Statement about Solway and Trump

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Locked
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by David Quinn »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:As for Kevin's post, which merely answered a simple question in another thread, isn't that largely what he's been saying as well in this very thread? Perhaps he decreased 99% to 95% as far as the uselessness of journalism. If you take his post seriously, you'd have to also see why it's so irrelevant to condemn Trump for the things you listed. In that light, that of a degraded society full of vandals, it becomes actually utterly irrelevant and emotional to make such strong case against one single leader.
Call me crazy, but I don't believe that the solution to righting a society full of vandals is to put an even bigger vandal in charge.

This will make you laugh. From a 2008 thread called Wealth and Responsibility:
Kevin Solway wrote:
Ryan Rudolph wrote:What warning signs do you see that tell you we could be heading for extreme economic/survival pressures?
Some of the things which concern me deeply:

1. The extreme complacency, greed, and removal from reality of most people in the developed world in particular. I'm thinking of children who don't know where milk comes from, or adults who don't understand how economies work (including politicians).

2. Reducing energy supply combined with increasing demand, combined with the large distances between food sources and populations.

3. Reducing fertility of soils, and loss of fertile soils to erosion, saltation, and other poisoning, and sea level rise.

4. Climate change.

5. The effects of pollutants and other chemicals on human biochemistry.

6. The social effects of overpopulation.

7. Fundamentalist Islam, and other crackpot religions.

8. All the above, combined with the human tendency to fly into a panic, en masse, which can send whole economies into a bottomless spiral, for little or no good reason.

Just to name a few.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

David Quinn wrote:
Diebert van Rhijn wrote:As for Kevin's post, which merely answered a simple question in another thread, isn't that largely what he's been saying as well in this very thread? Perhaps he decreased 99% to 95% as far as the uselessness of journalism. If you take his post seriously, you'd have to also see why it's so irrelevant to condemn Trump for the things you listed. In that light, that of a degraded society full of vandals, it becomes actually utterly irrelevant and emotional to make such strong case against one single leader.
Call me crazy, but I don't believe that the solution to righting a society full of vandals is to put an even bigger vandal in charge.
Did Kevin ever propose such thing as solution to "righting society"?
This will make you laugh. From a 2008 thread called Wealth and Responsibility:
Trump actually appears to address a few worries of the list, for example to urge for the US to produce instead of import or outsource. Or targeting Islam fundamentalism.

Since the topic is mentioned in the list, personally I actually support Trumps apparent extreme scepticism on the effects of carbon tax and government interference with the energy market. Also I suspect some kind of post-Christian end-of-times sentiments have infected the thinking on climate change, even within many scientific institutes. Just listen to people like Patrick Moore, James Lovelock, Richard Tol, Henk Tennekes and Bjørn Lomborg, all credible people who have in some cases even changed their climate stance over time when confronted with the more complex realities of the science and politics surrounding it. The proposed policy from Trump on less strict, market destroying CO2 regulation might be more rational than many on the ideological centre-left might think right now.

Elsewhere in that thread Kevin wrote as well that "the primary problem is overpopulation". Which lies definitely beyond any current political program. Only a quick and violent transformation of the developing world would have any short term significant impact. And for such project, one needs a government ten times as bold and ambitious as the current Trump crew. The only thing that seems to thwart the desire in common folks to procreate is a life of luxury or filled with personal ambition. Nothing what a presidency can change here although I was reading the current Turkish president was encouraging the Turks abroad to get "larger families". Haven't heard that one since Mao. Turkey is also a member of NATO which makes it interesting to see how Trump has been treating NATO so far -- as obsolete, in which he's right and the first Western leader to say so although he surely will discover it's not his to change.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Pam Seeback »

David Quinn wrote:
Pam Seeback wrote:
David to Kevin: It is evident that you are compartmentalizing what you are doing these days politically and sealing it off from what you did in the past spiritually and from the realm of wisdom in general. In other words, you are reducing spirituality to the abstract realm and ejecting all considerations of personal behaviour in the empirical world from the equation. It is the very thing you used to criticize academics of doing.
David, I believe what you said to Kevin above merits deeper examination, that it goes to the heart of what it means to have a spiritual conscience.

