Leo is Wrong About Trump - Accountability Predictions

[Leo Gura]

3 hours ago, GenuinePerspectiveXC said:

My position is systemic.  If hundreds of thousands of people are already migrating illegally each month, and they want to add:

incentives + amnesty + open borders

No major left-wing political candidate is advocating open borders. This is some bogeyman the right wing created.

Also, applying for asylum is LEGAL.

I have no problem with border enforcement as long as it's humane.

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, Zizzero said:

And yes, I absolutely think you contribute to this. Your emphasis on categorizing and generalizing people for example through your use of Spiral Dynamics is merely painting an image of these political debates being a questions of good vs evil.

That's a serious misunderstanding of Spiral Dynamics. SD stages are not good or evil. It's just relative degrees of awareness and development.

The reason some people don't like SD is if they find themselves low on the scale and then judge themselves that that is bad and unacceptable. But SD never said you are bad for being at a lower level.

There's nothing evil about saying that person X is in 3rd grade while person Y is in 12th grade.

Development Psychology and Spiral Dynamics help us understand one another better. It's the exactly opposite of calling people evil.

[GenuinePerspectiveXC]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

No major left-wing political candidate is advocating open borders. This is some bogeyman the right wing created.

Also, applying for asylum is LEGAL.

I have no problem with border enforcement as long as it's humane.

Just about all of them say they want:  

complete amnesty + citizenship for everyone + free medical benefits + free university

 

Effectively - this is open borders - and it won't be paid for by the people advocating it

Edited July 22, 2019 by GenuinePerspectiveXC

[Leo Gura]

17 minutes ago, GenuinePerspectiveXC said:

All of them say they want:  complete amnesty + citizenship for everyone + free medical benefits.

That means no consequences - and effectively - open borders.

Firstly, that is NOT open borders. Our borders are enforced and always have been enforced, even under liberal presidents. The threat of deportation and other problems are always there for illegals.

Amnesty + citizenship is the same issue. Amnesty was done under Regan and even many conservatives are okay with amnesty as long as the border is enforced.

The problem of amnesty isn't really a liberal one, it's a practical one. What do you do with 10 million+ illegals who've been here for years? Deporting them all would be unworkable, expensive, damaging to the economy, and cruel. So that leaves us with 2 options: 1) do nothing, 2) amnesty.

Amnesty usually involves paying fines and making other contributions to society.

Illegals pay sales tax, local tax, and payroll taxes while not receiving social security, Medicare, or other benefits. So to say that they will get free medical benefits is not quite right. And if illegals are given amnesty, they then pay into the system just like everyone else, so their medical benefits are not free.

And finally, it's not like you have a solution to illegals coming to the USA. They will come anyway. Most illegals are visa overstays from airports, not border crossings. No wall is going to stop it. Walls will just be climbed over or under, or flown around. So the problem of illegals will remain.

If you really want to stop illegals then the only workable solution is to provide massive help to their home countries to boost their governments and economies. That would be a great long-term strategy. The US could loan those countries money similar to the Marshall Plan for rebuilding Europe.

The only other option is a heavily militarized border like North/South Korea. But that's quite barbaric. Policing that entire border rigorously would waste more money than it's worth.

[GenuinePerspectiveXC]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Our borders are enforced and always have been enforced, even under liberal presidents.

We're not talking about liberals.  We're talking about virtue-signaling progressives.

 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Amnesty was done under Regan

And it was a mistake.

 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The problem of amnesty [is] a practical one.

Perhaps we should create incentives and compound the problem /s

 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Firstly, that is NOT open borders

I say it effectively is.  What's to stop everyone from doing whatever the hell they want?  No sovereignty, no reason for a border.

 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

What do you do with 10 million+ illegals who've been here for years?

It's between 10 - 40 million.

 

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Deporting them all would be unworkable, expensive, damaging to the economy, and cruel.

Are you completely against deportations?  Because that is open borders

Edited July 22, 2019 by GenuinePerspectiveXC

[Zizzero]

 

59 minutes ago, Apparation of Jack said:

Please don't make the mistake that too many spiritual people make and think spirituality is somehow "above" or "unconcerned with" political issues. The Buddha railed against the corrupt caste system of his day, despite all the resistance he got for it. Jesus called out the Temple authorities and the Romans for their hypocrisy and oppression. Spirituality and politics are deeply intertwined. 

