rigorousintuition.ca

guruilla » Mon Dec 24, 2018 6:13 pm wrote:No response so far from JW at FB.

What is the link to JW's FB Guru?

I have a rarely used FB account.

Thank you and best wishes. I like when you are at RI.

‘Twas the night after Christmas
And all through R.I.
Not a creature was stirring
Not even “That Guy”
The guy who just vanished
Like Christmas sleigh bells
When the sleigh driver lost it
And crashed - our Jeff Wells
He left behind members
And cold unread posts
And flame’s burning embers
And MIA toasts
And news copy-pasted
And endless long rants
By pundits who flew
By the seat of their pants
But we heard him express
As he yelled from the skies
This place is a mess
And I blame all you guys!

^^^ Very clever peartreed but kinda surprised you didn't re-write The Twelve Days...



In keeping w/the day's sense of humor and spirit as the Brits do best (esp. the Queen's Xmas speech) .......


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfEJkF9jqVI

So here's the rub: Pro-Russian State/Syrian State type discourse definitely has a following around here. Nevertheless, there are also those who are skeptical about it. Some here even believe that critique and counterpoint are valuable.

I personally accept that this kind of material will continue to be here- after all, most of it violates no "official" guidelines and for better or worse, it will be here.

So my big question is this: Are those who advocate for such beliefs prepared to accept that there will also be disagreement, that alternative perspectives and critique will be posted too? Because then we've got a much better chance at getting along.

AD wrote...

So here's the rub: Pro-Russian State/Syrian State type discourse definitely has a following around here.

Here it is asserted that Russians are responsible for my (faulty) thinking. It's handy in a way, I mean any woke person knows that the first principle of propaganda is to create enemies. I know it's hard for you to conceive of such a thing, given your connection to and promotion of violence, but some people both think for themselves and also consider that western manufactured emotional triggers lead to bombs being dropped.

Now, you told the audience what 'shapes' their thinking, so turn-about is fair play. You cannot imagine people thinking with complex sets of inputs because your own set is quite limited and defined in terms of Manichean oppositions. This is the give-away that you are a supporter of the status-quo and in no way revolutionary in your mentality. I said this to our dear audience ten years ago, now people may better understand.

AD wrote....

So my big question is this: Are those who advocate for such beliefs prepared to accept that there will also be disagreement, that alternative perspectives and critique will be posted too? Because then we've got a much better chance at getting along.

'such beliefs', you are such a dick, still as if I or we have no agency for our opinions.

You are positively Rovian, American Dream.

My first instinct was to react to what sounds like antagonistic language to me but it occurs to me that you probably don't understand what I have experienced.

I would suspect that your sentence does not make any sense on purpose, but I know better. At any rate, do not follow you instincts, they are not very good.

Your social engineering project and aspirations will fail because it shows absolutely no respect for the lived experience of real people. People will come to understand how this package of prevarications dressed up as righteous universality is really the planned road to trans-humanism slavery and further loss of control over ones own life.

Hopefully before it's too late to do anything about it.

The response to the Yellow vest movement is telling. I saw a vid where a truck driver was rolling down totally empty roads. Those pesky French shut down the country -non-violently-. The basic motivation seems to be about demanding that decisions be made closer to home and to the benefit of the actual residents rather than the bankers. Naturally this is something that neo-con AD cannot support, it's problematic.

In other words, you don't know and you don't want to know...

but it occurs to me that you probably don't understand what I have experienced.

You may mis-underestimate my understanding. I have friends that believe much as you do. I have said my piece to them for many years, to little affect, and many uncomfortable moments. Still i love them because I recognize them to be damaged psyches operating under limitations of reactive mind programming.

The only revolution worth it's salt is the one that removes the reactive mind programming.

Happy New Year too all, may it bring growth and understanding everywhere.

No, ignorance does not equal lack of intelligence. It involves a more deliberate stance of not wanting to know.

Now you are just yanking my chain AD, neither ignorance or intelligence were part of the verbiage.

Try to respond to words that are actually said rather than substituting pre-fab rhetoric in place of discussing those words. It's only fair, and go ahead, tell us about your experience and how it shapes your thinking.

In what universe could this:

No, ignorance does not equal lack of intelligence. It involves a more deliberate stance of not wanting to know.

be considered as being a response to this:

AD wrote...
but it occurs to me that you probably don't understand what I have experienced.

You may mis-underestimate my understanding. I have friends that believe much as you do. I have said my piece to them for many years, to little affect, and many uncomfortable moments. Still i love them because I recognize them to be damaged psyches operating under limitations of reactive mind programming.

The only revolution worth it's salt is the one that removes the reactive mind programming.

Happy New Year too all, may it bring growth and understanding everywhere.

Careful AD, this sort of thing may lead some to have the opinion that you may not be acting in good faith.

False of course, but these things must be managed.

It's about deeply held beliefs, which are fully consonant with the principles that we have long declared Rigorous Intuition to be based in. When the threats begins to hang over the heads of those expressing perspectives that have always been legitimate within the existing guidelines, a negative precedent is then created. It's not good for anyone.

Do those guidelines include encouragement for general disparagement of conspiracy suppositions or the avocation of violence?

Hey AD, I like to hear about what you think, the copy-pasta indoctrination courses, not so much.

And you get to hear about and ignore what i think, that is fine, you are not the audience.

But you are my springboard, so thanks for that.

You can read those guidelines just as well as me. Come back with some relevant quotes and we can talk about it.