Sorry I forgot he posts under the name of a now dead Soviet Union defector who laid this all out in the 1980's about how the commie subversion was going to go and it still keeps ticking along.
Well, you're right, if there is no God, there are no rights. Might makes right, the strongest man wins. No basis on which to judge actions as being wrong or right and no basis on which to complain about ones you don't like. People thinking there is no God is exactly how we got where we are.
Scott, the US Constitution preserves, protects and defends rights seen by its authors as self-evident and inalienable. Where they come from is not as important as the ratification and extension of that document. It's a contract of the self-governed. "There are no rights"... is that nihilism?
Maybe he just means that the US constitution makes a *terrible* job at defending any "rights". This is the same as saying that there are no guaranteed rights, which is absolutely true.
The prose in the constitution is all about "republic", and yet the US works exactly as a democracy. OK, it is slightly more difficult to change the constitution. But all you need is a little bigger majority. The constitution can and will be changed and become unrecognizable without even needing to go outside what is assumed to be legal by the constitution itself.
The US is really a democracy that wants to believe that is a republic.
No, rights can be imposed by force as well. If a lot of people come with guns to your house thinking that it is their right to take your property via taxes, you dont need to agree: They will take it.
On the other hand, the individual rights that the US constitution is claimed to protect could be imposed on the same way. Consent is not necessary.
What if one regards "God" as the energy of the universe? With all that entails: The good, the bad, the ugly, the absurd, the fun, and the funny. We probably understand very little of how the universe works.
The "God" of most religions still by and large reflects the social structure of the area and era from which they came. Such as the bronze age, for Christianity, during which emperors and kings were the norm, so naturally that's how they believed the universe to be organized.
Excellent view of where we are at. Thanks and keep fighting. The tide is turning and Florida & Montana are now joined by Alberta on the long walk back. Expect more.
I don't want to "like" this, but you get the idea. It's a terrible precise and true article, accurate and horrific, and for that, I both admire it and can't stand what it's saying. Great job, terrible truth.
Centralization of power will always create a dictatorship because centralized power removes the alternative of people to escape your tyranny.
A corollary is that absolutely *any* proposal that does not involve breaking up the central power will never result in less tyranny.
All the BS about "more representation", "better politicians", even "freedom of speech" will never solve the problem. Without the possibility of running away from tyrants, they will all continue there.
You lost me at non-violent protest on Jan 6, 2020. Why can't the Frontline doctors talk about censorship etc without excusing a bunch of Trumpites and trumpettes. Why do you intermingle them
Medical freedom, political freedom, lack of censorship have zero to do with a bunch of white supremecists on Jan6th wearing shirts that said "6 million were not enough. I am very disappointed in Frontline doctors for excusing Trump's crazy paranoia.
I do not believe the corporate media's characterization of the protestors with such a broad brush stroke, either. I'm not too keen on Trump, and in fact supported Marianne Williamson; but also supported the protest, seeing lots of weirdness in the election results, such as thousands of "absentee ballot votes" in a row coming in for Biden in Michigan. They didn't even do a good job of hiding it.
We don't really know what is true about those absentee ballot votes. Secondly, supporting Jan 6th doesn't mean one simply supports a protest, it means you support violence, killings, antisemitism, racism and sedition. Not to mention a crazed, ignorant, narcissistic lunatic.
I don't trust media reporting of it one bit. Del Bigree - a self-described liberal regarding most issues, who now says he is "politically marooned" - reported that outside of the idiots at the capitol steps - who many among the protestors themselves were doing their best to restrain - it was a peaceful demonstration. Dr. Simone Gold of America's Frontline Doctors was arrested on trumped-up (ahem) charges for making a speech. I don't trust the media for accurate reporting at all.
I watched it live as it was taking place. I guess people have different viewpoints regarding what is peaceful and what is not. I took part in many peaceful anti-Vietnam demonstrations, got pepper sprayed and even jailed once. None that I participated in even resembled Jan 6th. No doubt the bombing of Hiroshima was peaceful. Nobody heard a sound afterwards.
my bff was a poll worker in northern Michigan. her job was to check people's signatures on those mail in ballots, against samples of each individual's signatures out of a huge, hardcopy ledger. after working at it for 8 hours, she said she questioned about a dozen, which were bumped up the line for county officials to also scrutinize. what happened after that or happened elsewhere, she of course cannot attest to but one cannot say there were no checks going on. if Michigan was a formerly red state that all of a sudden went 'blue', that would make it fishy but I fear we will never really know.
