WOKE and proud of it....

[Alexis Jacobi]

The stage is yours: imagine for us how liberal Catholic doctrine might be.

Thanks for you inquiry, Mr Boneman!

I wrote:

It is really far more interesting, and also liberal, than most imagine.

Two aspects : what is interesting, and what is liberal. I am surprised by Catholicism’s commitment to themes of justice — social justice — as in respect to industry, labor, and consideration for the well-being of the worker and by extension the family. That is what I was thinking of when I wrote that glorious sentence.

In those early centuries — the 13th for example — the foundations were laid for many of institutions that are core to our civilization. Universities, the education system, hospitals and medicine. Art, literature, drama and certainly music. And then the legal system.

I implied that •most people• tend to see Catholicism as illiberal. And yes, it does depend on how one defines liberty of course.

See for example The Thirteenth Greatest of Centuries by James Walsh.

[Gary Childress]

The stage is yours: imagine for us how liberal Catholic doctrine might be.

Thanks for you inquiry, Mr Boneman!

I wrote:

It is really far more interesting, and also liberal, than most imagine.

Two aspects : what is interesting, and what is liberal. I am surprised by Catholicism’s commitment to themes of justice — social justice — as in respect to industry, labor, and consideration for the well-being of the worker and by extension the family. That is what I was thinking of when I wrote that glorious sentence.

In those early centuries — the 13th for example — the foundations were laid for many of institutions that are core to our civilization. Universities, the education system, hospitals and medicine. Art, literature, drama and certainly music. And then the legal system.

I implied that •most people• tend to see Catholicism as illiberal. And yes, it does depend on how one defines liberty of course.

See for example The Thirteenth Greatest of Centuries by James Walsh.

I tend to wonder if Catholicism led directly to liberal doctrine of if liberal doctrine can be traced back more directly to the Greeks and Early Roman Republic (coming out of the Renaissance). That's sort of the way I learned it growing up, but I suppose there might be a bit of truth to both interpretations. And if there are aspects to liberalism that are indeed worthwhile, then can it only be realized in a Catholic society? Or can liberalism stand independently of theology?

When I was growing up I was taught that the church was more of a restraining force to scientific progress and that liberalism more or less developed alongside Deism, which itself was a relatively radical departure from Catholicism.

[Alexis Jacobi]

An aside i suppose:

“Linguist and activist Noam Chomsky hospitalized in his wife's native country of Brazil after stroke”

[Immanuel Can]

Well again, what you call "the Leftist press" is relative to your own political view.

No. Only "relative" to what they used to be, what they themselves professed to be the reasonable center, until they abandoned it a few years ago.

Alternatively there has been a proliferation of overtly right wing media, Newsmax and OAN in America being examples, whose business model is based on criticising rivals less right wing than they for being "Leftist".

It would be so much harder for them to do that if the Leftists weren't so far Left.

...but have been exposed as ideologically coded with the dominant narratives of the ruling elite lately.

Do you not think that perhaps rival news outlets might have a motive for persuading people that the market leaders are unreliable?[/quote]Perhaps they might. But it's simpler than that. The legacy media have shown themselves to be unreliable. Nobody even had to do it for them. They botched a whole list of major stories by automatically backing the radical Left, and when they were demonstrated to be wrong, they lost credibility.

Examples abound, including practically all their coverage of things like the elections, the demonstrations, the COVID 'crisis,' and the Ukraine and Gaza wars. They're shilling for their masters.

Who is telling you that, and why?

Nobody's "telling me that." Anybody can see it. It's very plain, in all the above cases. To take one: are you still social distancing? Are you wearing a mask? How many shots of things like Astra-Zeneca have you taken lately? Where are the school and business closures today? How about all the closed churches, and all the media-approved (not so "mostly peaceful") riots and burnings? What about the Wuhan lab "conspiracy theory"? How's that one going? What is the state of your trust in the media that lied to you so brazenly, and never even bothered to check the facts?

When the media handles stories with such blatant disregard for facts, evidence and proper investigation, and just repeats the lines sent them by the establishment, it's only a matter of time until people start noticing. The legacy media has destroyed their own credibility, with no help from anybody else. It certainly isn't Newsmax or...what's the other one?...AON that is destroying CNN, NBC, CBS, CBC, BBC, the Guardian, the NYT, and a host of other Leftist outlets. Such tiddly little outlets as Newsmax have nothing close to the reach necessary to do that. The incompetence and veniality of the major news media is doing the job quite nicely, though.

