Another one to add to the list - the classic left used to be anti-fascist. Now, they co-opt the term to give them cover and to supplement their Orwellian double-speak... all so they can implement measures used by fascists of the past -
Printable View
Another one to add to the list - the classic left used to be anti-fascist. Now, they co-opt the term to give them cover and to supplement their Orwellian double-speak... all so they can implement measures used by fascists of the past -
Thanks Chester. I've got nothing to add. I've debated this matter as much I want to for the present time. I'm out of energy to come up with new ways of making the same argument. Enough.
It's up to everyone to think what they want to think, and decide what they want to decide.
Geez Star, it's not like I'm hounding you to the four corners of the Earth asking for clarification on the same exact matter over, and over, and over again. If you'll recall I even bowed out of the great debate because politically speaking, this forum bleeds MAGA red without pause or question, so why bother any more?Quote:
Posted by Star Mariner
But then to see an obviously Right Wing conservative movement (which is IMO neither good nor bad it just is) now being labeled as classic liberal, I felt someone needed to at least step in and point out that this cannot possibly be so. It should be obvious on the face of it, maybe someone else can explain to me why my reasoning is so flawed on that:
I don't know why the ultra rare dissenting opinion in the Trump echo chamber is seen as so aggravating and tiresome, but so be it.Quote:
Q is inseparable from Trump, who is in turn inseparable from the republicans and his loyal base, the latter of which is predominantly comprised of conservatives and Christian fundamentalists. How on earth is this classic liberalism?
Chester, Q is not anti-establishment, he's anti *democratic party* establishment. He's more than happy to make use of police, military, the court system, any lever of governmental force he can muster to get the DS Dems frog marched on off to Gitmo.Quote:
Posted by Chester
I offer no excuses for that particular version of today's left, but at least they're not the ones still ruthlessly going after Julian Assange and Edward Snowden for instance. That would be the Trump administration, along with the DS Republican side of the establishment.Quote:
Posted by Chester
Hardly champions of the 1ST Amendment themselves...
Are you saying the Military Industrial Complex is just a left thing?Quote:
Posted by Chester
From the stand point of source power I would say that both parties answer to the same power, and that this power sometimes smacks us with the left and sometimes the right and sometimes it isn't sure what it's doing and it makes mistakes and at some point in the past it confused the parties switching them and their policies in the process where it gets counter punched now with the past now and again. Such as, for one example, "JFK" a democrat running and winning on a campaign to reduce taxes! Which is something democrats have not sided with or used in a campaign since, now they increase taxes! They never talk about reducing them until now when Joe Biden makes vain promises he has no intention of keeping. The left as per Kennedy, used to condemn secrets but now they embrace them, and as Gracie pointed out the fact that they used to push free speech and now want to limit it to towing the party line only shows you they've mutated on both sides of the aisle.Quote:
Posted by Gracy MayGeez Star, it's not like I'm hounding you to the four corners of the Earth asking for clarification on the same exact matter over, and over, and over again. If you'll recall I even bowed out of the great debate because politically speaking, this forum bleeds MAGA red without pause or question, so why bother any more?Quote:
Posted by Star Mariner
But then to see an obviously Right Wing conservative movement (which is IMO neither good nor bad it just is) now being labeled as classic liberal, I felt someone needed to at least step in and point out that this cannot possibly be so. It should be obvious on the face of it, maybe someone else can explain to me why my reasoning is so flawed on that:
I don't know why the ultra rare dissenting opinion in the Trump echo chamber is seen as so aggravating and tiresome, but so be it.Quote:
Q is inseparable from Trump, who is in turn inseparable from the republicans and his loyal base, the latter of which is predominantly comprised of conservatives and Christian fundamentalists. How on earth is this classic liberalism?
Chester, Q is not anti-establishment, he's anti *democratic party* establishment. He's more than happy to make use of police, military, the court system, any lever of governmental force he can muster to get the DS Dems frog marched on off to Gitmo.Quote:
Posted by Chester
I offer no excuses for that particular version of today's left, but at least they're not the ones still ruthlessly going after Julian Assange and Edward Snowden for instance. That would be the Trump administration, along with the DS Republican side of the establishment.Quote:
Posted by Chester
Hardly champions of the 1ST Amendment themselves...