They'd be really stupid to plant a lot of bogus ballots in northern Michigan, where one might expect overwhelming support for Trump. More likely in places where there are so many they can't take such time to verify anything. But we really don't know, and worse yet, can't. It is way too easy to rig an election.
Consider that what you know about Jan 6th comes from the same people you don't trust to tell you about vaccines, about COVID-19, about corporate capture of public institutions, who do want to censor you, who do want to control you, who do want you to believe what you are told.
If you are not getting your information about Jan 6th from them, how did you know who wore what when? I mean, were you there?
Your thinking is locked in canals if you take skepticism towards what you're saying as diehard support for what you're opposing. It is exactly that kind of automatic response you probably recognize in others as evidence they're not properly thinking critically but instead being driven through their emotions.
I'm not "telling" you "those videos" are fake. I'm asking if you were there. If you weren't there, where are the videos? You could have easily linked to them: so what's their source? What's their provenance? Who edited them? Who produced them? Did you find them yourself or did you follow links someone sent you?
You hyperfocused on the word 'told' and instead said "It was what I saw," but what you *saw* wasn't something happening before you in real-time. You're saying, instead —what? That you watched *videos* of something and now believe that's the totality of what occurred?
And your belief is so strong it permits you to discount *completely* anything associated with "Jan 6th." That's the power of psychological operations: canalizing emotional reactions to enable crimestop to feel like a natural conclusion. You read CJ Hopkins, right? Embrace a more skeptical viewpoint, particularly if you find yourself immediately thinking someone who disagrees with you must therefore be your enemy's friend.
I am going to tell you one more time that I watched it live as it was happening-and later on videos which were the same as when I watched it live. It had nothing to do with emotionnal issues. It was a seditious act. call it fun and games if you wish. we are all entitled to our opinions and nobody has come down from heaven above or up from hell to say you are right and I am wrong. I disagree with you-plain and simple. Get over yourself.
It appears that part of the plan was to polarize the masses by politizing our health. Anything and everything that keeps us separate from each other or making the other a bad guy is good for the authoritarians and bad for us. IE, hate those friends, neighbors, and family members who aren't jabbed. My friend has twins at a fancy liberal college and they got pressure to be jabbed otherwise they were derided as trumpers. So they did. And, now one them is having 3 week long migraines.
Its like the Dr. that says "Well, I've got some good news and some bad news..."
The patient says "What's the good news?"
Dr.: "They're going to name a new disease after you."
The good news in this article could be that we're approaching the end of an authoritarian phase in American history... that bad news, however, is that we're entering into a totalitarian phase.
The devil's posse is bigger than we ever imagined...... trade unions though....that's disgusting......our union dues are supporting this...... think about that for minute.......
Unfortunately, totalitarianism wouldn't be complete without public approval...
It's ordinary citizens who mass-flag, report & harass dissidents on social media - the authoritues would have a difficult time without their help & cooperation...
With everyone 'nudged' into attacking each other - I feel ultimately a new philosophy is needed. One which transcends groupthink & tribal loyalties, as a first step towards being truly free...
IMHO - more activism just leads to more of the same... The system is in meltdown - the best thing to do is maybe withdraw & let it die a natural death.
Direct hit! Yep, divide and conquer is their game. The shitstem IS in a meltdown, but the solipsistic camps who are under the spell of some groupthink or another cannot recognize it. I think there is a not so loud majority who are fed up with this divisive BS, and the time is ripe for a sane, rational alternative to arise. Not necessarily moderate, as such, but perhaps more accommodating, offering more options?
Depends where one is. Places like Florida are moving AWAY from totalitarianism. Only about 30% of people in the US have gotten "boosted". A smaller percentage have subjected their kids to the jabs.
The thing that concerns me most, of all things, is the overturning of Roe v Wade, throwing the Dems, who have been the main perpetrators of such authoritarianism, a lifeline when they were reeling. Not because I am pro-abortion, but because I'm pro-realism. Now they will probably misinterpret their upcoming victories as some sort of vote of confidence to move from authoritarianism to out-and-out totalitarianism. At least where they CAN. I'm so glad I don't live in California or the other bluest coastal states.