[Gary Childress]

An aside i suppose:

“Linguist and activist Noam Chomsky hospitalized in his wife's native country of Brazil after stroke”

Equally aside: I had a client where I was working for a while claim that God speaks through Chomsky. I was surprised that he knew who Chomsky was.

[Will Bouwman]

...if the Leftists weren't so far Left.

What are the BBC, the Guardian and, to be clear, the London Times so far to the left of?

[attofishpi]

..just to be clear about what is unlikely to be reported on the BBC and other UK mainstream media.

39% of "British" Muslims want their OTHER HALF to VOTE akin to their vote.

How weird is that? Can't say I've seen UK media report on how non muslims want their other half to vote. How stable a relationship do you think you could maintain with someone whose politics you disagree with?

So you don't think the stat: 39% of British Muslims expect wives to obey them.

..can be inferred as 39% of Muslim men would want their spouse to vote in alignment with their own vote?

BTW: Check out the level Labour will stoop to for Muslim votes NOT a Muslim women in sight.. I can further infer from that my above opinion.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... ogyny.html

(From the Daily Mail, headline: Why footage of Angela Rayner grovelling for votes from a room full of Muslim men - with hardly a woman to be seen - shows Labour is pandering to misogyny. - I think by "hardly" they were including Angela Rayner, since she identifies as a woman.

23% of "British" Muslims want Sharia Law above any British Law.

What percentage of Christians do you suppose think their God's commandments are subordinate to secular law?

Not many would care, you may have noticed that Christianity is quite happy to sit aside from enforcing rules upon secular society. I honestly don't think Christ stated anything for the far left to concern themselves with.

Not sure why you are bringing Christianity into this? Islam from MorHamMad and Christianity as the teaching from Christ are polar opposite.

[Immanuel Can]

...if the Leftists weren't so far Left.

What are the BBC, the Guardian and, to be clear, the London Times so far to the left of?

Look at the cases I gave you...I gave you several. Any one of them will show you that these sources were not investigating, checking, following evidence, following science, or reporting neutrally...they were merely serving as conduits for a narrative we can all see now was totally false.

Why did they do that, if they ever were what they want us to suppose they are, namely unpartisan, objective journals reporting in the public interest?

[Gary Childress]

Nobody's "telling me that." Anybody can see it. It's very plain, in all the above cases. To take one: are you still social distancing? Are you wearing a mask? How many shots of things like Astra-Zeneca have you taken lately? Where are the school and business closures today? How about all the closed churches, and all the media-approved (not so "mostly peaceful") riots and burnings? What about the Wuhan lab "conspiracy theory"? How's that one going? What is the state of your trust in the media that lied to you so brazenly, and never even bothered to check the facts?

When the media handles stories with such blatant disregard for facts, evidence and proper investigation, and just repeats the lines sent them by the establishment, it's only a matter of time until people start noticing. The legacy media has destroyed their own credibility, with no help from anybody else. It certainly isn't Newsmax or...what's the other one?...AON that is destroying CNN, NBC, CBS, CBC, BBC, the Guardian, the NYT, and a host of other Leftist outlets. Such tiddly little outlets as Newsmax have nothing close to the reach necessary to do that. The incompetence and veniality of the major news media is doing the job quite nicely, though.

From the looks of it, the Lab in Wuhan may be the origin of the outbreak in humans. It appears that it could have been due to lax safety levels at the lab. I kind of doubt the Chinese researchers working on the project would have knowingly or purposely let the virus out into the public in their own country. It appears that researchers in the respective unit may have unwittingly exposed themselves to the virus. I would think that the most likely cause.

But yeah, some people in the US as well as China may have dropped the ball and probably have the deaths of millions of people around the world hanging on their shoulders. It would be one of (if not) the world's most costly accidents. If I had that kind of weight on my shoulders, I'd plead guilty and throw myself on the mercy of the court and hope they give me life in prison. Who can handle that kind of guilt?

[accelafine]

I suppose bird flu came out of a 'lab' too. And swine flu. And Spanish flu. FFS. Some people just HAVE to make up crap to make their pathetic lives more interesting. What difference does it make anyway?

[Immanuel Can]

Nobody's "telling me that." Anybody can see it. It's very plain, in all the above cases. To take one: are you still social distancing? Are you wearing a mask? How many shots of things like Astra-Zeneca have you taken lately? Where are the school and business closures today? How about all the closed churches, and all the media-approved (not so "mostly peaceful") riots and burnings? What about the Wuhan lab "conspiracy theory"? How's that one going? What is the state of your trust in the media that lied to you so brazenly, and never even bothered to check the facts?

