Philosophy Now Forum

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:24 pm I think this person is secretly in love with Trump. He's certainly obsessed with him.

Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:21 pm

Sculptor wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 7:56 pm I think you seem to be at the mercy of -isms and social trends.
Most of these things like "cancel culture" or "cultural marxism" are just phantoms of the media; idols of the theatre and of the marketplace, if you will.
Trump deserves to be pilloried, rejected, ignored. And I shall not shrink from this just because someone accuses me of "cancel culture", whatever the fuck that is.

I agree advertising has much to answer for. It can only foster envy, greed, and eventually disappointment. Religion fosters arrogance, false hope, and an abrurd view of reality. For most the disappointment is deferred until after death (by which time its too late).

But to return to the topic.
The antics of Trump since election night is a fkcing disgrace; unforgiveable.
I am still puzzled as to what was happening in his head, if anything.
The way the election votes are counted is absurd. IN contrast to the UK where the number of votes counted are NEVER declared until each constituency has completed their count, in the US there is this weird and false "race" that is played out. Eventhough the result is set in stone, with the polls having closed there is a weird idea that it is still not a fait acomplis. I've seen people praying on TV and believing that they have altered the contents of the ballot box.
I see Trump watching his "early" success and convincing himself that he is going to win, and then showing (pretending?) utter horror that late votes are all going to Biden.
Did he really think those were "found" or invented votes? Did he not realise that mail-in ballots were being counted later? DId he not realise that telling his supporters to NOT mail-in would mean they would be counted earlier and give a better showing early in the counting?
Of was this a cunning plan?
I have to beleive he is a moron. What fool would deny a means of voting to his followers?

I am not defending his choice of behavior but believe that he is INTENTIONALLY LYING

I was arguing with Immanual Can here, whom I actually believe is a reasonable arguer NORMALLY. But he adopted the same kind of behavior when pushed. This is pychologically 'normal' because in reality, NO politics is sufficiently sound and one tends to defend their position based upon their OWN relative realities. If one is pushed to the degree that they understand the problem, they too may interpret the contradictions as existing regardless and so feel compelled to respond by simply SELECTING the side they favor in light of their circumstances because if they did not, they would likely have a VERY REAL reason to trust that they personally would have to sacrifice themselves ABSOLUTELY to those they know (or strongly believe) hate them personally.

The futher point needs to be made with respect to the contradiction of politics: that both sides can be interpreted as being "liberal" AND "non-liberal", "conservative" AND "non-conservative", "progressive" AND "non-progressive", etc, ....all based on WHO THEY LOVE strongly and personally, ....themselves at least necessary to some degree. The Left that succeeds will always still favor 'conservative' minimals based upon the fact that the GROUP identity of those who believe in some GENETIC foundation of their beliefs to the same extreme of those on the Right, but differ in that they include more variety of GROUPS. The dominating factor on both sides favor the racist, sexist, hateful stereotypes of one form or another, contrary to one presuming they are the 'good' guys while the others are 'evil'.

And what defines the distinction? Love of one's own. ...and their personal understanding of being victimized unfairly as "hating". That STRONG LOVE for one's own logically requires one to have STRONG opposing HATE goes hand in hand. You cannot, for instance, favor one particular person so exclusively among a set of others in your domain without at least some form of INDIFFERENCE. This indifference is the CAUSE of eventual abuses that lead to hate necessarily because of what they ignore of those they are not concerned about in a world that is finitely limited to resources.

We now have a Catholic President in the White House who doesn't believe in abortion, for instance. [assuming this given his 'strong' Catholic claims.] But the apparent 'love' of the unborn is more about the means of politics to favor the VALUES they believe they 'profit' from of those they 'save' whether it be to represent a larger needy population that competes to undermine fair wages, or their pretentious state of 'love' for those they may never require investing in directly (like how one can 'love' the starving Ethopian child on those ads where they are crying with that one FLY that is often assured to be around. ) Distance compassion for those might help strengthen their Catholic base, who then in turn, favor them (a benefit) in some circuitous route.