'Person' is the illusion. This is an absolute truth. And, because of the truth of the illusion of personhood, the suffering of attachment to "I" exists in the world. The world of human politics is just one of the human realms that exemplifies the suffering of the delusion of the existence of an independent self.

Assuming that one who has the liberating wisdom of the impersonal nature of spirit is dedicated to liberating the world of its delusion of "I, a person, exist", would this individual not do everything he or she could to remove the suffering of this core illusion/delusion? And how can this happen if the wise one is not true to speaking and acting impersonally?

I offer this for your consideration and comment. Perhaps keeping the abstract/impersonal realm alive in one's consciousness, thinking about it, talking about it, writing about it, is the only way one can ensure that they stay true to its truth. I always considered this forum to be a worthy vehicle for this outlet.
While spirituality does entail keeping the mind centered upon the impersonal realm of absolute truth, it is not confined to it. This is why the various scriptures from around the world have focused their attention, not just on abstract reasonings, but on the practical matter of how to live truthfully in the world. Even the Buddhist canon, which is probably the most logically-minded of all the spiritual traditions, spends a good deal of time addressing practical issues.

Kierkegaard was disdainful of the very idea of keeping everything purely abstract and logical. He saw, correctly, that spirituality was much more to do with character and courage, with how willing we are, as human beings, to introduce the truth into our lives. He didn’t create a separate air-tight division between spirituality and worldliness (or politics). He brought every aspect of human behaviour into the equation.
It sounds as if you believe the absolute and the relative can be combined or blended. If so, please explain how this is done.
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by jupiviv »

David Quinn wrote:Call me crazy, but I don't believe that the solution to righting a society full of vandals is to put an even bigger vandal in charge.
Yes, I will call you crazy, because you can't seem to grasp the idea that Trump didn't get elected in a vacuum. I will certainly call Dan Rowden crazy, because he evidently believes that everyone who preferred Trump over Hillary is crazy.

By the way, I made the exact same points as in the quote by Kevin earlier in this thread, and you called my attitude cynical and fatalistic. Actually, what is that quote even supposed to demonstrate in the current context? I don't see how Kevin's view on any of those problems has changed.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by David Quinn »

Pam Seeback wrote:
David Quinn wrote:While spirituality does entail keeping the mind centered upon the impersonal realm of absolute truth, it is not confined to it. This is why the various scriptures from around the world have focused their attention, not just on abstract reasonings, but on the practical matter of how to live truthfully in the world. Even the Buddhist canon, which is probably the most logically-minded of all the spiritual traditions, spends a good deal of time addressing practical issues.

Kierkegaard was disdainful of the very idea of keeping everything purely abstract and logical. He saw, correctly, that spirituality was much more to do with character and courage, with how willing we are, as human beings, to introduce the truth into our lives. He didn’t create a separate air-tight division between spirituality and worldliness (or politics). He brought every aspect of human behaviour into the equation.
It sounds as if you believe the absolute and the relative can be combined or blended. If so, please explain how this is done.
They are combined whenever we make a decision in this world.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by David Quinn »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:Since the topic is mentioned in the list, personally I actually support Trumps apparent extreme scepticism on the effects of carbon tax and government interference with the energy market. Also I suspect some kind of post-Christian end-of-times sentiments have infected the thinking on climate change, even within many scientific institutes. Just listen to people like Patrick Moore, James Lovelock, Richard Tol, Henk Tennekes and Bjørn Lomborg, all credible people who have in some cases even changed their climate stance over time when confronted with the more complex realities of the science and politics surrounding it.
Every branch of science has a minority of detractors. Climate science is nothing special in that regard.