Are you saying the Military Industrial Complex is just a left thing?Quote:
Posted by Chester
Yeah sure, I’ll point out the obvious flaw for you Gracy.Quote:
Posted by Gracy May
You started your argument based on a conflation.
That’s as illogical as me saying you are inseparable from Bill Ryan just because you play on the same team (the moderators team). Q is Q. Trump is Trump. Different bases. Different demographics.Quote:
”Q is inseparable from Trump”
Are you saying that everyone on the Q thread and all the thousands upon thousands of people who show up at Trumps rallies are Christian Fundamentalists? The evidence on the ground (and in the threads) proves otherwise.
Problem with calling Trumps base conservatives, is that the Overton window you view politics through has been so skewed by decades of mass propoganda, that what was once called ‘classic liberal’ is now called ‘the extreme right’. You yourself were guilty of this subjective slippage of semantics when you called Dr Steve Turley “ultra right wing” a while back. (Man, that still gives me the giggles :ROFL:).
Only a month to go before the final showdown begins, so it’s too late for debate, too late for arguments, we’re purely in the popcorn, memes and mockery stages, so, I’m just going to chill out, relax, put my feet up and watch all the Antifa heads explode as America doesn’t descend into an apocalyptic civil war hellhole after Trump is re-elected, and the left-wing liberals are forced to confront the most terrifying fear the world has ever known... the fear that “Orange man really isn’t that bad” and the past 4 years of screeching otherwise has been utterly and pathetically futile. Roll on 2021, 2020 has been a blast!! :popcorn:
https://i.imgflip.com/21w90d.jpg
Trump nominated for Nobel Peace Prize by Norwegian official, citing Israel-UAE peace deal (3 weeks ago)
and
Trump nominated for second Nobel Peace Prize following Serbia-Kosovo deal (2 weeks ago)
and third nomination today...
Trump Nominated for Nobel Peace Prize by Australian Law Professors for Doctrine Against Endless Wars (September 28, 2020)
Note all three nominations come near the very end of Trump's first term (unlike his predecessor who was nominated and won, barely into the beginning of his opportunity to prove he deserved it).
The Trump Doctrine (from the third article) -
"The Trump Doctrine is something extraordinary, as so many things that Donald Trump does. He is guided by two things, which seem to be absent from so many politicians. He has firstly common sense and he is only guided by a national interest, and therefore, in our circumstances, an interest in the Western alliance," Flint said. "What he has done with the Trump Doctrine is that he has decided that he would no longer have America involved in endless wars, wars which achieve nothing, but the killing of thousands of young Americans and enormous debts imposed on America."
That alone, without a doubt, would, in fair "normal" times, ensure his re-election. Unfortunately, the war machine's candidate is, as we all know, Joe Biden.
The KILLING business is goooood bizness. Combine that with an electorate that consistes of 35% or so who will vote who are either ignorant, insane or both and you get a close race that probably still can only be won by mail in voting fraud (like the sort that was busted recently by Project Veritas and made public yesterday) -
Project Veritas uncovers ‘ballot harvesting fraud’ in Minnesota
https://i.imgur.com/avHnbUZ.gif?noredirect
Okay Jayke, so I'll continue to ignore the constant drumbeat of "Q = Trump = Republican = FOX NEWS = Conservative" in all of this, and pretend it's not really there. If that equation actually = classic liberal in the majorities' eyes, then by all means roll with it.
Now I still can't help but notice the ongoing stone cold silence on the continued wars, ever ballooning military budget, the strangling sanctions on innocent peoples, CIA regime change efforts, Wall Street bailouts by the trillions, the silencing of Snowden Assange and the likes, etc.
If this is also part of this classic liberal revolution, the 4D chess, then so be it, my decades of indoctrination must be blinding me so badly that I simply cannot even fathom the true majesty.
Please carry on :)
Oh, for a Supreme Court that could review "settled law" at the Project Avalon forum.
