zazen

With voter turnout of 57% and Labour securing only 35% of that vote, we're looking at a mere fifth of eligible voters actually backing Labour. Yet this meager 20% support translates into a vast 160-seat majority? This is hailed as representative democracy. After 14 years the Tories are spent offering nothing but stale crumbs of failed policies and promises. Labour's victory echoes Blair's 1997 landslide. Don't be fooled by the changing of the guard. The ruling class understand the game well. They know the importance of these political intermissions to appease public discontent - periods that allow for the illusion of change while ensuring the status quo remains unthreatened. Public pressure needs to be alleviated like a release valve. Just look at Starmers campaign to destroy Jeremy Corbyn. We're talking about a man who's been the beating heart of Labour for half a century. Corbyn's record is a list of fights for justice: battling fascism, opposing apartheid, championing nuclear disarmament, and standing up for the oppressed from Ireland to Palestine. He stood against the Iraq War when it was deeply unpopular, earning himself international peace awards. Yet, Starmer attempts to obliterate Corbyn's political legacy. This isn't just internal party politics; it's a ruthless purge of anyone who dares to challenge the blood-soaked status quo. This is the same Starmer who, as Director of Public Prosecutions, helped persecute Julian Assange - another thorn in the side of the establishment. Starmer also denies that he said Israel had a right to block water and food from Gaza, which is caught on video. Starmer is just a opportunist chameleon ever shifting to gain and maintain power and profit for himself and the establishment. There isn't even a Keir Starmer or a Rishi or whoever else, they are only placeholders for oligarchy and interests, avatars with different colours and labels.

I get where you’re coming from. America definitely has the strongest fundamentals and is geographically blessed. The main thing that could mess things up leading to decline (not doom) is the human factor ie people themselves. Much like Argentina being geographically blessed yet unable to capitalise on the cards it has. A lot of what gets called maintaining global stability is actually global domination, with a body count to prove it. Any country leading the world may abuse that position of power as power corrupts way too easily. Which is why it’s best the world shifts towards cooperation rather than domination - so that power is shared and distributed. Maybe the idea of needing a world leader is actually part of the problem and not the solution. From a historical perspective Empires naturally rise and fall, and Western hegemony is an aberration of only 500 years compared to India / Chinas 2000 years. When other countries naturally rise and their time comes to challenge the current order, this creates friction where the hegemon tries to maintain its position. These transitions have mostly resulted in war, but in today’s world our weapons are too apocalyptic to go at it with each other directly which is why it’s a necessity to have multipolarity. The West loves to preach from its high horse, all while that horse is trampling over the very values it claims to uphold. The rest of the world would actually love it if the West actually embodied those values at a state and foreign policy level. But their usually on the receiving end of the bad and not the good. If Western values include things like free speech, critical thinking, and the constant pursuit of betterment then that's exactly what we're doing when we point out the West's laundry list of failures and hypocrisies. Calling out injustice is embodying those values. As long as it’s not done in a self loathing way with a white man bad rhetoric that can be seen poisoning the left. It’s not about tearing down the West but holding it accountable to its own stated ideals. Speaking of global order in relation to Ukraine. This is US / Western led order on display: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/07/02/ukraine-to-be-told-it-is-too-corrupt-to-join-nato/ Remember Henry Kissingers quote "It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." If Ukraine isn't living proof of that cynical wisdom I don’t know what is. The U.S. doesn't have allies; it has disposable assets. Countries to be used, abused, and discarded when they're no longer convenient. Ukraine made the fatal mistake of believing the promises, of thinking they were special. Now they're learning the hard way that in the game of empire, there are no real friends, only temporary conveniences. This is the dark heart of American foreign policy that the mainstream media won't touch. This is why the UK having over 10’000 US troops stationed on its land never gets mentioned. These troops aren’t here to dance or for some temporary training - they’ll literally stationed. The West dangled the carrot of NATO membership and now that the game's gone sideways, they're backpedaling. "Ukraine's too corrupt," they say, conveniently forgetting how they've turned a blind eye to corruption when it suited their interests. It's the geopolitical equivalent of "It's not you, it's me" like some breakup line. They can't even admit they were wrong. Instead of owning up to the catastrophic miscalculation of antagonizing a nuclear power, they're deflecting to Ukraine corruption as a reason for not joining the NATO gang. NATO have deformed into a pack of neighbourhood watchdogs armed to the teeth who whimper when they finally encounter a pitbull with nukes up its ass. It's a masterclass in gaslighting, with Ukraine and many around the world left with the consequences and aftermath of their adventures.