You can’t pick and choose when it comes to science. If, in principle, you affirm the supremacy of the scientific method when it comes unearthing empirical forms of knowledge, then it necessarily means that you affirm all branches of science - without exception. To allow non-scientific issues to interfere with this affirmation is irrational. It makes you no different to the Christian fundamentalists.

Elsewhere in that thread Kevin wrote as well that "the primary problem is overpopulation". Which lies definitely beyond any current political program.
That’s certainly true. That's way beyond all of us.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by David Quinn »

jupiviv wrote:
David Quinn wrote:Call me crazy, but I don't believe that the solution to righting a society full of vandals is to put an even bigger vandal in charge.
Yes, I will call you crazy, because you can't seem to grasp the idea that Trump didn't get elected in a vacuum.
Yes, he wasn’t elected in a vacuum. But that doesn't mean that the election of Trump was a good idea.

Look at it this way. We can think of the globalized system as a building which houses the human race and sustains it with varying levels of success. But it is old and rickety and in need of repair. Now we can either rise up in rebellion and rampage around the place and run the risk of having everything come crashing down on us, or we can calmly and methodically replace the aging parts and construct a stronger, better building from the inside out.

Unfortunately, a lot of people are in the mood for rampaging about and they don't seem to care how dangerous it is.

jupiviv wrote:By the way, I made the exact same points as in the quote by Kevin earlier in this thread, and you called my attitude cynical and fatalistic. Actually, what is that quote even supposed to demonstrate in the current context? I don't see how Kevin's view on any of those problems has changed.
It is the narrowing of focus which concerns me. The spiritual man differs from the political advocate in that he deals with all forms of human stupidity. He doesn’t just focus exclusively on one form of stupidity, and ignore or excuse or condone other forms of stupidity in the process.

You might think it is important to scrub some mold from the walls and ceilings in your house, which is sensible as it can cause respiratory problems. But if a fire breaks out while you are doing this, you don’t pretend that the fire doesn’t exist or assume that it poses no danger. No, you immediately step away from the mold and deal with the fire directly. Once it is out, then you can go back to scrubbing the mold.
Kevin Solway
Posts: 2766
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Kevin Solway »

David Quinn wrote:They [the absolute and the relative] are combined whenever we make a decision in this world.
While you can be absolutely certain that you have a belief about some empirical matter, you can't be certain that your belief is correct. Your belief may be entirely wrong.

Also, you said of myself in your opening post that "he has given himself entirely over to the Breitbart worldview".

So you owe it to the readers of this thread to tell us exactly what "the Breitbart wordview" is that I'm supposed to believe every word of.

You are continuously referring to me as "alt-right", even though I'm not a white supremacist, nor even a white nationalist, and you know very well that many people, and probably most people on the Left, consider the alt-right to be about white supremacism and white nationalism. I don't appreciate being tarred in this way.

An increasing number of people are becoming aware of these labelling tactics, and they aren't going to work on anyone who has knowledge of them. They will backfire.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

David Quinn wrote:Every branch of science has a minority of detractors. Climate science is nothing special in that regard.
Actually, it's a bit of an odd science, not exactly known for its empiricism or provability. You have to take it on my authority of being wise, insightful and well read on all positions (to prevent a technical discussion) that climate science is strongly model and scenario based, has not had much predictive power so far, and is mostly about hyper-complex, dynamic systems of which not that much is understood yet, which makes it all rather unique and ambitious as a science. It takes only a brief look at past disasters with applications of ecology and "system thinking" to see how easy it is for the scientific minds to get into the wrong tracks until the paradigm shifts again. And it would not be the first or only time a large industry surrounding a wrong or seriously incomplete scientific idea would have existed either. Science is not a perfect god but it's the only god we have...
You can’t pick and choose when it comes to science. If, in principle, you affirm the supremacy of the scientific method when it comes unearthing empirical forms of knowledge, then it necessarily means that you affirm all branches of science - without exception. To allow non-scientific issues to interfere with this affirmation is irrational.
Climate science is not a "branch" like mathematics and neither is is it "empirical" like weather forecasting is. Plus I let my view be shaped by scientific issues brought up by various established scientists. Yes, a minority of detractors, still, many of those are firmly part of the scientific establishment. But you're now calling them "non-scientific" for doing the scientific bit, that is disagreeing and publishing opposition in established, peer reviewed journals. For example Richard Tol, professor economics (Sussex) and economics of climate change (VU Amsterdam) and IPCC lead author.