This solipsism on the part of the right the moved them to overturn Roe v Wade and think they can run successfully on it is not unlike the Dems having unwittingly enabled Trump's election by nominating HRC, who only die-hard mainstream Dems really liked at all, and worse yet was the very epitome of "more of the same" when the American public wanted something different. Anything different. Which I think the American public wants again, by and large, but not if they fear it means denying abortions in the most extreme cases.
Above all, rationality has taken a beating. If we ever needed another party to supersede these solipsistic fools, it is now. Tulsi Gabbrd's defection from the Dems for the very reasons stated in this post is an indicator of hope that something may arise to fill the need, as the Republican party of Lincoln did the last time the nation was this divided.
I would much prefer a party whose aim is not to attempt to fit all people into a "one size fits all" box; but rather to enable us to be governed (or not) AS we want to - with a la carte options galore - to the extent possible, within a Consitutional framework that protects our rights.
the otherwise excellent essay lost me at his calling Jan 6 a 'non-violent' protest. uh... I watched it live. there was violence and other crimes committed. very obviously so. the alleged unconstitutional treatment of suspects is dead wrong of course. but really disingenuous to refer to the thing as non-violent.
Do not underestimate the power of the media to cherry-pick footage and make 0.1% of what went on look like 99% of what went on. And I'm not a Trumper, but any means. I supported Marianne Williamson, the most authentically liberal of the lot. And also the only one who is not fully bought in on vaxxes.
"Roof Top Koreans" is an interesting substack.
Sorry I forgot he posts under the name of a now dead Soviet Union defector who laid this all out in the 1980's about how the commie subversion was going to go and it still keeps ticking along.
https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/how-to-rooftop#details
Well, you're right, if there is no God, there are no rights. Might makes right, the strongest man wins. No basis on which to judge actions as being wrong or right and no basis on which to complain about ones you don't like. People thinking there is no God is exactly how we got where we are.
I think I understood you maybe better than you assume.
Scott, the US Constitution preserves, protects and defends rights seen by its authors as self-evident and inalienable. Where they come from is not as important as the ratification and extension of that document. It's a contract of the self-governed. "There are no rights"... is that nihilism?
Maybe he just means that the US constitution makes a *terrible* job at defending any "rights". This is the same as saying that there are no guaranteed rights, which is absolutely true.
The prose in the constitution is all about "republic", and yet the US works exactly as a democracy. OK, it is slightly more difficult to change the constitution. But all you need is a little bigger majority. The constitution can and will be changed and become unrecognizable without even needing to go outside what is assumed to be legal by the constitution itself.
The US is really a democracy that wants to believe that is a republic.
I completely agree. I was more trying to address this nonsensical idea that "the (current US) constitution guarantees our rights".
It is even possible to create one that does, but definitely not this one.
No, rights can be imposed by force as well. If a lot of people come with guns to your house thinking that it is their right to take your property via taxes, you dont need to agree: They will take it.
On the other hand, the individual rights that the US constitution is claimed to protect could be imposed on the same way. Consent is not necessary.
What if one regards "God" as the energy of the universe? With all that entails: The good, the bad, the ugly, the absurd, the fun, and the funny. We probably understand very little of how the universe works.
The "God" of most religions still by and large reflects the social structure of the area and era from which they came. Such as the bronze age, for Christianity, during which emperors and kings were the norm, so naturally that's how they believed the universe to be organized.
I would much prefer Curly of the Three Stooges.
Dr. McDonald's Substack - https://markmcdonaldmd.substack.com/
Great article!! Dr McDonald has been advocating for kids since the beginning.
Excellent view of where we are at. Thanks and keep fighting. The tide is turning and Florida & Montana are now joined by Alberta on the long walk back. Expect more.
I don't want to "like" this, but you get the idea. It's a terrible precise and true article, accurate and horrific, and for that, I both admire it and can't stand what it's saying. Great job, terrible truth.
Centralization of power will always create a dictatorship because centralized power removes the alternative of people to escape your tyranny.
A corollary is that absolutely *any* proposal that does not involve breaking up the central power will never result in less tyranny.