I actually believe the opposite. Spirituality does not make you an expert on politics; they are different things. But obviously there are always lessons that you learn in one field which you can apply to other fields. I agree that political questions are important ones; I personally am super interested in politics. I simply believe that ideological wars and constant arguments have no place on a personal development and spirituality forum. But the ones I'm looking at when making this criticism are exactly the ones who pride themselves on being the nonideological ones. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

SD stages are not good or evil. It's just relative degrees of awareness and development.

The reason some people don't like SD is if they find themselves low on the scale and then judge themselves that that is bad and unacceptable. But SD never said you are bad for being at a lower level.

There's nothing evil about saying that person X is in 3rd grade while person Y is in 12th grade.

Development Psychology and Spiral Dynamics help us understand one another better. It's the exactly opposite of calling people evil.

Fully agreed. That was not what I was trying to say - quite the opposite actually. My criticism was the use of SD to determine the quality of someone's beliefs and ideas. A true statement is true whether it's said by a 3rd grader or a 12th grader. Painting a cultural debate as green vs blue/orange and saying that the reason we should support the green side because they are more highly developed is what I dislike. It doesn't get to the core of issues and, as you said, since higher stages aren't better, a blue perspective is sometimes more useful than a green perspective. All it does is prevent the side that's supposedly green from listening to the other side because why would they listen to something that's below them. (On top of that you have the practical problem of assigning the correct stage to a person or policy which in reality is often more complex and difficult than we would like to admit). What I'm trying to say is this: An individual does not have to be tier 2 to say smart and true things. To quote something you said in your SD series: The map is not the territory. In fact, there is a real risk of using a model you like in an absolutist stage blue fashion.

What I perceive as toxic is seeing two sides arguing which both believe they have the absolute truth on normative questions and therefore don't see any value in listening, but instead in throwing their opinion at other people because its' them who are the problem. 

[Angelo John Gage]

@Leo Gura @GenuinePerspectiveXC @GenuinePerspectiveXC

You all are making good points but totally no one is mentioning the physical aspect of immigration or politics. In my opinion, all immigration should be totally halted until every person here has a job. You cannot argue and tell me we need to add more people to this sinking ship. We are not the best country on Earth, we are in debt 22 trillion and have the most UNHEALTHY people on the planet. Retards like to quote the GDP or stock market, meanwhile our children are overdosing on heroine; we have half the country wanting to kill the other half; highest obesity rates; highest incarceration rates; getting dumber every year and literally going into a death spiral. So to add more people to this disaster is absolutely stupid until we fix it. And yet when you say this, as I do, the only thing people can do is cry "racism" or some other appeal to emotion instead of realizing there is no reason to add more people to a country that is as sick and ruined as ours. We have 320 million people, when do we stop? Why not have 1 billion people immigrate here. When is it enough immigration?

Another factor no one dares to say, is this: Demographics is destiny. Our population has SUB-par birthrates and idiots think importing new people is going to NOT literally ethnically cleanse the current one lol. Instead of promoting current citizens to have more children, lets import foreigners. Yes that makes sense. We need more slave labor! Except doing so will dramatically change the country to something way worse; becoming the very countries those people fled from. There is a reason why certain nations around the world are in 3rd world status, and never once achieved ANY technologically advanced civilizations whatsoever, and its not because lack of education, "racism" or whatever. Its more nuanced than that. If you think you can take some dude from the Congo and throw him in the middle of Sweden, and think he's going to become a law abiding citizen, when the average IQ in some African countries (genetic factor) is 70, you're deluded as fuck. If you think 70 IQ people can build 100 IQ countries, again, deluded as fuck. I've attached a picture below showing you this. No amount of education will change these countries because magic words don't change genetic behavior and habits, like many Marxists believe.

