If You Are Aligned With a Side ...

[enfoldedblue]

I have always been an observer. The shy one standing back watching the bold flaunt their perspectives, their version of the narrative. From my position I see a problem.

One of the easiest ways to explain what I see is with Trump. What I see are two almost distinct realities existing in their own echo chambers.

On one side you have the left leaning influences who despise Trump. For them descriptive terms might include: crass, obnoxious, ridiculous, self-serving, greedy, heartless, egotistical, dodgy etc.

While on the side of the right he is heralded as a near god, who is not afraid to step up and save the world. For them descriptive terms might include: brave, straight talking, reasonable, strong, fair, devoted, wise etc.

The contrast between the two perspectives is harsh. But when you look at the material shared by each of the two camps it is clear how this can happen.

In left leaning media sources, both mainstream and alternative Trump is constantly portrayed as a complete bumbling idiot. Sexists statements are featured, foolish moments highlighted, emphasis is placed on mistakes and wrongdoings. Memes, video clips, articles, blogs…there is a lot of material being shared that completely vindicates this perspective.

While right leaning sources, both mainstream and alternative, portray Trump as Hero fighting the evil powerful forces in the name of the little guy. The material shared in these circles highlight his no bull**** approach and his willingness to stand up for what he believes in. All the positives are celebrated, with a secret master plan up his sleeve often hinted at. Memes, video clips, articles, blogs…there is a lot of material being shared that completely vindicates this perspective.

Each group, standing firmly in their own camp, look over to the other...”Idiots,” they think; “brainwashed fools,” they chide; “What is wrong with people,” they lament; “when will they wake up to the truth” they ask.

“Bleeding heart, whingers, who don’t know how to think for themselves, don’t realize they are aligned with evil in sheep’s clothing?” Cry the right.

“Heartless, poorly educated, religious fanatics who are rallying around a greedy uncaring idiot who is playing them for the fools that they are.” Cry the left

Both sides are absolutely certain they are on the right side of history.

Meanwhile as this divide deepens in the populace the controllers pat themselves on the back.

The masses, the animals, nature, and the planet itself, continue to exist in increasingly dire circumstances. We are being poisoned, we are being exploited, we are all being played for fools.

Most people are good people, who truly want to love and be loved, who want to feel free, who want their children to grow up healthy and strong. On those things most of us would agree. But as they say..the devil is in the detail. And this is how we are being manipulated.

If you are on a side…you are not seeing the whole picture

With each side carefully cherry picking their content to match their own narrative it is so easy to lose sight of the big picture. Neither side are idiots. Both sides hold vital, valid information and perspectives that is crucial to healing the whole.

This of course goes way beyond Trump and left right politics. It is being played in so many arenas. Only once we are willing to accept that if we feel aligned with a side, that there may be something we are not seeing or fully understanding will we open ourselves to meaningful growth. Only when we are able to stop putting down the ‘other side’ and start creating a meaningful dialogue between the two camps will we be able to unite, and truly throw off our shackles.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

I agree there is more complexity to everything that is going on in the world right now than to either paint Trump as a God or a cartoon villain, for example, but let's have a thought experiment here.

Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that we are in the late 1930s Germany, and that the Nazis are in power, or even late 1910s Russia, and the Communists are about to stage a very bloody revolution. And let's say, also for the sake of argument, that you have foreknowledge that some very terrible things are about to be done by some very ruthless and bloodthirsty groups.

What kind of common ground and compromises would you be willing to find in these situations? I would be interested to hear how it would be possible to hug out differences in these scenarios without some people simply having to face hard consequences.

[enfoldedblue]

Posted by A Voice from the Mountains (here)
I agree there is more complexity to everything that is going on in the world right now than to either paint Trump as a God or a cartoon villain, for example, but let's have a thought experiment here.