He's one of few dozen, accomplished vocal people inside the scientific world and active with climate research who I listen to and I think they sound extremely rational despite the usual uninformed crowd forming around disagreements of any kind. And of course one can disagree and prefer the mainstream, majority thinking on it. It's not something I'd call "irrational" unlike the more fundamentalist view on opposition, all based on scripture written by a "priesthood", all in some arcane, technical language.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

David Quinn wrote:We can think of the globalized system as a building which houses the human race and sustains it with varying levels of success. But it is old and rickety and in need of repair. (...) Unfortunately, a lot of people are in the mood for rampaging about and they don't seem to care how dangerous it is.
What I sense from that analogy is that because we're getting old and rickety, we' also tend to become conservative, generally fearful and feeling that things are going to pieces. It's actually this pseudo-religious feeling the world is about the collapse that is to me the most interesting part of Trump-alarmism, climate-alarmism, culture-alarmism (our white culture is disappearing!), kevin-alarmism (he's losing his mind!) and so on. It's the underlying current within Trumpism as much as it's in all the vocal opposition to his ascend. It's a sign, but not of the end of times, it's a sign of impending, slow changes and the reaction of a modern culture which has been expired already a long time ago (the end will thus never come) and is just holding on right now by regurgitating nonsense. It takes a bit of poking before it starts oozing out and perhaps that's all we can do, as philosophers. It's not "fixable" as such but we can point out and expose where the signs of expiration, of systematic invalidity are welling up, calling for people to let go and embrace whatever is coming our way. Generally called the future.
Glostik91
Posts: 347
Joined: Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:13 am
Location: Iowa

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Glostik91 »

Dan Rowden wrote:I appreciate the sceptical and cautious tone of this, along with the desire to actually be fair to Trump, but I don't find that the state of play warrants that caution. For me it is not remotely accurate to say Trump hasn't done much yet. The negative or positive quality of what he's done is, obviously, an entirely subjective call, but the truth is he's done plenty. Even if some of those actions are somewhat symbolic, the symbolism is nevertheless startling and instructive. Here's a pretty thorough timeline:

https://presterity.org/reference/First+100+Days

And, really, a one hour investigation into Trump's Cabinet picks tells you everything you need to know about this administration. And now we have the White House 'skinny budget' which is also deeply instructive.
You really ought to warn a guy before you drop a link like that haha.

Politics isn’t much of a science. Scientific theories such as gravity and evolution have steadfast proven track records, but what theory would one utilize in order to determine the utilitarian calculus of Trump’s presidency? We can of course look to the past, but the past’s application to the present can only go so far. We need experimentation. We need controls. This is just something that is not possible with politics. As far as I know there exists no equation where I can plug in all of this linked information and return a reliable result. (at least not right now.)

I shouldn’t go so far as to say there are no political equations of course. War = destruction. Politician = liar. But when the variables begin to stack up, any reasonable understanding of the outcome of any one person or situation in such a giant system seems illusive. If we have solid reasonable understanding that Trump was installing a police state in Hitler-like fashion, well, I think that would give one good reason to resort to extraordinary measures in order to stop him, or at least stop paying taxes. Is there anyone this resolved in their understanding yet?