And all this doesn't just include race, if you have too many competing ideologies in one area, you are asking for conflict. If you think you can have a Majority Wahhabist community in a part of the US and not expect issues, again, deluded. Apply this logic to any ideology. That's the problem with MOST people when it comes to politics and human nature; they COMPLETELY pretend the race/genetic factor doesn't exist and blame ideological factors, continuing the stupid notion that "diversity is a strength" when not one person can ever give an example of when division caused unity lol. "Oh but we have different food and shit!" Yes, that's worth the crime, chaos, hate crimes and the rest that comes when "diversity" is forced instead of being organic. People like George Soros are doing a good thing shoving inassimilable people into Europe in mass, feeding off the welfare system getting free I-phones, 5-star hotels, sexually assaulting/raping women and committing murder, while the Europeans are working their asses off to subsidize this nonsense.  This is a taboo and super politically verboten topic, but that doesn't make it false. The same applies to some 1st world citizen, throw some White scientist with a 200 IQ in the middle of the Congo and see how long he lasts, while the locals easily do.

We evolved in our environments and that is why certain government work in certain areas, but not others. You can never have socialism work here in the US because we are simply TOO big and TOO diverse. Socialism could work when your country is homogenous. It works in Northern Europe because those countries are composed of mostly White Europeans. Fuck, speaking of socialism, even fucking HITLER made it work. Nazis had the highest standard of living on Earth in Hitler's time. In fact, Hitler was Time's man of the year in 1938. Why, because he pulled off what they called "the German Miracle." Germany went from 6 million unemployed to everyone having a job living in the most prosperous country on earth, while everyone else was facing a depression within 4 years. Why? Because he created a homogenous state that had a HUGE welfare net for Germans and took care of Germans. Yes, it was totalitarian, and yes, it was anti-Semitic and the rest is history, but no one care discredit what the Nazis did in only 4 years, that our presidents haven't done in 100. BTW, most liberals would agree with many Nazi policies, and they don't even know it. You could quote Mein Kampf and they would agree (I've done it.) The reason why even the Nazis, of all people, pulled this off is because studies have shown that people are more giving and charitable to their own group. For example, if you voted Hillary, you would not donate anything to Trump fundraisers. Humans are tribal by nature; racially, religiously, politically, and almost every single possible distinction. I've been there myself, and evolved out of this tribalism. I don't' think Leo would donate to Unspirituality . com being the fact that this dude is constantly on his case and against his work. So even Leo see's him as other. Sure he can "love and appreciate him" but he will not financially support his work and he see's it as counter his work.

Different people around the world EVOLVED into different ethnic groups because of their different environments. Animals evolved this way, and to think we didn't is silly. We humans clearly have evolved with different moralities, cultures, genetic strengths and weaknesses (I.e. physical adaptions and immunities to disease) and to believe, against all evidence, that we can just cross imaginary lines and learn from books to make us all equal people is ridiculous. That is not to say all human life should not be considered equally valuable and people should be treated different because of it, but quite the contrary; to understand and accept the realities of race/ethnicity and appreciate the human biodiversity, instead of pretending it doesn't exist because "muh Hitler" or "racists" will help us better solve our differences and problems. The fact is, none of us are equal, not even twins. Equality only exists under law, but never in nature. So our laws should make sure people are treated equal, but never will people BE equal. 

Furthermore, that is not to say, that from these areas there aren't people who are outliers; nor that people in high IQ countries are "good" or don't have low IQ neighbors, or that Low IQ is "bad" and they can't be good people (all of this is relative) but the fact is, to expect all humans to act the same and think they could act the same in some kumbaya idealist WORLD govt (more susceptible to corruption of the few) is a super delusion. Even a turquoise-Gaia-world-government would be corruptible and make policies to enforce its own survival. There is no way it would allow former stage policies to exist and interefer with the current status quo order; thus even this so-called ultimate stage will oppress some people. This also assumes that all of humanity will one day become super aware and "enlightened" This will never happen and cannot happen. What reality has shown is that such people are always a minority surrounded by a super majority of mindless zombies. That is the nature of this reality thus far and there is no evidence to show otherwise. Sure, we have progressed from SOME bad things we've done as humans, and yet more sick and twisted things arise in other forms despite our progression (whatever that even means). There is no "end game" to this. There is no final political form or govt that will solve everything. There will always be a struggle. That is the nature of this reality. 