Both sides are selling a simple solution to a complex world. The far right says to go back whilst the far left says to push forward, the right are nostalgic, the left utopian. The extremes from each side feed each other like a snake eating itself. Each overreach by one side justifies the other's existence. The more the left pushes, the more the right can claim they're under attack. The more the right resists, the more the left can paint them as backwards dinosaurs. Take Biden's tone-deaf declaration of Trans Visibility Day on Easter Sunday - a move that might play well in coastal echo chambers but lands like a slap in the face to Middle America's deeply held beliefs. Every rainbow flag raised in a gentrified neighborhood is seen as another middle finger to rural / suburbanite Americans. Each symbolic woke gesture is a Hawk Tuah on tradition, a woke spit on that thang. The establishment Democrats widen this chasm by catering to far leftists, but end up playing into the reactionary hands of the religious right, who position themselves as the last defenders of traditional values. No surprise ''Christ is King'' was trending online and the introduction of Nick fuentes on twitter having people among the right anticipate his ratio's of Jordan Peterson and many figure heads for not being America first, but Israel first.

The good old days lol. Yeah, I’m seeing the same talking points come up that we all had months ago except with different users who may not know what’s been said before by other users. Feels like all points have been exhausted and people got burnout from discussing - but some things have now been conceded to by the pro-Israeli side such as their government are not helping the situation / are extreme, how they’ve gone about the conflict hasn’t been clean.

I was being hyperbolic with regards to saying collapse - more like decline in relative power. I'm not celebrating gleefully at this, but pointing out the fact that others do which is why i wrote ''for some across the world''. It's just highlighting the ironies and consequences of its foreign policies. Where has China or Iran expanded with feet on the ground? Meanwhile, where has the US or NATO expanded with actual feet on the ground. When the West invades its called intervention, when it regimes changes or topples governments its called spreading democracy or a colour revolution - as colourful as their pride flag to make it look nice. It's actually the West that are alarmist about the threat of other nations, even to the point of saying their at 'existential threat'. The problem is that the mainstream narrative within the West is detached from reality, the populace is marinating in propaganda by a complicit media on behalf of intelligence agencies and a network of vested interests. Pointing this out isn't trying to be edgy for the sake of it although their are people who crap on anything mainstream as bad or love being contrarian because it makes them feel special. Saying they "did some shady things with some Central American countries" is like saying Godzilla had a mild disagreement with Tokyo. Orchestrating coups, arming death squads, and toppling democratically elected governments is bad enough - the problem is their interventionism has persisted beyond just the Cold War era and beyond to other regions of the world. Why stop at Central America? Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos - the US turned the region into a testing ground for its latest murder gadgets. The Vietnam war was prompted by the false flag Gulf of Tonkin incident. Hiroshima was unnecessary. Then in more recent memory, they globe trotted across the Middle East with their "War on Terror". Two decades of turning countries into parking lots, all while fattening the wallets of defense contractors. Propping up extremist groups and ISIS who coincidentally only target US adversaries. ISIS always attacks Iran or the like recently they claimed the attack in Russia, but somehow never attack their sworn enemy Israel - not even a Israeli olive has been touched by them. The issue many countries across the world have is that America goes across continents to places it has no business being in and often gets up to no good. If China, Russia and Iran did the same, they should also be critiqued and kicked out. Last I checked its called the South China Sea, not South American Sea - yet we got US ships posturing in waters closer to Beijing than Boston - again, who's a threat to who.

Ironically one nation's collapse is another's liberation. After decades of playing world police, judge, and jury, America might just find out what it's like to be on the receiving end of "regime change." The American people are as much a victim of their own empire as are the people outside of its borders. The world's self-appointed police force may not be finally hanging up their badge and gun as they are turning their attention to their own home turf as civil chaos emerges. For some across the world watching America weaken is a fever dream, whilst for others its a sigh of relief that America doesn't 'intervene' in their affairs.