Let's say, just for the sake of argument, that we are in the late 1930s Germany, and that the Nazis are in power, or even late 1910s Russia, and the Communists are about to stage a very bloody revolution. And let's say, also for the sake of argument, that you have foreknowledge that some very terrible things are about to be done by some very ruthless and bloodthirsty groups.

What kind of common ground and compromises would you be willing to find in these situations? I would be interested to hear how it would be possible to hug out differences in these scenarios without some people simply having to face hard consequences.

Hi Voice from the Mountains

The people who voted for Hitler were likely people who felt threatened, who felt disenfranchised, who saw electing someone with radical nationalistic views that put their group first as the only solution they could see. Perhaps, if instead there had been a ground level community dialogue that addressed the concerns of both sides, Hitler would never have been able to gt into the position he did.

Also I think it is interesting to note that both the left and the right would equate the side they don't identify with NAZI Germany.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by enfoldedblue (here)
Perhaps, if instead there had been a ground level community dialogue that addressed the concerns of both sides, Hitler would never have been able to gt into the position he did.

I see people saying this a lot, that we need "dialogue," but these "dialogues" never seem to manifest as public debates because "political correctness" seems to have conveniently narrowed the scope of what the left feels is appropriate to discuss in the first place. Universities used to be places to have such debates, but now they also censor people, deny speakers platforms, etc., etc., so no meaningful actual dialogue ever seems to take place anywhere. Social media has also become ban-happy over things that never used to be censored ten years ago, or ever, before the last few years.

I would love if people had real dialogues that included philosophy, logic, facts, and all of that, but it seems that too many people also believe that "dialogue" means simply repeating their side of the argument as if no one has ever heard it before, and expecting the other side to go, "Ah, okay, I agree now." That's not really realistic, and there are some major disagreements to be hashed out, which cannot be avoided. Personally, I'm ready for peer-to-peer dialogue whenever.

As things now stand, however, there have been many months/years for actual dialogue, and I can't remember seeing it anywhere during this whole time.

Also I think it is interesting to note that both the left and the right would equate the side they don't identify with NAZI Germany.

I actually threw out two examples: the Nazis and the Soviets, the Soviets having actually killed far more people, if you go by the "official" numbers associated with each regime. I'm naturally wondering why you acted as though I never mentioned them, as well as why you didn't post this thread two or three years ago, when the divisions were equally obvious.

[Didgevillage]

German nationalists knew their country was threatened by communists a.k.a. Bolsheviks whose next target for communist revolution was Germany. (It's a matter of record)

Hitler had no quarrel with Britain, and did his best to avoid a conflict with Britain, while occultist Churchill did everything in his power to cause a war with Germany.

Hitler had a number of Jewish generals and even a Jewish field marshall (Erhart Milch). How can a country like this "exterminate" six million Jews?

Their intention was to overturn the Bolshevik regime in Russia and remove the mass murderer Stalin from power, while sending safely millions of Jews to Palestine. Adolf Eichmann, Jewish and fluent in Yiddish, negotiated a settlement deal for this transfer with the Jewish settlers in Palestine. That's why Israel captured him after the war and promptly executed him, so that he won't tell the truth.

[norman]

Our engagement with sides of this fracas probably varies as much longitudinally as it does horizontally.

If we discount longer views, we must look like ant armies. My own view is that there is a road to positive human maturity that has been blocked and land mined for several decades at least. When someone 'gets out of the car' and confronts the issue, I'm not rallying around a guy with car crinkles in his pants just for the hell of it. I'm wanting to get on down the road, and the guy that's dealing with the obstruction gets my vote above the guy that's flagging us down and saying we cannot pass.

Once we are back on the road again, well, the faster this waste of time and energy fades away in the rear view mirror, the better.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by norman (here)
I'm wanting to get on down the road, and the guy that's dealing with the obstruction gets my vote above the guy that's flagging us down and saying we cannot pass.

In reality, if you always try to ignore the people warning you not to proceed, you'll end up driving off of a bridge into a river or some other catastrophe. "Full speed ahead" is not always the logical option, even in your analogy.