If one insists and MUST have immigration, than at least it should be an immigration policy that is MERIT BASED. Try immigrating to Japan (which is an Ethno-state btw) without a degree or being able to contribute to Japanese society. Try immigrating to Israel without being Jewish. Currently, our immigration policy is the way it is because BOTH sides benefit: Democrats want to literally remove the current "white" majority since almost all POC vote left, (which they do); which is why we have liberals constantly catering to minorities; because if all minorities are combined, and get some white virtue-signalers, they can overcome the "evil" White majority. But just imagine the condition our country would be if it was 80% Latino, probably would reflect those wonderful countries like Brazil or Columbia, am I right? And ironically, even the Republicans love big business and benefit from cheap labor of same said people. It is all part of the same game and the elites, on both sides, are never affected as they live in gated communities and have resources, multiple houses, funds in various countries etc. You also see these liberals who cry about racism and shit yet live in all-white neighborhoods and are closet racists themselves. And yes, conservatives can be racist too...news flash, anyone can be racist. But even the world "racist" has lost all its meaning; people are called racist for anything. I've been called literally every name in the book while doing activism on Twitter and its just comical and sad at the same time.

And even if you wish to discard everything I said here, i'll leave this Barny-style presentation on mass immigration using marbles. I'd love to see counter arguments to anything I said here, without appeals to emotion and tell me how the opposite of what I said here, would benefit ANY country at all.

Thanks guys.

 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Angelo John Gage

[Angelo John Gage]

can't blame lack of education, colonialism, slavery, racism, Nazis, etc on this. IQ is a genetic trait. It is not the ONLY measure of intelligence, but it has good predictors. This is not right wing bullshit, this is scientific and due to the political correctness we see today, this is totally dismissed in favor of retarded and false platitudes. 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Angelo John Gage

[Forestluv]

19 minutes ago, Angelo John Gage said:

IQ is a genetic trait. 

That is a gross over-simplification. IQ is a multi-factorial trait that involves an extremely complex set of many variables (including genetics). 

I teach genetics at a University level. To say science supports that statement is highly misleading and inaccurate because it over-simplifies underlying complexity - creating a distortion. 

 

[Angelo John Gage]

4 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

That is a gross over-simplification. IQ is a multi-factorial trait that involves an extremely complex set of many variables (including genetics). 

 

Yes, but people pretend that genetics has nothing to do with it, and that reading books will turn a 70 IQ person into a 100 IQ person. IQ is hereditable and there have been experiments done to show this. Usually IQ of a person is the average of their parents. If one parent has 120 IQ and married a lower IQ person say 80, child will be in between ( actually dysgenics in this case)

[Angelo John Gage]

Again, IQ doesn't mean superiority or whatever; Nature doesn't give a shit if you can build rockets or not, but it does explain why different low IQ areas of the world have always been and will probably always be, less advanced that higher IQ areas. And btw, the American IQ is dropping BECAUSE of more immigration. Same with Europe. We are importing low-skilled, low IQ workers then wonder why we get results like this lol. 

Isn't is strange that the more diverse America became from 1965 (90% white) to current (60%), so did the drops of IQ? https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/13/health/falling-iq-scores-study-intl/index.html Is it magic?

 

[Angelo John Gage]

@Ero  You can try, but I already know what you're going to say and that you've already erroneously judged and assume my political ideology or position. (Hint: I don't have one. ) So right off the bat you're wrong about me. I've dealt with this shit for years lol. But go ahead. First starters, please tell me what my belief system is?

Edited July 22, 2019 by Angelo John Gage

[Apparition of Jack]

@Angelo John Gage IQ is malleable. 100 years ago the average IQ for American citizens was 30 points lower than it is today. Does that mean that Americans 100 years ago were "genetically inferior" to modern Americans?

No, of course not, that would be completely ridiculous to suggest that, since they literally created the genetic pool of current Americans. What changed was not some magic shift in race or genetics, but an increase in the economic, social and educational standards of American society.

You take "some dude" from the Congo with an IQ of 70, give him and his community access to safe water, affordable healthcare, quality education, an effective police force, reliable sources of nutrients, a functioning law system, etc., and within two or three decades him and his community's average IQ would've skyrocketed. The reason this hasn't happened is because there just hasn't been the social and political will to do it, not because genetic differences make rises in IQ impossible.

EDIT: This is also nothing to say about how limited IQ is for measuring the health and wisdom of a society, although this has already been touched upon by others.