When the media handles stories with such blatant disregard for facts, evidence and proper investigation, and just repeats the lines sent them by the establishment, it's only a matter of time until people start noticing. The legacy media has destroyed their own credibility, with no help from anybody else. It certainly isn't Newsmax or...what's the other one?...AON that is destroying CNN, NBC, CBS, CBC, BBC, the Guardian, the NYT, and a host of other Leftist outlets. Such tiddly little outlets as Newsmax have nothing close to the reach necessary to do that. The incompetence and veniality of the major news media is doing the job quite nicely, though.

From the looks of it, the Lab in Wuhan may be the origin of the outbreak in humans. It appears that it could have been due to lax safety levels at the lab. I kind of doubt the Chinese researchers working on the project would have knowingly or purposely let the virus out into the public in their own country. It appears that researchers in the respective unit may have unwittingly exposed themselves to the virus. I would think that the most likely cause.

And yet, the "Wuhan lab" explanation was immediately condemned by the major press and by the Democratic Party as a "conspiracy theory." Now, it's recognized as fact. Why did the press collude with these governments to deceive us, then, if they are supposed to be objective observers and investigative journalists, impartial providers of news?

And the public has just become increasingly jaded and suspicious about their pronouncements, and for good reason.

[Gary Childress]

Nobody's "telling me that." Anybody can see it. It's very plain, in all the above cases. To take one: are you still social distancing? Are you wearing a mask? How many shots of things like Astra-Zeneca have you taken lately? Where are the school and business closures today? How about all the closed churches, and all the media-approved (not so "mostly peaceful") riots and burnings? What about the Wuhan lab "conspiracy theory"? How's that one going? What is the state of your trust in the media that lied to you so brazenly, and never even bothered to check the facts?

When the media handles stories with such blatant disregard for facts, evidence and proper investigation, and just repeats the lines sent them by the establishment, it's only a matter of time until people start noticing. The legacy media has destroyed their own credibility, with no help from anybody else. It certainly isn't Newsmax or...what's the other one?...AON that is destroying CNN, NBC, CBS, CBC, BBC, the Guardian, the NYT, and a host of other Leftist outlets. Such tiddly little outlets as Newsmax have nothing close to the reach necessary to do that. The incompetence and veniality of the major news media is doing the job quite nicely, though.

From the looks of it, the Lab in Wuhan may be the origin of the outbreak in humans. It appears that it could have been due to lax safety levels at the lab. I kind of doubt the Chinese researchers working on the project would have knowingly or purposely let the virus out into the public in their own country. It appears that researchers in the respective unit may have unwittingly exposed themselves to the virus. I would think that the most likely cause.

And yet, the "Wuhan lab" explanation was immediately condemned by the major press and by the Democratic Party as a "conspiracy theory." Now, it's recognized as fact. Why did the press collude with these governments to deceive us, then, if they are supposed to be objective observers and investigative journalists, impartial providers of news?

And the public has just become increasingly jaded and suspicious about their pronouncements, and for good reason.

As with anything else highly scandalous, those who knew the most about the failings leading up the pandemic, probably kept silent to save their own skins, others perhaps to hide embarrassment or to protect colleagues or the industry. Maybe the press didn't have much to go on at that point other than the suspicious coincidence that Wuhan was the home of research into those types of viruses. However, the evidence presented in the opinion piece I linked to looks pretty solid.

[attofishpi]

BTW: Check out the level Labour will stoop to for Muslim votes NOT a Muslim woman in sight.. I can further infer from that my above opinion.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/arti ... ogyny.html

Not sure if anyone watched the Labour candidate Angela Rayner vid, but apparently---> Labour when voted in are going to rebuild ""Palestine"" - more UK hard working taxpayers are destined to pay for the Hamas tunnels to be rebuilt, & of course more armaments to unleash upon the RAINBOW accepting democratic people of Israel.


OH THE IRONY!! of the lefty vote....

[Will Bouwman]

...if the Leftists weren't so far Left.

What are the BBC, the Guardian and, to be clear, the London Times so far to the left of?

Look at the cases I gave you...I gave you several. Any one of them will show you that these sources were not investigating, checking, following evidence, following science, or reporting neutrally...they were merely serving as conduits for a narrative we can all see now was totally false.

What did you read in the Guardian or London Times, or hear reported by the BBC that supports your claim?

[puto]

Does this not seem to you like the social contract theory (Republic 359a.) Fundamental to the regime is education and this is the major issue of the book. Seemingly, this is denoted as psychological egoism. Particulars can never be fully addressed by language. A basic issue in the history of philosophy.