Search the Community

I was at the university the other day and I passed in front of the social science department and something so outrageous happened I thought I'd share it with you guys. The building had speakers all around it so that people walking on the sidewalk could hear loud and clear what the speaker had to say (right there you get this 1984 Orwellian feel from the setting =P). The guy that was talking was making some anti american, anti republican, pro communist speech. The kinda thing you would expect from social science. What struct me was that he never used the words: Marxists, communist, socialist.. The way he worded it was ''the republican elites are so greedy, so capitalist, that they are against economical equality''. And I stopped right there on the sidewalk. I had a million things to say about this buzzword salad that was utter garbage. Instantly I was looking for a way to go talk to that guy and set him straight, but I came back to my senses knowing that he was probably in a room that I did not have access and probably would have gotten arrested or thrown out of the university for harassment. But the level of bullshit in that sentence was EPIC. You could have smelled the stench a mile away. Sorry, but I need to deconstruct this bullshit: - right from the start, this is typical leftist propaganda. They redefine words. He didnt use the word ''communist'' because it has such a bad quo notation to it. He went the feminist way and used the word ''equality''. Because, who in his right mind wouldnt want equality in the word... you must be a greedy monster if you dont... Bullshit. What his words means is that he wants a redistribution of wealth through the coercion of the state and some uneducated people are going to fall for it... - And he tries to portray the republicans has the evil people who wants to keep poor people in misery. This is stupid. Of course republicans are against communism. It is the system that has created nothing but death and suffering, it is a system that robs you of every freedom you have. People starve by the tens of millions under communism. Capitalism, on the other hand, has brought 2/3 of the worlds population out of an hopeless misery and has been the system that has ended the most hunger in the world. - Thirdly, I find it funny that he calls the republicans ''elite''. This is typical leftist propaganda to turn things around and accuse the enemy of all the thing you have done (i'm not sure my sentence is quite clear). We have seen this throughout history: the left blames the right of slavery and racism when it was the republicans who were the abolitionist party and the democrats were the party of slavery. They blame the right for Mussolini and Hitler, when these 2 monsters were on the far left and followed the Marxist doctrine to the letter. They blame Queen Victoria for oppression and slavery around the world, when she spent her life abolishing slavery around the world and bringing wealth and prosperity to her empire. And today, they say that republicans are the elites. Well, most republicans are honest folks who are hard working. Many of them work in factories or do some for of hard labor. The ''elites'' are the democrats and liberal who own multinational corporations and want to piss on the little guys by flooding the country with 3rd world population to bring down wages so they can save a buck.... You know, its always striking to see how far this Marxist cancer has grown and how it is still growing. October is coming and I can see flyer of the communist flag on lamp posts. You see antifa and feminists doing marches in the streets. Some countries live under a complete information lock down. You see Theresa May and Merkel controlling all information in their countries. We werent paying attention and it creeped out on us. We are living in 1984. Its no longer fiction. =(

I came upon this article and found hope, seeing that others out there in the scientific community are realizing the effects of ignorance. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/24/opinion/the-case-for-teaching-ignorance.html?ref=opinion Do you think that this will grow and help change the world?

I am not the first to raise this question, without a doubt. Still, I find it more curious than ever, to wonder maybe human society - naturally - is supposed to propagate only few serious Thinkers in each group / tribe. Could it be that nature designed us, as animals, to have a very limited amount of people capable of deep strategic and logical thinking? Maybe replace that with 'people who see it as their duty and profession to think deeply, strategically and logically.' And if so, does that mean that - in order to not be fascists, it is the role of the Thinkers, to convince the general population of possible future strategies, for the entire society? And, yet, if so, could it possibly mean that a big chunk of what the Thinkers should focus on, is their skill in convincing the general population? Maybe even excluding the other Thinkers from that part of the process? And, finally, if so, could the "human problem" originate in the fact that in modern society, most people don't have a specific Thinker, or group of Thinkers, that they personally know and trust? Just like people have their trusted doctor, or cook, or even plumber. What do you think?

So, recently having a conversation with my father who i haven't talked to in a few years, writing to him i wrote or realised something which i believe is a decent 2 cents i'd like to put out there to bounce off people and see what have you. Not the greatest at wording things but the thought is. I said to him "you ask or want things of people but then take nothing else of them into consideration" I ended up saying this after he made a douche "I realise that you have affection to Marxist and communist people" when neither marxism or communism i've ever read into.. All i told him years ago is that i wanted to travel to Peru for ayahuasca. He contacted me because he wanted me to get a dual citizenship and travel to Finland.Kind of what i've abstracted from this is that (for lack of a better way to represent it i'll say), people are an accumulation of 'parts', a puzzle with a bunch of pieces they more than 'feel associated'. They feel this of that and feel this of this. Arguably, for how many things there are in and of the world, multiplied by how many people there are of the world, is the number of possible things which can be considered (the total picture), because there are no 2 people the same (though the environments we can grow up in may be), and not until a person expresses what they feel of whichever thing will i know what they feel if anything at all of it. Equally, since there are no 2 people the same and we are, as much as we have experience are equally limited by it, can learn from one another because one may look at such things differently or look at a different part of such a thing? idk if that makes clear sense.Thankfully we only associate with a few people. Any empathic person i believe will consider or wonder your view of such and such or whichever thing. Stefan often talks about finding (can't remember what he said specifically) decent empathetic people. I think such an empathic person would consider that for every thing this is another perspective. If you have a tree and a few people standing around it, each person sees the same tree but a different side of it and can say try standing here. In a bit of a hurry but my point is:"you ask or want things of people but then take nothing else of them into consideration"Your 'parts' are what you feel. Any truly or decently empathetic person, the things they say in respect of yourself will match or be based or revolve around your feelings (although they will see a different side of them so to speak), instead of being against the grain, or some entirely different imagination land fucking neurotic bullshit. Sorry rushed at the end there lolol :