Edited July 22, 2019 by Apparation of Jack

[Forestluv]

@Angelo John Gage I am not saying you are 100% wrong. From a scientific perspective, what you say has some truth, yet you are over-simplifying it such that your conclusions are inaccurate and highly misleading. As well, the fundamental incomplete and misunderstood is being extrapolated and mixed with other beliefs - which creates a distorted view. 

IQ is a highly nuanced complex issue. It would take me at least a week of genetics classes to cover the basics and it’s not limited to genetics. I would also need to cover the human construct of IQ at social and biological levels. As well statistical analyses within a highly complex set of variables. I could easily spend a full semester on this. Yet the prep would be enormous. 

[Angelo John Gage]

@Apparation of Jack  the average HUMAN IQ is rising, but also the gaps rise in unison. One day the average IQ of Africa could be 100, but the other nations would be 150, get what I mean. As I said, it is heritable. You could theoretically take the highest IQ African genius and breed them if you wanted to the point they become the average. Even your explanation proves my point. have you ever heard of Liberia? Liberia was never colonized and was given literally the same Constitution we have here and the school dropout rate reflects the same as our African American rate, essentially. But the problem is, you have to bring that technology and environment to Africa, and we have tried. In fact, due to our help, African mortality rates are even higher! We send food, we build schools and everything yet its still a disaster there. I would love to see all the world improve, but you cannot bypass evolution. You would have to create an environment and keep it that way long enough for adaption to occur, if it ever does/.

[Angelo John Gage]

@Serotoninluv  I am aware, but it is no coincidence that that map literally shows us the state of the world and which countries are developed more than others. Again, this has NOTHING to do with superiority vs inferiority. One can argue African tribes living one with nature and are not destroying their environment like we are, are superior because they DON'T need to technology to live. I would agree with that myself to some extent. But even they have their own issues. They don't have medicine like we do and could die from the flu, for example. 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Angelo John Gage

[Angelo John Gage]

I'll give a better analogy. Imagine if this forum became majority stage blue conservatives. would it be actualized. org anymore or a blumpf-tard circle jerk? Imagine we imported 1 million MAGA users here and gave them mod privileges lol. How long would it take for these MAGA folks to start kicking and blocking people and totally destroy what this website was meant to be. Again, take this with ANY different groups or any kind. If we added 1 million radical feminists, or Marxists, or whatever. 

 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Angelo John Gage

[Apparition of Jack]

@Angelo John Gage America's current social ills are not due to genetic differences between ethnicities, but due to decades of economic and social mismanagement at the hands of people who really should've known better. A prosperous, safe and coherent multiracial America is 100% possible, but not so long as there are devils who try and divide and manipulate the population for their own egoic needs. It will also involve a lot of open re-evaluating by Americans on what it truly means to be an American, but there are answers to this question out there, and when this has been done it will become so obvious at just how much the current feelings of fear and division were simply based on ignorance.

As always, the answer to these problems is to raise the consciousness of society. More consciousness = more integrated, safer, more prosperous society. Less consciousness = more divided, more dangerous, poorer society.

Edited July 22, 2019 by Apparation of Jack

[Forestluv]

28 minutes ago, Angelo John Gage said:

@Serotoninluv  I am aware, but. . . 

You are not aware of what you are unaware of and that “but” is a block and resistance to expansion. 

You are interpreting and extrapolating pieces of information through a lens that is causing distortion. There is some underlying truth, yet there are underlying assumptions and you are extrapolating it to the point that your conclusions are no longer accurate. Your conclusions would not be accepted in the science of mainstream genetics. 

 

 

 

[Angelo John Gage]

@Apparation of Jack  in theory a multiracial America can work, but not a multicultural one, and not one where the founding stock becomes a minority. To say it can be, is like saying China will be Chinese even if we reduce their founding stock to 20 percent while having 40% Arabs and 40% Italians (I'm Italian); expecting that majority to reflect that nation and not totally change it to something not chiense, which is NOT in the best interest of the Chinese. Who wants a country that was founded by their people to be totally replaced. This is literally ethnic cleansing.  Multiculturalism, where competing ideologies and cultures are striving to lord over the other in a divided two-party dictatorship is a massive problem. That's what we have here and in the West currently.