As far as I'm aware Trump hasn’t infringed any major political precedents. He hasn’t, for instance, used a militarized police force to begin rounding up illegal immigrants. I believe he has begun to focus police efforts on rounding up criminals who are also illegal immigrants, but this is hardly police subverting the judicial branch (which is how I imagine a police state would operate.)

I certainly don’t support Trump. I believe I’ve already expressed that I think he’s a dangerous demagogue, a liar, and has the potential to be worse than the previous republican president. However, I am still willing to pay my taxes. Not because I’m afraid of police… oh, well, I suppose I am paying in part to avoid jail, but the unification of the countr… well ah. You know what, fuck it.
a gutter rat looking at stars
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by David Quinn »

Kevin Solway wrote:
David Quinn wrote:They [the absolute and the relative] are combined whenever we make a decision in this world.
While you can be absolutely certain that you have a belief about some empirical matter, you can't be certain that your belief is correct. Your belief may be entirely wrong.
True, we are dealing with the realm of appearances here, which are always uncertain. I might see a fire erupt in my house, but I can't be absolutely sure that there really is a fire. However, for the sake of my own safety and of those around me, it is wiser to assume that the fire is real and to act accordingly.

You are continuously referring to me as "alt-right", even though I'm not a white supremacist, nor even a white nationalist, and you know very well that many people, and probably most people on the Left, consider the alt-right to be about white supremacism and white nationalism. I don't appreciate being tarred in this way.
If you remember, I did distinguish between the “far right” (white supremacism) and the “alt-right" (anti-SJW/anti-left/anti-mainstream media) a few days ago. We both agreed that these labels are used by different people in different ways. I acknowledge that you are not a white supermacist.

It is just a term of convenience, to distinguish the kinds of views you espouse from those who, like myself, are more supportive of the liberal establishment. I don’t follow the SJW issue and so I am not aware of whatever pejorative tones the term has accumulated. If you have a better label, I'll be happy to use it.

Also, you said of myself in your opening post that "he has given himself entirely over to the Breitbart worldview".

So you owe it to the readers of this thread to tell us exactly what "the Breitbart wordview" is that I'm supposed to believe every word of.
I am referring to the whole anti-mainstream media, anti-Obama, anti-Clinton, anti-blacklivesmatter, anti-social science departments, anti-Islam, anti-immigration, pro-birther, pro-Milo, pro-Trump shtick you are running with. You have diluted this shtick a little on the forum, but it still comes through nonetheless. Is it at odds with the Breitbart worldview?
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Dan Rowden »

Glostik91 wrote:
Dan Rowden wrote:I appreciate the sceptical and cautious tone of this, along with the desire to actually be fair to Trump, but I don't find that the state of play warrants that caution. For me it is not remotely accurate to say Trump hasn't done much yet. The negative or positive quality of what he's done is, obviously, an entirely subjective call, but the truth is he's done plenty. Even if some of those actions are somewhat symbolic, the symbolism is nevertheless startling and instructive. Here's a pretty thorough timeline:

https://presterity.org/reference/First+100+Days

And, really, a one hour investigation into Trump's Cabinet picks tells you everything you need to know about this administration. And now we have the White House 'skinny budget' which is also deeply instructive.
You really ought to warn a guy before you drop a link like that haha.
Yeah, it's a bit of work. I was compiling my own list but got lazy. But I feel if you want to express a meaningful opinion on Trump and this regime you ought be over this stuff. Otherwise, what is it you're speaking to?
As far as I'm aware Trump hasn’t infringed any major political precedents. He hasn’t, for instance, used a militarized police force to begin rounding up illegal immigrants. I believe he has begun to focus police efforts on rounding up criminals who are also illegal immigrants, but this is hardly police subverting the judicial branch (which is how I imagine a police state would operate.)
The Obama regime began rounding up illegal immigrants with an actual criminal record (roughly 2 million over 8 years). Obama deported a record number of illegal Mexicans such that the net flow of Mexicans into the US is currently zero. But it was reasonable, targeted and not indiscriminate. It's analogous to the Muslim countries that Obama tagged for stronger vetting. That's what it was - stronger vetting. Trump turned it into a side show of indiscriminate police state madness that was, and continues to be, directed at US citizens with Islamic or Hispanic names. Muhammed Ali's son has been twice detained by these fuckwits purely because of his name. Police State? The US is already 30% there and has been since 9/11.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 72001.html (Just an example of widespread shit like it)