This. It's a cultural cage match, not a political choice of 'oh this policy of such and such will do my country or myself any good'. Instead its 'this party and person tickles my tribalistic tendencies and makes me fuzzy inside with a sense of belonging to a identity.' People aren't just voting for who they like, as much as they are voting for who they hate. Foreign policy and domestic oligarchic vampirism remains the same (how many wars started during Obamas time) - the overwhelming majority of the empire's abusiveness happens outside the borders of the US whilst within its borders domestically trivial things change. A shiny new social program here or a progressive sounding slogan there. While people are arguing over pronouns and plastic straws, the oligarchs are cleaning up middle America and democratic foundations faster than that Hawk Tuah girl went viral - thats a consistent no ones able to vote against. Its not just about left vs right but about top vs bottom. Soft feudalism with a ''democratic'' coat of paint. The parasitic elite don't build without extracting. They don't produce without manipulating. They don't affect change without it benefiting the few at the expense of the many.

And Project 2025 sounds like the empires next latest hit album. From the Project 2025 mandate : ''In a world on fire, a handful of nations require heightened attention. Some represent existential threats to the safety and security of the American people; others threaten to hurt the U.S. economy; and others are wild cards, whose full threat scope is unknown but nevertheless unsettling. The five countries on which the next Administration should focus its attention and energy are China, Iran, Venezuela, Russia, and North Korea.'' A country flanked by vast seas they control, a ally to its north and a subservient to its South, are soooo at risk, existentially as well. Notice how these "threats" conveniently align with countries that challenge U.S. hegemony or sit on resources. The US has over 750 military bases in at least 80 countries. That's not a defensive posture; it's a chokehold on global geopolitics. One or two withdrawals isn't isolation, it's a tactical reshuffling of the empire's chess pieces.

Assurances aren’t guarantees but when you go back on your words that obviously erodes trust. Its wise to not erode trust with a powerful country and infringe on a comfort zone to avoid potential future conflicts. It’s not just a little oopsie when dealing with nuclear powers with apocalyptic arsenals. Its like a man saying to his partner “I won’t marry you on paper so our relationship isn’t bound in writing and you have no guarantee of a financial safety net if I were to get up and leave you as a single mum, but you have my assurance in word, don’t worry baby I love you - while he’s out on weekends being a pick up artist.” You say expansion is good as if it has no consequence. NATO is viewed as some glorified neighbourhood watchdog on steroids armed to the teeth that whimpers when it comes into contact with a pit bull who bites back.

@Gennadiy1981 I responded to that post above regarding prophecies which you may have missed. You had asked ''how can you say those people bullshitted when they predicted such. And if they predicted such details, and they claim they were messengers from God, how can I now close my eyes and let it go?'

Authoritarian regimes can pander to traditional culture to gain legitimacy. Totalitarian regimes destroy it to enforce new ideologies and consolidate power. Authoritarians are content to control the political sphere and leave some aspects of personal life untouched. Totalitarians got a PHD in micromanagement and want total control over a society - public, personal and political. Totalitarian regimes don’t just run the government, they run your life. You’re not just a citizen, but a walking billboard for their ideology. Their leader isn’t just great, their God. Authoritarians are cultural pick pockets, using tradition and cultural aspects to gain control - their drug dealers in nostalgia. Totalitarians want your soul and to re-shape culture completely - their drug dealers in Utopia. This is also why stage green isn’t exempt from madness. They can be totalitarian and tribalize - they just tribalize around green values. Gaia warriors will have us starving because our carbon footprints are bigger than big foot.

Got it, so the rise of Christian Nationalism isn't due to a lack of vision from progressives but a reaction to a vision they don't like - in some cases they probably can't even see the vision. I think what happens is that stage green's excesses or shadow elements get spotlighted by normies which causes them to go 'better to stay in our bubble because look at that shit over there'. For example just yesterday I've been seeing right wing/normie twitter sharing the degeneracy of grown men walking in San Francisco with their dicks out in front of children for Pride month - and a cop saying its fine. A public blowjob also took place - https://x.com/CensoredMen/status/1807591499061772462 So while fundamentalism may be a reaction to progressivism, we can understand whats causing it. I also think when people have children they tend to tilt towards conservatism. Like Russell Brand recently becoming a dad and now turning to Christianity. It's not just about faith - it's about the challenge of breaking down complex ideas for young minds. Distilling nuanced perspectives for kids isn't easy. So parents feel this pressure to present a solid identity, something their kids can latch onto and emulate. It's like they're trying to be a stable lighthouse in a often chaotic and confusing world. So most, out a of need for identity, belonging and convenience turn to religion. It's like a ready made kit of values and world views, neatly packaged in an easy to transmit format. It's the fast food of moral frameworks - quick, convenient, and easily passed down to the next generation. The issue is that along with those valuable life lessons comes a lot of baggage of religious literalism, dogma and half truths.