You must have an idealism bordering on fantasy if you think one man can stop the juggernaut of the military industrial complex, Gracy. It’ll take a good while to turn that ship around, regardless of who you choose to put at the helm. I find it very quaint that you believe the American president has that kind of power, almost endearing in its naivety. “If Jesus was really the sun of God, he’d be able to stop the sun from rising in the morning with the power of his prayer”, similar kind of logic, it’s the expectation of impossible standards that keeps people mired in the political theatre of samsara, always expecting perfection. Try reading the Bhagavad Gita, you might find it insightfully cathartic.Quote:
Posted by Gracy May
Yeah, your the only one on the Q threads banging that drum. It’s a phantasm of your own imagination if they’re the only notes you tune into when reading the Q material. How much do you honestly have to ignore in order to arrive at those exceedingly superficial conclusions? Your equation really has very little to do with what the Q movement is genuinely about.Quote:
the constant drumbeat of "Q = Trump = Republican = FOX NEWS = Conservative"
Interesting Jayke, thanks for furthering your deep insights.
Brendon O’Connell has been putting out some interesting videos lately. He’s one of the only people who seems to be tuned into the UN 2030 grand plan. How does Trump fit into the Chabad Lubavitch goals of enslaving the planet into an A.I drone powered, smart city technocracy?
His take goes way beyond the left vs right Punch and Judy show and looks at the bigger picture. Optimistic and pessimistic in equal measure. Still not sure if he’s just another talking head pumping out disinformation, but worth considering what he says even if I don’t fully agree with it all, to see what plans might potentially be rolled out further down the line.
Awesome Jayke. That's exactly the way I feel about things at the moment. All my arguments are done and dusted, all the interpretations I've attempted to make (and justifications for them) are spent. It's a kind of battle fatigue of the keyboard variety at this stage.Quote:
Posted by Jayke
And I'm not dodging you Gracy, I just feel I've covered everything, including to the Nth degree how viewing these affairs as left vs right is pure 2D thinking. Unless you break from that you will never see or understand the extra dimension(s) operating here. I simply cannot describe them any further without repeating myself.Quote:
Posted by Gracy May
You said elsewhere you weren't a shrinking violet and were ready, locked and loaded for whatever is coming. I do not doubt it. I somewhat think you're quite a total badass - that's a compliment. If ever it kicked off and things went sideways, I'd probably be standing behind you! But let it be known that a difference of opinion is only that. A difference of opinion. And unlike other places in the world there should be no falling out over that here.
:handshake: :beer:
Well I'm very glad you brought that up Star. I've always assumed there's nothing but mutual respect in our exchanges, no different than how athletes shake hands and hug after a match. Most people here have mastered fairly well the fine art hashing out differences of opinions without unneeded insults and/or condescension, some not so much, but fortunately they are few and far between.Quote:
Posted by Star Mariner
Perhaps we'll just never be able to properly understand each other on this one. In my personal daily life, I don't look at any of these matter through the left/right paradigm, I simply view them as do I agree with it, or disagree with it; does it make sense, or does it not make sense.Quote:
Posted by Star Mariner
Now having said that, of course I see the environment that these issues swim in. So often times in trying to describe something, I use the descriptor to which I see it most closely associated, no different than I might describe a certain fish as being either "salt water", or "fresh water". Hopefully that wouldn't be seen as a limit on my overall, fundamental understanding of fish in general.
So obviously I'm pretty much the only one here who looks at the the whole Trump/Q/FOX NEWS thing, and sees that it exists in a right wing environment. So be it. :)
Anyway, the only reason I popped in on this conversation again after bowing out, was because I noticed you linking this movement to that of classic liberal.
I guess my confusion comes in where my observation of a right wing environment is seen as pure 2D type of thinking that needs to be overcome; yet when this same movement (of whatever label) refers to itself as classic liberal, and refers to other movements as radical socialists and anarchists, it's cutting edge and deadly accurate.
Huh... :noidea:
Hi why is it not possible to ignore moderators? Can you please find a workaround this? Thanks.Quote:
Posted by Gracy MayGeez Star, it's not like I'm hounding you to the four corners of the Earth asking for clarification on the same exact matter over, and over, and over again. If you'll recall I even bowed out of the great debate because politically speaking, this forum bleeds MAGA red without pause or question, so why bother any more?Quote:
Posted by Star Mariner
But then to see an obviously Right Wing conservative movement (which is IMO neither good nor bad it just is) now being labeled as classic liberal, I felt someone needed to at least step in and point out that this cannot possibly be so. It should be obvious on the face of it, maybe someone else can explain to me why my reasoning is so flawed on that:
I don't know why the ultra rare dissenting opinion in the Trump echo chamber is seen as so aggravating and tiresome, but so be it.Quote:
Q is inseparable from Trump, who is in turn inseparable from the republicans and his loyal base, the latter of which is predominantly comprised of conservatives and Christian fundamentalists. How on earth is this classic liberalism?