All the BS about "more representation", "better politicians", even "freedom of speech" will never solve the problem. Without the possibility of running away from tyrants, they will all continue there.
You lost me at non-violent protest on Jan 6, 2020. Why can't the Frontline doctors talk about censorship etc without excusing a bunch of Trumpites and trumpettes. Why do you intermingle them
Medical freedom, political freedom, lack of censorship have zero to do with a bunch of white supremecists on Jan6th wearing shirts that said "6 million were not enough. I am very disappointed in Frontline doctors for excusing Trump's crazy paranoia.
I do not believe the corporate media's characterization of the protestors with such a broad brush stroke, either. I'm not too keen on Trump, and in fact supported Marianne Williamson; but also supported the protest, seeing lots of weirdness in the election results, such as thousands of "absentee ballot votes" in a row coming in for Biden in Michigan. They didn't even do a good job of hiding it.
We don't really know what is true about those absentee ballot votes. Secondly, supporting Jan 6th doesn't mean one simply supports a protest, it means you support violence, killings, antisemitism, racism and sedition. Not to mention a crazed, ignorant, narcissistic lunatic.
BTW-I don't support Biden either and his puppet role for big pharma and support of covid nonsense.
I don't trust media reporting of it one bit. Del Bigree - a self-described liberal regarding most issues, who now says he is "politically marooned" - reported that outside of the idiots at the capitol steps - who many among the protestors themselves were doing their best to restrain - it was a peaceful demonstration. Dr. Simone Gold of America's Frontline Doctors was arrested on trumped-up (ahem) charges for making a speech. I don't trust the media for accurate reporting at all.
I watched it live as it was taking place. I guess people have different viewpoints regarding what is peaceful and what is not. I took part in many peaceful anti-Vietnam demonstrations, got pepper sprayed and even jailed once. None that I participated in even resembled Jan 6th. No doubt the bombing of Hiroshima was peaceful. Nobody heard a sound afterwards.
my bff was a poll worker in northern Michigan. her job was to check people's signatures on those mail in ballots, against samples of each individual's signatures out of a huge, hardcopy ledger. after working at it for 8 hours, she said she questioned about a dozen, which were bumped up the line for county officials to also scrutinize. what happened after that or happened elsewhere, she of course cannot attest to but one cannot say there were no checks going on. if Michigan was a formerly red state that all of a sudden went 'blue', that would make it fishy but I fear we will never really know.
They'd be really stupid to plant a lot of bogus ballots in northern Michigan, where one might expect overwhelming support for Trump. More likely in places where there are so many they can't take such time to verify anything. But we really don't know, and worse yet, can't. It is way too easy to rig an election.
Consider that what you know about Jan 6th comes from the same people you don't trust to tell you about vaccines, about COVID-19, about corporate capture of public institutions, who do want to censor you, who do want to control you, who do want you to believe what you are told.
If you are not getting your information about Jan 6th from them, how did you know who wore what when? I mean, were you there?
It wasn't what I was told. It was what I saw. There is a difference, you know.
Saw while you were there?
so you're telling me those videos were all fake?? Wow. You are a true Trump believer. Were you in every state for the ballot counts too?
Your thinking is locked in canals if you take skepticism towards what you're saying as diehard support for what you're opposing. It is exactly that kind of automatic response you probably recognize in others as evidence they're not properly thinking critically but instead being driven through their emotions.
I'm not "telling" you "those videos" are fake. I'm asking if you were there. If you weren't there, where are the videos? You could have easily linked to them: so what's their source? What's their provenance? Who edited them? Who produced them? Did you find them yourself or did you follow links someone sent you?
You hyperfocused on the word 'told' and instead said "It was what I saw," but what you *saw* wasn't something happening before you in real-time. You're saying, instead —what? That you watched *videos* of something and now believe that's the totality of what occurred?
And your belief is so strong it permits you to discount *completely* anything associated with "Jan 6th." That's the power of psychological operations: canalizing emotional reactions to enable crimestop to feel like a natural conclusion. You read CJ Hopkins, right? Embrace a more skeptical viewpoint, particularly if you find yourself immediately thinking someone who disagrees with you must therefore be your enemy's friend.
https://www.onsecrethunt.com/what-is-platos-theory-of-reality/
I am going to tell you one more time that I watched it live as it was happening-and later on videos which were the same as when I watched it live. It had nothing to do with emotionnal issues. It was a seditious act. call it fun and games if you wish. we are all entitled to our opinions and nobody has come down from heaven above or up from hell to say you are right and I am wrong. I disagree with you-plain and simple. Get over yourself.
