my entire life.  

He is the embodiment of candide naivety. An intentionally well-meaning person whose ability to process reality is just downright ridiculous.

Spiritual bypassing combined with political illiteracy is a very sad combo to observe.

[PurpleTree]

27 minutes ago, BlackPhil said:

Not saying the election was stolen 2020 but where did the extra 10-15 million votes for Biden come from? Serious question.

65,853,625 votes for democrats. 62,985,106 votes for republicans 2016.

81,284,666 votes for democrats. 74,224,319 votes for republicans 2020.

71 819 593 votes for democrats. 75 115 826 votes for republicans 2024.

Republicans now just got a little more  votes than they did 2020.

It sure is strange Biden got such a crazy high amount of votes 2020. More votes than Obama. And now suddenly those extra 10mil+ votes are up in smoke again this election.

Edit: And oh btw, Hillary also claimed election 2016 was stolen from her so that is not unique for Trump:

They tried to get Trump impeached over and over. Accusing him of winning because of Russian interferance and so on.

It becomes abit hypocritical when you only point out Trump not accepting election results when the democrats did the same.

It’s wild with the Russian thing.

The Democrats still say there’s Russian interference , Trump is compromised by Russia/Putin.

And Republicans/Trump say it’s all hogwash.

Both like diametrically opposed realities and since years or nearly a decade.

And no progress or solving of the issue really.

[Alex M]

@BlackPhil 

You have to look at how people voted. In 2020, Trump was advising all those who would vote for him to do so in person. Also, a lot of Democrats were taking COVID more seriously and avoiding crowds that might have been in voting stations. So, more mail-in votes were taking place.
The in-person votes are counted much more quickly. So, obviously, you will get a spike of red votes that will take a commanding early lead. Once more mail-in ballots are verified and counted, the red votes will tail off, and you'll start getting a surge in blue numbers. This isn't complicated, and there isn't some silly conspiracy behind it; it's straightforward.

In terms of voting numbers, this could be largely based on voter turnout. Have you looked at the turnout numbers?

About Hilary, you have to be more nuanced. Now I'm not here to defend her and any bullshit that comes out of her mouth. Answer me this:

Did Hilary try to stop the certification of Trump becoming president?

Did she whip up a massive crowd to storm the capitol building and stop Trump from becoming president?

Did she start god knows how many lawsuits to try and stop Trump from becoming president?

Did she then continually keep going on for years after about how the whole election was rigged and how she won and it was stolen from her? trying to poison the minds of any dem voter that would listen?

Or was it more a case of sour grape / sore loser and then shut up about it?

 

Edited November 12 by Alex M

[zurew]

50 minutes ago, BlackPhil said:

It becomes abit hypocritical when you only point out Trump not accepting election results when the democrats did the same.

1) Hillary conceded few days after, Trump still denies the results fo the 2020 election - if you think these two things are even remotely in the same ballpark you either shouldn't enagage with politics ever again ,or you are being dishonest.

2) There were more than 60 lawsuits launched for finding evidence for voterfraud for the 2020 election . Some of the judges were appointed by Trump none of them found anything. So what you have here is that you need to claim that all of those cases were corrupt and even Trump's people went against him or you need to come back to reality and concede that the election wasn't stolen. 

The difference between Hillary and Trump couldn't be more clear. It isn't just that Trump didn't accept the result of the election on the day of the election. Its that Trump still denies the results of the election even after 4 years and even after 60+ lawsuits. And not to mention what he did on jan6. Again, if you think these two cases even remotely similar you shouldn't engage with politics ever again.

 

The numbers in votes can be explained by the fact that covid was happening at that time and more people gave a fuck to engage with politics.  So that can be one hypothesis, more hypothesis can be generated but again a few things about the 2020 election: 1) Even if I cant generate a hypothesis that explains the data from that doesn't follow the election was stolen and its on you to prove voter fraud and saying "here is a piece of data that I can't explain" won't be sufficient for that 2) Again you need to explain why all 60+ lawsuits were unsuccessful - that is the piece of data that you will need to explain to us.

 

This is just another case for an ignorant Trump supporter spouting bullshit. None of you guys are read into Trump's case not even on a surface level and yet you are here to spout bs and to try to cry about liberals and democrats while you are completely clueless about everything.

All of you are a waste of time.

Edited November 12 by zurew

[BlackPhil]

8 minutes ago, zurew said:

1) Hillary conceded few days after, Trump still denies the results fo the 2020 election - if you think these two things are even remotely in the same ballpark you either shouldn't enagage with politics ever again ,or you are being dishonest.

 

My guy, the democrats went on for years trying to impeach Trumps presidency accusing him of this and that, grabbing every straw to stop him being president. If you call that conceding and accepting the election results you are delusional and biased beyond help.

Edited November 12 by BlackPhil

[zurew]

26 minutes ago, BlackPhil said:

My guy, the democrats went on for years trying to impeach Trumps presidency accusing him of this and that, grabbing every straw to stop him being president. If you call that conceding and accepting the election results you are delusional and biased beyond help.

1) The first impeachment of President Donald Trump occurred on December 18, 2019.

2) Im not sure if your head is still spinning or not from the beautiful pivot that you did there - starting with Hillary denying the results and then pivoting to talking about democrats as a whole group and completely ditching your point about presidential candidates. If you want to make that point - you can do that, but if you think non.candidates denying the results of an election is the exact same as presidential candidates denying the election - you shouldn't ever engage with politics again. 

Now im completely sure you will engage with the other points that were made about Trump, about jan6 and about the 60+ lawsuits that were unsuccessful.

Edited November 12 by zurew

[Consept]

@BlackPhil

Because something happened, in this case a lot of votes for Biden does not equal on its own that there was any foul play. As @zurew said you would have to prove the foul play, which is not something that's been done in 60+ lawsuits, as well as organisations like Fox who said the lie being successfully sued for defamation. Just saying 'isn't this a weird thing that happened?', does not amount to a serious conversation on the topic, espeicially when we have concrete proof that it wasn't the case. 

If you accept, pending any proof you have, that the election wasn't rigged then you have to contend with the capitol being stormed on a lie. Which either makes trump very stupid and delisional or that he was trying to subvert democracy and stay in power through force and manipulation pf his followers 

[Tanz]

4 hours ago, Consept said:

new era of truth but then votes in a guy

He made a point how Trump is honestly an asshole and not being politically correct and then do the opposite. He has a point there.  The nation is desperate for the truth and the rather take him than he lied to over and over. 

[Consept]

2 hours ago, Tanz said:

He made a point how Trump is honestly an asshole and not being politically correct and then do the opposite. He has a point there.  The nation is desperate for the truth and the rather take him than he lied to over and over. 

People say he's an asshole and not PC but it's really a distraction, which gives the impression you're making a criticism but in reality you're actually not addressing the most egregious things that he's done and aspects of his personality. 

I understand the sentiment of wanting more clarity in politics and on the face of it I do agree. However Trump is not truthful, when people say they want truth and point to Trump it suggests to me that what they really want is someone to identify what they're worried about, which Trump does, and then provide a solution, which Trump doesn't do. What Trump does do is convince them that he can solve these problems, which is dishonest. The truth for example with inflation is that yes it's higher but the US is doing much better than every other developed nation. Unemployment is also at its lowest, Trump had said the opposite on both these issues and then claimed he can solve the non-existent issue. So no he's not honest. 

People priortise politicians that make them feel good rather than truth, it has always been this way but I think Trump has taken it to another level.