True, Chad Angel Gabriel was pointing to the eternal where you can be bliss. Thats the thing thats missing, intention. Its pointless if its being forced on people. I do think theres possibly something to praying even if not consciously engaged in it. Most people due to human bias and a evolutionary mismatch of ancient instincts in modern environments just seem to have bad thinking patterns and habits. Prayers and gratitude such as ''thank Lord for another day to live, thank Lord for my oatmeal and coffee I'm about to dive into'' can be a habitual practice that can have positive effects regardless of one's conscious engagement. Even if its half assed, you're training your brain to spot silver linings in a world that often feels like it's on fire. It's like you're hacking your own operating system. We don't need to understand every line of code to benefit from the update and our subconscious is doing the heavy lifting, rewiring neural pathways while we're busy doom-scrolling or netflixing. The shift on the subconscious it has may keep us slightly more on the positive end of the scale - thats probably what the studies are picking up on when they conclude positive benefits to prayer - something can also be said about rituals being relaxing. Its a bit like robotically brushing teeth, most aren't conscious when doing it but it has certain health benefits nonetheless.

In relation to your latest blog post on Christian nationalism which is brilliant - isn’t a contributing factor to the rise of Christian nationalism exactly because of this lacking vision by the left. Moral relativism of the left has left people starving for a moral anchor to guide them, and because most are too unconscious they revert to stage blue Christianity which they now are incorporating into stage Orange capitalism. Dogmatic divinity marrying vampiric capitalism. We have the likes of Richard Dawkins to Russel Brand converting to Christianity, or Dawkins just being a “cultural Christian”. Big time atheists like Dawkins and Ayaan Hursi Ali are suddenly donning the robes of religion, not out of sincere spiritual awakening, but as a desperate shield from a soulless secular culture they helped create. The left went too far in deconstructing structure and labelling everything as a construct as if it has no basis or meaning to a reality we very much feel with our senses. This left is right, up is down, man is woman politics has dizzied, dazed and disenfranchised many into regressing to old belief systems. Those beliefs will now be hinged to modern tools and levels of power with the ability to destroy and gut much progress out of society. They will be the new ‘deconstructionists’ but in their own way.

Thars what’s needed. Biden's presidency is less "hope and change" and more "nope and the same." He's the political equivalent of a participation trophy - there just for showing up, but not presenting a bold vision and stepping into it, he can barely step up the airforce 1. Biden's not Trump. And for a lot of people that's enough. But "not being the other guy" is a pretty low bar for the leader of a major power. US has gone from "Yes We Can" to "At Least He's Not That Guy." It's like being excited that your car's on fire because at least it's not exploding. Progressives aren’t excited for Biden, but are for not having Trump. They aren’t playing to win but to not lose - a negative excitement, which isn’t really excitement at all. It’s lukewarm political loyalty. It's familiar and safe, but it's ultimately unsatisfying and out of touch with what America actually needs right now.

A minimum effective dose of exercise to garner the most results would be something as basic as the following: 2x a week full body resistance training / weights. 30-45 min 2x a week cardio (any kind) at low-medium intensity for 30 minutes. Heart rate should be high enough to be breathing heavily but not so high you can barely hold a conversation or speak. If unfit - a brisk walk will achieve this, if fit - a light jog with or without incline, if very fit - jogging with at a incline will achieve this. 1x a week do 15-20 minutes of High intensity interval training (HIIT). You want at least a total of 10 minutes in the high intensity zone giving it your all or almost your all. You can make up that 10 minutes in multiple ways. Do 1 min on (give your all) 1min off (resting, or slow movement) done 10 times. Or 3 min on (medium high intensity giving it almost your all) 2-3 min off (rest, slow movement) done 3-4 times. You can make HIIT low impact on joints by doing it on a airbike/elliptical machine. 1x a week stretch/yoga for 20 minutes. That's 2.5 hours of your time a week to give to amping up the only vessel you have to experience this life in. Not a waste of time at all.

Perhaps both. If we are not separate from the All, but a living expression of it - then our purpose is a discovery (inherent) and a creation (extrinsic). It's unveiling that which has always been, and a shaping of that which is becoming. Inherent purpose is that which is, extrinsic purpose is that which is yet to be - which we work towards with what we have (capabilities and environmental opportunities). The feminine path of purpose is surrender (to what is, presence) the masculine path to purpose is striving (to what can be, potential).