It appears that part of the plan was to polarize the masses by politizing our health. Anything and everything that keeps us separate from each other or making the other a bad guy is good for the authoritarians and bad for us. IE, hate those friends, neighbors, and family members who aren't jabbed. My friend has twins at a fancy liberal college and they got pressure to be jabbed otherwise they were derided as trumpers. So they did. And, now one them is having 3 week long migraines.
Its like the Dr. that says "Well, I've got some good news and some bad news..."
The patient says "What's the good news?"
Dr.: "They're going to name a new disease after you."
The good news in this article could be that we're approaching the end of an authoritarian phase in American history... that bad news, however, is that we're entering into a totalitarian phase.
The devil's posse is bigger than we ever imagined...... trade unions though....that's disgusting......our union dues are supporting this...... think about that for minute.......
https://gettr.com/post/p1vfxbna8ce
Unfortunately, totalitarianism wouldn't be complete without public approval...
It's ordinary citizens who mass-flag, report & harass dissidents on social media - the authoritues would have a difficult time without their help & cooperation...
With everyone 'nudged' into attacking each other - I feel ultimately a new philosophy is needed. One which transcends groupthink & tribal loyalties, as a first step towards being truly free...
IMHO - more activism just leads to more of the same... The system is in meltdown - the best thing to do is maybe withdraw & let it die a natural death.
Direct hit! Yep, divide and conquer is their game. The shitstem IS in a meltdown, but the solipsistic camps who are under the spell of some groupthink or another cannot recognize it. I think there is a not so loud majority who are fed up with this divisive BS, and the time is ripe for a sane, rational alternative to arise. Not necessarily moderate, as such, but perhaps more accommodating, offering more options?
Depends where one is. Places like Florida are moving AWAY from totalitarianism. Only about 30% of people in the US have gotten "boosted". A smaller percentage have subjected their kids to the jabs.
The thing that concerns me most, of all things, is the overturning of Roe v Wade, throwing the Dems, who have been the main perpetrators of such authoritarianism, a lifeline when they were reeling. Not because I am pro-abortion, but because I'm pro-realism. Now they will probably misinterpret their upcoming victories as some sort of vote of confidence to move from authoritarianism to out-and-out totalitarianism. At least where they CAN. I'm so glad I don't live in California or the other bluest coastal states.
This solipsism on the part of the right the moved them to overturn Roe v Wade and think they can run successfully on it is not unlike the Dems having unwittingly enabled Trump's election by nominating HRC, who only die-hard mainstream Dems really liked at all, and worse yet was the very epitome of "more of the same" when the American public wanted something different. Anything different. Which I think the American public wants again, by and large, but not if they fear it means denying abortions in the most extreme cases.
Above all, rationality has taken a beating. If we ever needed another party to supersede these solipsistic fools, it is now. Tulsi Gabbrd's defection from the Dems for the very reasons stated in this post is an indicator of hope that something may arise to fill the need, as the Republican party of Lincoln did the last time the nation was this divided.
I would much prefer a party whose aim is not to attempt to fit all people into a "one size fits all" box; but rather to enable us to be governed (or not) AS we want to - with a la carte options galore - to the extent possible, within a Consitutional framework that protects our rights.
Who else is in? Let's make it happen, already!
the otherwise excellent essay lost me at his calling Jan 6 a 'non-violent' protest. uh... I watched it live. there was violence and other crimes committed. very obviously so. the alleged unconstitutional treatment of suspects is dead wrong of course. but really disingenuous to refer to the thing as non-violent.
Do not underestimate the power of the media to cherry-pick footage and make 0.1% of what went on look like 99% of what went on. And I'm not a Trumper, but any means. I supported Marianne Williamson, the most authentically liberal of the lot. And also the only one who is not fully bought in on vaxxes.
Mar 24, 2016 America: Freedom To Fascism
A documentary that explores the connection between income tax collection and the erosion of civil liberties in America.
https://youtu.be/n2PzcswenxM