DARK GOTHIC MAGA: How Tech Billionaires Plan to Destroy America

[Alexis Jacobi]

Evangelicals now think Jesus was a liberal wimp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aitvb7bdX18

As is understood by those who bother to research:

A word about the “slap” that Jesus says we should endure. Jesus here speaks of personal slights of any kind. The slap (or the “smiting,” as the KJV has it) does not have to involve literal, physical violence. Even in our day, a “slap in the face” is a metaphor for an unexpected insult or offense. Did someone insult you? Let him, Jesus says. Are you shocked and offended? Don’t be. And don’t return insult for insult. Turn the other cheek.

Matthew Henry’s comment on this verse is helpful: “Suffer any injury that can be borne, for the sake of peace, committing your concerns to the Lord’s keeping. And the sum of all is, that Christians must avoid disputing and striving. If any say, Flesh and blood cannot pass by such an affront, let them remember, that flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God; and those who act upon right principles will have most peace and comfort” (Concise Commentary, entry for Matthew 5:38).

Turning the other cheek does not imply pacifism, nor does it mean we place ourselves or others in danger. Jesus’ command to turn the other cheek is simply a command to forgo retaliation for personal offenses. He was not setting government foreign policy, and He was not throwing out the judicial system. Crimes can still be prosecuted, and wars can still be waged, but the follower of Christ need not defend his personal “rights” or avenge his honor.

There was a time in history when a man would feel compelled to protect his honor against one who slandered him or otherwise besmirched his character. The offended party would challenge the offender to a duel. Swords, firearms, or other weapons were chosen, and the two enemies would face off. In most cases, senseless bloodshed ensued. Samuel Johnson wrote in favor of the practice of dueling: “A man may shoot the man who invades his character, as he may shoot him who attempts to break into his house.” The problem is that “invasions of character” are exactly what Jesus told us to tolerate in Matthew 5:38. Turning the other cheek would have been a better option than dueling, and it would have saved lives.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Jesus Was Woke - The Bible Says So?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZgUjqcX5jLs

“Woke” and “wokeness” require a proper and detailed definition and then can be understood and reacted against.

It takes a person committed to processes of reasoning and critical thinking to do that.

See James Lindsay in Woke For Dummies.

[phyllo]

How Trump and Vance use Christianity as a Tool Against the Oppressed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-omH_XquUxY

[attofishpi]

Evangelicals now think Jesus was a liberal wimp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aitvb7bdX18

Ha!

(Good thing we don't have these Evangelicals in Europe much. Wonder if they even follow Christ or some Israeli propaganda anymore.)

FFS c'mon.

Talk about pigeon holing an entire ideology/people just because of a shite video.

Evangelicals have always been the spear in my side.. ...but still

[Alexis Jacobi]

I have decided to build a Frankenstein! Yes!

I will conglomerate Phyllo, Age, Atla, Dubious (and I am thinking Gary) in my basement laboratory — through amputations, transfusions, a rain of electrical sparks and by recitation of obscure Vedic Mantras — to create the most formidable intellectual adversary ever encountered in these pages!

[Alexis Jacobi]

In Phyllo’s case, since he has never bothered to think through any of this stuff in any responsible depth, his ultimate tactic is to toss up some videos that indicate just where, in fact, his own “thinking” is mired.

Some pages back I challenged Phyllo to “reveal himself” and his response was “No, I did that once and won’t do that again!”

I submit that he is however revealing himself. And it is wise to examine what is revealed. It should be obvious that his video presentations are contentless. Whatever ideas are presented in them are presented by (literally) ignoramuses. People dealing on seemingly important topics but on the most superficial level simply for titillation.

It is not “the content” that is relevant, but rather the titillation derived from glorying in some sort of feeling of moral domination.

This is not “intellectual work” but nothing more than sentimental indulgence, and it is precisely this that is most common in our present. And we are invited to stimulate our own bubbling sentimentalism and then “enter the fray” in these most stupid of idiotic rehearsals.

Now, you (i.e. a hypothetical antagonist) might challenge this “Phyllo” (a common man of our present) to do some real intellectual work … but he will refuse. The challenge is taken as an insult.

And then there is the so-common doubling down on the ignorant position; a burrowing down into it. A rebellious refusal.

And this is why I have developed my extensive line of Jacobian Supplements concocted from Mediaeval Aristotelian alchemical recipes! I am here to help, people!

Please! Consider a dropperful a couple of times a day!

[phyllo]

If Jesus was in America now ...

Would he be called un-American?

Would he be called dumb and nasty?

Would he be called a socialist?

Would he be called a communist?

Would he be called a terrorist?

Would he be deported?

Would he be executed?

[Alexis Jacobi]

Oh Phyllo! Don’t worsen your suffering!

[Atla]

In Phyllo’s case, since he has never bothered to think through any of this stuff in any responsible depth, his ultimate tactic is to toss up some videos that indicate just where, in fact, his own “thinking” is mired.

Some pages back I challenged Phyllo to “reveal himself” and his response was “No, I did that once and won’t do that again!”