Regardless, the power will favor the wealth/power of SOME select subclass of the whole they choose, in contrast to another subset they reject. Although I choose the Left for its still MORE democratic form, for me, it still favors ME personally in many ways such that the opposite side would not in some way. Yet, I DO know that the present identity polltics DOES intentionally SACRIFICE (at present) the racial external identities of their hated opposition. As the stereotype of the Right as being constantly associated with White Supremacists, with Patriarchalism implied along with it, I am one of those who always loses because I am simply NOT already 'privileged' in the ways those arrogant wealthy whites on the Left tend to find some means to justify how they are 'minority' in contrast.

[For example, although the dominant 'white' class in power are (or can be) Jewish, they can call exception of themselves being in power to presume they are a victim class deserving SPECIAL protections. The present demands to be more varied in places like the movies has only removed the non-family related associates of those who ARE white. And it happens by chance that the major ownership of the movie and television industry are Jewish owned. Thus, we see a new form of discrimination that places the WEAKER class of white males unaffiliated with any CULT as sufficient to scapegoat for all the wealthier whites in power on the Left. Half of the populatio in general are women also. So we see that women in many SIGNIFICANT positions of power being increased at the sacrifice again of those particular WEAKER whites at the bottom of the economic world.

This will never end. I just watched a 'good' movie yesterday that had famous actresses playing representative real people in this COVID reality. It was very touching (I didn't catch the name of it). But it literally bashed in a counter extreme way, the Trumps in a way that, though perhaps deserving, is nevertheless TABOO if the same behavior were pointed to their own. I always thought that the insults of Trump's visual appearance troubling, even where it can be funny and also 'earned'. But to me, the means of succeeding suffices to STOP the abuses.

I notice you assume the Trumps as being relatively 'sick' where you interpret them as literally believing their 'apparent' lies. [I'm being king to put 'apparent' to reflect what they would think IF they were NOT lying) I also agree with this in part. But they could then think of him as mentally disabled. Woud that not qualify as a 'minority' class accepted by most on the present dominance of the Left? To many, the answer is vengeance: at least some form of penalty, where they also assume as I do that they INTENTIONALLY LIED.

The riot at the Capitol was bad but NOT as 'bad' as it could have been by contrast AND, to those who really DID, many of them ARE either mentally disturbed (brainwashed?) or literally suffering economically in direct opposition to Trump as a representative. But many are demanding they ALL be penalized regardless under the same banner....even those who did not enter the building. I still thought is was a violation but to those who jumped on the bandwagon, are they ALL equally at fault such that they should be punished in ways that may have already gave them apparent justice to side with Trump?

I never had CNN until recently. [My cable companies here in Canada do not permit FoxNews as part of the packages, and so they cannot be blamed for 'influence' here. But although entertaining, the news anchors there are, to me, as acting in the same way that the ragmag news style of the Fox news adopted. All the night-time hosts of all non-Fox shows prove to be stongly vocal against Trump in a way that teeters on the side of abuse, when their rhetoric is highly emotive in the same way.

In Canada, we have a 'public' service channel funded directly by our government (as most British Commonwealth adopted the BBC model. In the last 10 years, we saw that they removed all the males in positions of power, including false accusations of sex abuse that failed in the courts. But for the stereotypical LOW-level jobs that have always been based on favoring women (entry-level and survivable), are NOT changed. So waiters are still predominantly female, as is with retail sales, as one example. We also have 'culture' laws (religious laws are inclusive of this at least for the predominating 'established' English-French "catholic-style" religions conserved permanently in our Constitution as 'superior' heritage classes, alongside all Natives here who have a "distinct" status as well.) While some of these are appropriate aides, they do not exhaustively cover all people, especially those who have the MERE genetic affiliation of being white and male. This fosters multi-level discrimination.

Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:28 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:24 pm I think this person is secretly in love with Trump. He's certainly obsessed with him.

OR...you are reflecting YOUR secret obsessive 'love' for me?