[enfoldedblue]

I actually see some beautiful examples happening at a grass root level. Of course aspects of the control system..social media platforms, universities etc are not going to facilitate this. We are not going to get anywhere if we keep expecting top down solutions. Here, for example, people are looking to create a space in which a dialogue between men and women relating to the #me too movement can occur. The idea is that it is key to this discussion is the idea that everything can be put on the table. That nothing is taboo...however it is also important that all participants feel safe. These things don't have to be mutually exclusive when people are willing to work towards a common goal.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by enfoldedblue (here)
I actually see some beautiful examples happening at a grass root level. Of course aspects of the control system..social media platforms, universities etc are not going to facilitate this. We are not going to get anywhere if we keep expecting top down solutions

I agree that local solutions are a good answer, if that's what you mean. Decentralization of power is fully consistent with how the United States were founded as a federal system, though I'm not sure which country you're in.

That means making less decisions from the federal level and allowing state and local governments to make their own decisions, which may vary widely from one to another. Federal politicians trying to ramrod their personal opinions down the throat of the entire country is an abuse of power and has been for a very long time, ever since the Whiskey Rebellion.

Here, for example, people are looking to create a space in which a dialogue between men and women relating to the #me too movement can occur. The idea is that it is key to this discussion is the idea that everything can be put on the table. That nothing is taboo...however it is also important that all participants feel safe.

If people don't feel safe peacefully talking with words, just imagine how safe they will feel when the non-peaceful alternative occurs. This is the prospect we are dealing with. I personally think that people have become much too sensitive and fragile to have to run away from any conversation because words make them feel things, and many people can't seem to deal with their own feelings anymore, or have any sense of personal responsibility over them.

At the end of the day, someone's feelings are their own responsibility, or else men could claim that assaulting someone for wearing a short skirt is justified because it made them feel something. Of course that is not a logical argument, and neither is avoiding an uncomfortable discussion because opposing ideas make people feel uncomfortable. Like I said, the alternative to uncomfortable, but peaceful, discussions, is going to feel even more uncomfortable.

[Didgevillage]

It is a good thing that people can discuss important matters without a fear of being branded as racist, anti-semite, nazi, commnie, etc. because these names really don't mean anything.

It is the work of modern mass media to give "racism" and "racist" a bad name, so to speak, because I see nothing wrong in worrying about one's race. Those who worry about their country are patriots and nationalists. Those who worry about their freedom and freedom of thought are individualists. Why should there be anything wrong with "racism" and being "racist"?

Nazis were socialists and they invented welfare and sports as entertainment and gave the citizens an affordable car.

While communist FDR's New Deal was a miserable failure, Nazi socialism worked miracles. That's exactly why Germany got attacked.

[enfoldedblue]

I don't have a lot of time to respond now. I will digest the info and see what comes up.

But what is clear for me is that to have a real conversation that doesn't involve two groups, deaf to the other, yelling their truths both sides need to be wiling to accept that they are undoubtedly missing some important pieces of the big picture .

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by Didgevillage (here)
Nazis were socialists and they invented welfare and sports as entertainment and gave the citizens an affordable car.

While communist FDR's New Deal was a miserable failure, Nazi socialism worked miracles. That's exactly why Germany got attacked.

National Socialist economics could be a thread in itself. (Maybe it can be split off, so as not to distract from this thread?) There is a lot of information to unpack from this.

Both the US and the Third Reich were recovering from the onset of the Great Depression. Germany had it much worse because of the debts imposed by the Versailles Treaty, so the economic improvement was a more marked contrast than what happened in the US. The US also took more time to recover because FDR was dithering around during the 1930s with programs that often conflicted with one another, such as the WPA and unemployment funds (workers refused to work because then they couldn't receive unemployment, etc.).