I submit that he is however revealing himself. And it is wise to examine what is revealed. It should be obvious that his video presentations are contentless. Whatever ideas are presented in them are presented by (literally) ignoramuses. People dealing on seemingly important topics but on the most superficial level simply for titillation.

It is not “the content” that is relevant, but rather the titillation derived from glorying in some sort of feeling of moral domination.

This is not “intellectual work” but nothing more than sentimental indulgence, and it is precisely this that is most common in our present. And we are invited to stimulate our own bubbling sentimentalism and then “enter the fray” in these most stupid of idiotic rehearsals.

Now, you (i.e. a hypothetical antagonist) might challenge this “Phyllo” (a common man of our present) to do some real intellectual work … but he will refuse. The challenge is taken as an insult.

And then there is the so-common doubling down on the ignorant position; a burrowing down into it. A rebellious refusal.

And this is why I have developed my extensive line of Jacobian Supplements concocted from Mediaeval Aristotelian alchemical recipes! I am here to help, people!

Please! Consider a dropperful a couple of times a day!

You say that as if the average Trump voter had a bunch of PhDs in the topics you view as important.

[phyllo]

Musk on 'empathy':

Musk: There's a guy who posts on X who's great, Gad Saad?

Rogan: Yeah, he's a friend of mine. He's been on the podcast a bunch of times.

Musk: Yeah, he's awesome, and he talks about, you know, basically suicidal empathy. Like, there's so much empathy that you actually suicide yourself. So, we've got civilizational suicidal empathy going on. And it's like, I believe in empathy, like, I think you should care about other people, but you need to have empathy for, for civilization as a whole, and not commit to a civilizational suicide.

Rogan: Also don't let someone use your empathy against you so they can completely control your state and then do an insanely bad job of managing it and never get removed.

Musk: The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy. The empathy exploit. They're exploiting a bug in Western civilization, which is the empathy response. So, I think, you know, empathy is good, but you need to think it through and not just be programmed like a robot.

Rogan: Right, understand when empathy has been actually used as a tool.

Musk: Yes, like, it's weaponized empathy is the issue.

When is empathy "weaponized", when is it bad and when is it leading to civilizational suicide?

Maybe you "thought it through" and concluded that "weaponized empathy" is when empathy prevents you from accumulating wealth or encourages you to help migrants or help people in other countries.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Phyllo, you have shown resistance to and ethical confusion about “psychological analysis” in these conversations (in processes of analysis and thought about present conditions).

And now you head directly into this entire territory!

First, you are (this is my opinion of course) not merely intellectually confused, but deeply confused at a psychic psychological level. Your thinking about social conditions (immigration, the oppressed in foreign lands) is all in a muddle!

To help you separate emotion from reason is beyond my capabilities. But I can steer you in such a direction.

Get a grip over yourself!

You are “emblematic” of masses of people today. You explain why “woke rhetoric” gains purchase. Do you understand why I must separate myself intellectually and spiritually from the “you” that you present here? And this “rehearsal”?

It’s all sentimental theatrics! You are becoming like a bonfire in a huge mound of hay on a prairie at the end of day. Up in flames you go, uncontrollable. You have no idea what possesses you!

And you say “You don’t know me!”

You are known, Phyllo. You show yourself quite clearly.

To examine whatever it is that Rogan and Musk were discussing will necessarily involve separating the concept of “empathetic weaponization” from whatever you think of those two individuals.

I’ve now got my Frankenstein prototype on my operating table! Head there, feet and arms over there. Taking apart then putting back together again is what it’s about. I am just now starting the generator because this is going to take a lot of energy!

[Alexis Jacobi]

You have claimed that the 74 million people who voted MAGA are the only valid constituency and fuck everyone else. Those words are going to haunt you.

More relevant, certainly more interesting, is the evolution of social disunity that separates “two Americas” (really a number of them) and that irreconcilable differences become manifest.

Preconditions of wartime. Perhaps similar to or following an outline like that of The War Between the States? (These patterns that really inform the American republic).

One thought: that the so-called Marxian-inspired or infused activism of (so-called) wokism — that swept the nation but was then (sort of) stopped in its tracks — inspired reaction. (I refer to the wokism that James Lindsay analyzes quite thoroughly as being highly doctrinal).

The reaction seems tied to or wedded to the former activism. I.e. enmeshed with it.

[Atla]

Give it up Appallon. If you can't explain something simply, say so that the average voter would understand it, then you don't understand it yourself. You don't know why the MAGA/Trump phenomenon happened.

[Impenitent]

If Jesus was in America now ...

Would he be called un-American?

Would he be called dumb and nasty?

Would he be called a socialist?

Would he be called a communist?

Would he be called a terrorist?

Would he be deported?

Would he be executed?

he'd be ignored

and he never said that you should pay more taxes so the government can provide

-Imp

[phyllo]

Jesus also didn't say that you should get a tax cut.

However, he did say some things that seem to be at odds with the policies of the current American administration.