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/06/opin ... .html?_r=0

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/25/us/p ... .html?_r=0

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

https://thinkprogress.org/trumps-uncons ... .pp8rllzs3

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/2 ... verbruggen

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 72001.html
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Pam Seeback »

David Quinn wrote:
Pam Seeback wrote:
David Quinn wrote:While spirituality does entail keeping the mind centered upon the impersonal realm of absolute truth, it is not confined to it. This is why the various scriptures from around the world have focused their attention, not just on abstract reasonings, but on the practical matter of how to live truthfully in the world. Even the Buddhist canon, which is probably the most logically-minded of all the spiritual traditions, spends a good deal of time addressing practical issues.

Kierkegaard was disdainful of the very idea of keeping everything purely abstract and logical. He saw, correctly, that spirituality was much more to do with character and courage, with how willing we are, as human beings, to introduce the truth into our lives. He didn’t create a separate air-tight division between spirituality and worldliness (or politics). He brought every aspect of human behaviour into the equation.
It sounds as if you believe the absolute and the relative can be combined or blended. If so, please explain how this is done.
They are combined whenever we make a decision in this world.
As I see it, the absolute and the relative do not combine as if two things come together to make one, rather, that they have always been two-in-one and that the conscious relative of the empirical is engaged to speak and act by the subconscious absolute.

What is interesting to me is what happens to the sentient relative when the absolute becomes conscious of itself. To me this is the moment of illumination and as the moments of illumination expand, enlightenment is yhe result.
Kevin Solway
Posts: 2766
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2001 8:43 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Kevin Solway »

David Quinn wrote:If you have a better label, I'll be happy to use it.
I am anti-SJW.

Also, you said of myself in your opening post that "he has given himself entirely over to the Breitbart worldview".

So you owe it to the readers of this thread to tell us exactly what "the Breitbart wordview" is that I'm supposed to believe every word of.
I am referring to the whole anti-mainstream media, anti-Obama, anti-Clinton, anti-blacklivesmatter, anti-social science departments, anti-Islam, anti-immigration
I'm not "anti-immigration". I'm against the immigration of specific people you don't want in your country, such as the immigration of too many muslims, in the case that you want to have freedom of speech in your country.

pro-birther
I'm not "pro-birther" since I'm not convinced one way or the other on the issue. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama's birth certificate is a forgery, and I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't. I explained previously that I'm not convinced, but this apparently doesn't fit the narrative you are running with.

And you are badly contradicting yourself. You previously claimed that Breitbart was "far right", which you clearly explained means "white supremacist" (to you). So why didn't you say that you believe the "Breitbart worldview" includes white supremacy? That's a pretty glaring omission, don't you think? What you're saying doesn't make any sense at all.
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by jupiviv »

David Quinn wrote:
jupiviv wrote:Yes, I will call you crazy, because you can't seem to grasp the idea that Trump didn't get elected in a vacuum.
Yes, he wasn’t elected in a vacuum. But that doesn't mean that the election of Trump was a good idea.
I think all of us believe that Trump is an extremely bad president relative to the ideal. That wasn't my point, though.
jupiviv wrote:By the way, I made the exact same points as in the quote by Kevin earlier in this thread, and you called my attitude cynical and fatalistic. Actually, what is that quote even supposed to demonstrate in the current context? I don't see how Kevin's view on any of those problems has changed.
It is the narrowing of focus which concerns me. The spiritual man differs from the political advocate in that he deals with all forms of human stupidity. He doesn’t just focus exclusively on one form of stupidity, and ignore or excuse or condone other forms of stupidity in the process.
I agree, but again, I don't understand why you think Kevin has abandoned spirituality in favour of politics. Where has Kevin revised his critique of human delusion in general to exclude Trump, Milo, their respective fans and alt media journalists?
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by David Quinn »