Both FDR and Hitler used government spending to ultimately get out of the depression. In the US, the economy was nonetheless still on bad footing even by the end of the war, because so much of the economy had become dependent upon war production. Military production had to be scaled down, but it was still the birth of the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us about. Germany was essentially destroyed by the end of the war, so there is no way to judge the long-term effects of its similar economic policies.




Universities and media outlets today try to argue that the National Socialists were not "real" socialists, but consider the following:

• Hitler believed that politics should determine the direction of the national economy, rather than letting the free market determine its own direction. This is a socialist philosophy.
• Hitler distrusted the free market because he believed that businessmen would always have selfish interests unless the state imposed values on them. This is also a socialist philosophy.
• Hitler believed that workers and employers would always naturally oppose one another, just like Marxists believe. This, despite Hitler hating Communists. (The US largely avoided this mentality, which is why unions were never so popular here.)
• Manufacturing was unionized in the Third Reich.
• The unions were controlled by the government.
• Employers were not allowed to fire employees without the consent of the National Socialist government.
• The Third Reich subsidized nationalized health care, forms of welfare, work programs, pensions for the elderly, etc. All of these are socialist programs.

If those aren't socialist policies, then what are?

FDR's economic policies during the 1930s utterly failed. That's why the entire decade was one long depression, while President Harding had us bounce back from a similar situation in the early 1920s by unleashing the free market. Incidentally, Harding died in office and didn't even finish a single term, and you hardly ever even hear his name today. FDR, on the other hand, is virtually worshipped by the left despite presiding over the largest part of the Great Depression without results. Funny how that works.

About half of the New Deal programs were repealed while FDR was still in office. The US economy did not begin to rebound until WW2, and that was only because war production (overseen by the US government) was ramped up to enormous levels, equivalent to over a third of the total US GDP. That means a full third of the total US economy was in the war business during WW2, and that's how unemployment finally started dropping, temporarily ending the Great Depression.

At the end of WW2, the government had to end its emergency measures which justified its interference in the market, and the free market was at least partially restored, leading to the relatively booming 1950s economy without as much wartime production, though there was still of course a considerable amount of spending due to the Cold War. Thus the "military-industrial complex" of Eisenhower.


This video from the Mises Institute goes into greater detail on the big-government/socialist economic policies of the Third Reich using primary source documentation:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=17DkMDvKqw0

Whatever success the National Socialist economy had, I think stems from two things:

1. Abandoning the Versailles Treaty and the over-burdensome debts it placed on Germany, and
2. Economic stimulus through massive government investment using fiat currency. (The Nazis were not fans of gold-backed currency, made their own banks, and just printed however much they needed, just like all the central banks do today.)

As the video above discusses, the Nazis could afford to just keep printing money as long as the availability of goods to purchase also increased, and inflation stayed relatively stable. I don't think this would have been an effective long-term strategy, however, or that it would have ultimately been able to compete with a decentralized free market economy such as what the US traditionally employs.

You can either try to micro-manage the entire economy yourself, from the top down, like socialists do, or you can just set the ground rules, allow for private ownership and management, and then just let industries compete with each other while making their own individual decisions. That's the real difference. And the National Socialists were dictating their economy from the top down, just like FDR's administration.

[Didgevillage]

I will watch the video. In order not to diverge from the thread, I shall quickly note that Hitler had to borrow heavily from the Rothschilds (and the branches thereof) while the US had the Federal Reserve which can print any amount of money the government requests --- and charge the American people with interest.

After 1945, Germany and Japan became two of the largest exporters to the US, but the US government kept the payment to Germany in gold stateside, with the excuse that West Germany could be invaded by the Soviet Red Army and the gold could get stolen. Japan had to buy US bonds in dollars with the money earned by exporting stuff and to this day, it is not allowed to sell. Thus Germany and Japan, two American foes turned miserable colonies and slaves, had to work without any payment.

[norman]

Posted by enfoldedblue (here)
I don't have a lot of time to respond now. I will digest the info and see what comes up.