Chester, Q is not anti-establishment, he's anti *democratic party* establishment. He's more than happy to make use of police, military, the court system, any lever of governmental force he can muster to get the DS Dems frog marched on off to Gitmo.Quote:
Posted by Chester
I offer no excuses for that particular version of today's left, but at least they're not the ones still ruthlessly going after Julian Assange and Edward Snowden for instance. That would be the Trump administration, along with the DS Republican side of the establishment.Quote:
Posted by Chester
Hardly champions of the 1ST Amendment themselves...
Are you saying the Military Industrial Complex is just a left thing?Quote:
Posted by Chester
Q is posting big time at this writing
The short answer is, it's what they identify themselves as.Quote:
Posted by Gracy May
Eg here, or here (and here).
As far as the term 'classic liberal' goes, the Overton window as previously mentioned has shifted. Thus the perception - and depiction - of what liberalism is (or was), has shifted..
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/atta...4&d=1601472949
The political compass. Classic liberals are generally rather centred people (not too hot, not too cold, not too dry, not too moist). The people posting on the Q threads have a well balanced constitution.
http://i.imgur.com/wOvy8Xs.jpg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~WHAT’S YOUR HUMOR?
Humoral theory, based on the work of the ancient Greek physician Galen, holds that good health relies on a balance of four fundamental fluids: blood, choler (yellow bile), phlegm, and black bile. An ideal proportion (one quarter as much phlegm as blood, one sixteenth as much choler as blood, and one sixty-fourth as much melancholy as blood) is difficult to sustain since humors are continually influenced by what people eat and drink. So one humor will generally predominate and characterize an individual’s overall temperament or “complexion.” Too much blood, for example, results in a sanguine personality, and an overabundance of black bile makes one melancholy.
Each temperament carried its own set of characteristics, which still resonate in our language today. Sanguine people were thought to be ruddy and cheerful, phlegmatics pale and listless, cholerics jaundiced and angry, and melancholics dark and sad (but often creative).
https://i1.wp.com/shakespeareandbeyo...rs-graphic.jpg
Maybe Gracy should take the political compass test so we can get some kind of objective measure of where she comes from with her political prognostications.
https://www.politicalcompass.org/test
Go on Gracy, I double dare you, show us what your made of so we can put this argument to rest for good. :p
Regarding the following:
I have my own hypothesis.Quote:
Posted by Gracy MayQuote:
Posted by edina
Hey there edina, this offers me another opportunity to try and find clarification on an ongoing question of mine concerning the near and dear value of free speech:Quote:
We are attacked by Big Tech because we stand for freedom and because we compete with their control over the flow of information online. We operate a social media site that has one core rule: political speech that is protected by the First Amendment is allowed on our site. We do not take sides.
After praising Julian Assange and Wikileaks throughout the 2016 election campaign, President Trump doesn't even seem to recall this issue any more, all while having unleashed the dogs of war against him.
How does this square with a President being a great activist for free speech? Bringing back around to topic, is there maybe a Q drop I've missed on this or something that can easily explain away an obvious concern?
Trump understands his re-election is more important than the fallout he might experience regarding the Assange situation at this time. In addition, most people (with reasonable thinking capacity) understand that Assange holds key information which would be greatly appreciated with regards to a.) how Wikileaks obtained the DNC emails and b.) why Wikileaks offered a reward for information that would lead to a conviction of the Killer(s) of Seth Rich.
Once Trump is re-elected, the situation may change with regards to Trump's actions that relate to how the Assange situation is disposed.
Assange, like each of us, took his risks in a very high stakes game. Trump understands this as so as his family and himself. Trump is able to consider the big picture along with "timing of actions" and with regards to Assange, I believe the above are valid factors that are in play.