Kevin Solway wrote:
pro-birther
I'm not "pro-birther" since I'm not convinced one way or the other on the issue. I wouldn't be surprised if Obama's birth certificate is a forgery, and I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't. I explained previously that I'm not convinced, but this apparently doesn't fit the narrative you are running with.
Speaking for myself, I would be very surprised if Obama's birth certificate is a forgery, just as I would be very surprised if the certificates of Trump, Bush or Clinton were forgeries. Indeed, it would never have occurred to me, or indeed I'm sure to most people, to question any of these men's citizenship. I guess it was just a coincidence that it was the first non-white president in history who had been singled out for suspicion.

From what I can see, Trump began to aggressively push the birther conspiracy theory back in 2011 for two main reasons - to test just how far the public was willing to abandon the traditional methods of determining truth and to announce that he was perfectly willing to represent the millions of anti-political correctness advocates, conspiracy kooks and white nationalists in his upcoming political career.

And you are badly contradicting yourself. You previously claimed that Breitbart was "far right", which you clearly explained means "white supremacist" (to you). So why didn't you say that you believe the "Breitbart worldview" includes white supremacy? That's a pretty glaring omission, don't you think? What you're saying doesn't make any sense at all.
It's a grey area. As Shapiro observes, Breitbart does attract readership and comments from members of the "far right", which indicates that the site is indeed catering to that kind of mentality to some degree.

You make your bed, Kevin and you lie in it. If you don't want to be associated with white supremacism, then you need to properly disassociate yourself from the Breitbart worldview and make it crystal clear through your words and actions that you completely reject that kind of mentality - similar to what I have done in this thread with Trump and Breitbart. If you continue to huddle too closely with that kind of crowd, you may find that it will be impossible not to be tarred with labels you don't like.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by David Quinn »

jupiviv wrote:
David Quinn wrote:It is the narrowing of focus which concerns me. The spiritual man differs from the political advocate in that he deals with all forms of human stupidity. He doesn’t just focus exclusively on one form of stupidity, and ignore or excuse or condone other forms of stupidity in the process.
I agree, but again, I don't understand why you think Kevin has abandoned spirituality in favour of politics.
There are many reasons why I think this. Let's look at his sensitivity towards being labeled, for example. A spiritual man knows only too well that the human race generally does everything it can to reject truth from their lives, and thus he knows that when he speaks the truth, he will almost certainly be insulted, defamed, regarded as mentally-ill, and so on. It goes with the territory. And in the past Kevin was indeed subjected to these kind of labels, as was I, but he used to shrug them off without giving it another thought.

It is very different nowadays. Kevin has become extremely touchy about being defamed and called mentally-ill, and this has come about because he nowadays identifies more with the political group which fights the SJWs than he does with the larger spiritual cause of fighting ignorance in general.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

David Quinn wrote:Kevin has become extremely touchy about being defamed and called mentally-ill,
Do you have any example for this? As for as this thread goes indeed he finds it impossible not to be tarred with labels only you are providing here. This is what makes it so bizarre. You arrive here with all these labels aimed at Kevin and then blame him for being labeled? You must try to understand how this looks like to people not involved in whatever back-chamber conversations you are privy to. If Kevin has been touchy about anything, do you mean here, on the forum?
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by David Quinn »

Diebert van Rhijn wrote:
David Quinn wrote:Kevin has become extremely touchy about being defamed and called mentally-ill,
Do you have any example for this?
They are strewn throughout his performance in this thread. The white supremacist thing is a good example. I have never called Kevin a white supremacist, nor have I brought up the issue of white supremacism in general, nor has anyone else raised the issue, as far as I can recall. The only hint of it has been a little snippet inside a quote from Ben Shapirio, almost an aside, that evidently irked Kevin enough to cause him to want to zero in on it and amplify in a big way. This suggests that he is bringing into the thread a long-festering sore point which has been troubling him from his interactions with feminists and SJWs in the past.