But what is clear for me is that to have a real conversation that doesn't involve two groups, deaf to the other, yelling their truths both sides need to be wiling to accept that they are undoubtedly missing some important pieces of the big picture .

I'm all for synchronising the information packages we form our grasps on reality with. It has to be a levelling up, not a levelling down. Yes, let's all talk it through and level it out.

It can't be something we put up as an obstacle in the timetable tho' Things are too urgent. The planet was within inches of being completely taken over by crooks. It's still on the brink of that now. The time it would take to explain all that to the people who don't know that yet would be enough time for the crooks to regain control and finish the operation.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone who protests that is no different from someone who runs up to the arresting officer after a street shooting or whatever demanding that the officer stop it immediately and call for a council meeting, WHILE THE KILLER RUNS AWAY !

It's not politics or ethics or lifestyle choice, it's crime. A rampant crimewave that engulfed humanity. A crimewave so massive that it made us all culturally sick with crime. Are we to go through a tick list of all the crimes and convert them to being legal ? so we can 'resolve' the matter. Of course not. It's not a game of this conspiracy theory versus the other conspiracy theory. It's an investigation to get to the bottom of crime, and stop it.

Sure, it's ok to have safe spaces for people who don't want to confront the extent of it or deal with it for what it is, but some people will have to get on with the job. Right now, those people are being opposed every inch of the way by the cultural inertia caused by the crimewave. I'm not even saying that every street fool is a criminal but I am saying that the resistance to stopping the crime is embedded deeply into what a lot of people still think is their cultural 'identity'.

It's like snatching the drugs away from junkies. They are not going to thank you for it, at the time.

[petra]

Posted by enfoldedblue (here)
With each side carefully cherry picking their content to match their own narrative it is so easy to lose sight of the big picture. Neither side are idiots. Both sides hold vital, valid information and perspectives that is crucial to healing the whole.

This of course goes way beyond Trump and left right politics. It is being played in so many arenas. Only once we are willing to accept that if we feel aligned with a side, that there may be something we are not seeing or fully understanding will we open ourselves to meaningful growth. Only when we are able to stop putting down the ‘other side’ and start creating a meaningful dialogue between the two camps will we be able to unite, and truly throw off our shackles.

Brilliant post. I couldn't agree more. So far I've only read the OP, and taking a little break to brace myself before getting to the bit about Hitler.

The Hitler thing is a big part of it too, I think so. Remember that philosophy question "If you could go back in time and kill Hitler, would you do it?". Most people would say yes to that - but not me. It's a trick question.

[Savannah]

I don't feel I have say in how the political system works, that's a meme by the controllers who would like me to think I have a say in the process. People and possibly entities other than myself actually orchestrate what goes on politically. What I see now is two gangs battling it out for control who use the democratic and republican parties as window dressing. We are divided as a country by design, and yes people are well meaning in what they believe. We are just given the illusion our votes and protests control the process. Talking and coming to a well meaning compromise, to me, is meaningless because our compromise means nothing, results in nothing, changes nothing. You and me don't run this world.

I understand this is a disempowering perspective, but perhaps realistic one. Politics is interesting to watch like a sporting event but a honey pot you eventually get stuck in.

[Tomkoyote]

There are no sides, no left, no right, no party. There are facts.
A US president is no more no less than an employee of a system, just like a CEO who gets his instructions from and reports to a board of directors. How he executes his bosses' instructions is a matter of style. Bush1 has his own style, Bush2 his own style, same with Clinton, Obama, Trump has his style, as well as all the rest. They all follow an agenda set by the big boss. If he deviates, they will take care of him. With Trump it has become so blatant and they don't even care to disguise it.
Has anyone heard Trump say something and do something about
- unemployment
- poverty, homelessness (many, many, many families living on the streets or under a bridge). Is it acceptable to see a family living in their car?
- the educational system which has in fact become a dumbing and gender bending system
- the horrible state of the healthcare system
- and so, so many other basic but important national issues

not me.
This is because taking care of the American citizen is not on the agenda, and he doesn't give a s**t about it. He is a champ at 2 things:
- spending billions at helping, protecting and financing Israel, billions on concocting wars and sending troops here and there, bulling & threatening other countries. What does all of this has to do with the average american's interest and welfare? Nothing, really nothing. It all has to do with someone else's interest
- repeating his favorite slogan MAGA (Make America Great Again)

All I see is a hot air balloon; I can't align with a side, a balloon has no sides.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

Posted by Savannah (here)
I don't feel I have say in how the political system works, that's a meme by the controllers who would like me to think I have a say in the process. People and possibly entities other than myself actually orchestrate what goes on politically.

This kind of attitude sounds very dis-empowering. Maybe that is what they want you to think.

The fact that there is a battle going on at all means that no single faction has a monopoly on power. Think about that.

Posted by Tomkoyote (here)
Has anyone heard Trump say something and do something about
- unemployment
- poverty, homelessness (many, many, may families living on the streets or under a bridge). Is it acceptable to see a family living in their car?
- the educational system which has in fact become a dumbing and gender bending system
- the horrible state of the healthcare system
- and so, so many other basic but important national issues

The fact that you even asked this question tells me that you haven't been paying any attention at all to anything Trump has actually been saying.

Sometimes you have to go to the man himself to hear what he is saying, rather than getting all your information filtered for you by the CIA.

US unemployment rates are at record lows right now and he talks about this all the time. He just tweeted about healthcare reform earlier today.

So when you ask, "Has anyone heard Trump say something and do something...", umm, yes, and where have you been? Watching the Young Turks?

[Didgevillage]

Armchair anarchists will say: Politics and polities are all bad. Let's ignore all politicians and governments, then we will live in a paradise.

BULL****!
Never trust anyone who promises a paradise.

Trump didn't invent cars and bridges, so stop blaming him if you see people sleeping in or under them.

As A Voice from the Mountains indicates, there is a big struggle going on, the result of which will determine the future of this planet.
A New Age voice will say: All struggles are bad, let's visualize love and light and harmony, then everything will be fine. BULL****!

[enfoldedblue]

In a Beyond Quantum healing session I gave last week the client wanted to explore her relationship with her father. He had been a junkie and a very neglectful parent. When she got into the trance state her unconscious showed her many lifetimes where she had powerful and usually toxic relationships with this same being. What really affected her though was the fact that in many of these lives she had been the villainous one. For her this was a new and revolutionary concept...we all just take turns playing the good guys and the bad guys so that we can learn and grow! She found it hard to witness herself the dark roles she had played, but was eventually able to see that was the growth mechanism of this particular reality. She was able to transcend and release a lot of the anger that she had held for many lifetimes and step into a liberating energy of understanding and forgiveness. We come here to experience duality...with the ultimate aim of deepening and expanding our hearts.

In another session the client became aware of the flow of creation. As she was watching it unfold like a beautiful kaleidoscope unfolding from a center point she realized that some of the parts of it were dark. She then observed that when she became aware of the dark nature of these parts she felt frightened...and wanted to change them. But then she realized that her fear and focus had only served to 'energise' them, making them more prominent in the whole than they had been. From there she realized that in reality they were all just part of the whole. That when no judgement (bad good) were applied to them they were actually just a part of the unfolding beauty.


For me when we get too caught up in focusing on 'the bad out there' we are missing a great opportunity for growth. We can't fix that which is outside our sphere of influence...but we all have the power to make important changes to this reality by owning and integrating our own darkness, and aligning with our own hearts. Focusing on smashing and eliminating something 'out there' is a futile exercise which will ultimately only bring more darkness into this reality. While having the courage to step out of our own ego (which is the part that is sure that way we see the world is the right way) and making a concerted effort build bridges of understanding with those who we may think have lost their way is key to transcending this game as it is currently playing out.