Indeed, half the time when I speak to Kevin nowadays, I feel as though he is talking not to me but to those SJWs who are obviously causing him so much grief. It's as though he is in a perpetual fight with them in his brain. It's a shame, because he is far better than that.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Dan Rowden »

Kevin is perfectly fine. Just don't mention the War (Gamergate). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfl6Lu3xQW0
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by David Quinn »

Dan Rowden wrote: Police State? The US is already 30% there and has been since 9/11.
I found this segment from the ABC show "Planet America" to be particularly disturbing:

https://www.facebook.com/abcnews.au/vid ... 722474988/

I'm not sure which part of it I found more disturbing - the barbaric law that allows police to steal property from people who have never been convicted of a crime (a law that has long pre-dated the Trump era), or Trump's own authoritarian and uncaring response to the idea of changing it, or those who laughed uproariously with Trump when he made that authoritarian response.

America is certainly a very strange place.
jimhaz
Posts: 141
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2002 7:28 pm

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by jimhaz »

29 Signs of a Psychopath (the word seems to have only been mentioned once in this thread, by David)

I can match Trump to every one of the signs below.

1. A huge ego and narcissistic behaviour
2. They are easily bored
3. A trail of broken and hurting people fill their past
4. Reluctance or refusal to admit when they are wrong
5. Hyper competitive
6. Always seeking prominence in social settings or organisations
7. Grandiose lying
8. Lack of proper emotive responses
9. View people as personal possessions
10. Gaslighting/psychological abuse
11. Always moving
12. Use children and pets to manipulate others
13. Always trying to win, no matter what
14. Lie about how they help others
15. Will cut people off without any thought
16. Sexual deviants
17. Highly ambitious
18. Occupy positions such as chef, civil servants, religious leader/clergy, police officers, journalists, surgeons, sales persons, media personalities, lawyer, corporate CEO/entrepenuers
19. Prey on children and the elderly
20. Try to destroy peoples reputations
21. Not creative – always asking for input from others
22. Impulsive
23. May have associates with questionable character
24. They always get exposed at some point as moral deviants
25. Brag about celebrities they met
26. Brag about good deeds and charity
27. Put out fake emotions trying to make you think they are real
28. Never able to see your side, have a coldness about them
29. Get mad when they lose control of you
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Dan Rowden »

David,

Civil forfeiture is one of those barely known insanities of American policing and jurisprudence. Jurisdictions across the country have been raking in the dough for a long time now. The statement about the Supreme Court potentially making it illegal was pretty funny. With Gorsuch on board that is 100% never going to happen, and even if it were to, the States that want to continue using it would do so with impunity because this Federal administration isn't going to act to stop them - or on any front where States act contrary to the Constitution.

This is one of the issues with this regime, they are not interested in protecting the Constitution and being the usual buffer between it and State jurisdictions. And with Sessions as Attorney General, this is ever more certain.

As for Obama, although he attempted many criminal justice system reforms, on this issue it's arguable he made things worse.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Statement about Solway and Trump

Post by Dan Rowden »

jimhaz wrote:29 Signs of a Psychopath (the word seems to have only been mentioned once in this thread, by David)
Now, Matt, don't try to psychoanalyse someone or you'll earn the ire of Jupiviv. Curiously, Trump also ticks every single criterion for Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Without trying to formally diagnose, I think we can all observe that Trump is a seriously messed up human being and completely, utterly, irremediably unfit for this role.

Mind you, from the point of view of those behind him and those behind those behind, Trump is the 'blunt instrument' that Bannon once said he was.
Locked