So the same group of countries that have a history of lying, stealing, cheating and invading the global South/East, expect to be invited into a fold comprising mostly of the global South/East? Who are creating this alliance exactly to counter the West trampling on their sovereignty and development. Don't think so, they need to earn that trust. African nations one after the other have been kicking out Western influence and talking back like never before. Decades of the West abusing its power and position has left a bitter after taste that will take some time to go away. The West imposes sanctions on countries that often cripple those countries, then cries about countries wishing to create a parallel system to rid itself of this tyrannical tentacle of a tool which disrupts their ability to trade and develop. Other countries will be dictating some of the terms now - like the Somali pirate meme goes - I am the captain now. It's not like China hates Europe or doesn't want anything to do with them either - in fact they were at the end stages of signing the EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI) , before the Ukraine war kicked off, which is now gathering dust. I wonder who benefits from that: ''In total trade, China overtook the United States in 2020 and became the EU's largest trade in goods partner. However, in 2022 the United States retook the first position.'' Europe's been trading with Asia since Marco Polo was in diapers. But now they're supposed to cut ties because America says so? The US is that kid who lives across the street but insists on dictating who you can play with in your own backyard which happens to be a blessed piece of land linked to many other geographic players and partners for business. US sits by itself across the Atlantic in jealousy wanting to maintain a semblance of authority and power, whilst securing a running stream of profits to its coffers. Just like in post WW2, Europe became dependent on US markets, US military protection, and US approval. The almighty dollar became king, and Europe's once proud nations found themselves sheep to America's dictates. In the game of realpolitik, there are no permanent allies, only permanent interests. And America's interest has always been to stay on top - even if it means keeping its "friends" on their knees. For a insightful perspective on BRICS I'd suggest these two videos and 18 minutes of your time which you can make approx 10 with 1.5x speed:

Mind the gap between rhetoric and reality The Western hypocrisy in regards to democracy, free speech and human rights will have you thinking Westerners don't value their own Western values - but its the elites who don't. Every day people may have values, elites have interests. Power brokers weaponise the values of the populace as a smokescreen for their own gain. They wear these values like a cheap halloween costume. This domestic sleight of hand shows up in Western foreign policy also. Spreading democracy and liberty is a guise for global dominion. The elites have perfected the art of harnessing the good hearts of the many to funnel power and profits into the hands of the few. Campaign promises, emotional appeals, manufactured consent with a complicit media, token gestures and scapegoating are all the tools of politics. The tragedy is that the energy, passion, and genuine desire for positive change exhibited by ordinary citizens are real. But in the hands of cynical power, these become just another resource to be exploited. This exploitation of goodwill creates a feedback loop of polarised extremes - either despair and apathy or tribalism and anger. As people witness their efforts repeatedly twisted or nullified, they retreat from civic engagement, or become engaged in a tribalistic way full of anger against the 'other' side of the political aisle they lay blame to. Westerners are raised on lofty notions of democracy, freedom, and human rights, only to witness their nations routinely violate these principles both domestically and abroad. This grand canyon between rhetoric and reality creates a pervasive sense of disorientation, disillusionment and disenchantment. Whats packaged to Westerners about their society, isn't whats found once the wrappers open. They struggle to reconcile the high-minded values they've internalised with the often brutal realpolitik practiced by their governments. In a cruel twist, many individuals internalise this discord, believing the fault lies within themselves rather than the system that surrounds them. This is where leftism creates a atmosphere of shame, guilt and self loathing over the West's past and current injustices. To remedy this, its important to realise that this feeling of malaise and cognitive dissonance isn't because of you, its because of whats around you. It's not your state of mind, it's the state of affairs of the structure you live in. In light of Leo's recent video on traps, heres one to be mindful of: don't internalise the contradiction and cognitive whiplash caused by the difference between public ideals and private interests. Quite literally, you need to mind the gap between rhetoric and reality - be mindful enough to separate elite interests and actions from the peoples - or else conflating what your country does with what you or your neighbour are will lead to nihilism, confusion, tribalism and in the case of leftists, self flagellation.

It’s not necessarily pro-Russian to view a chain of cause and effect and how provocative the West has been. Nigel Farage and Trump are now even using the forbidden P word and the narrative is shifting - as always much too later after the fact once countless lives are lost. And both have been labeled Putin lovers now or pro-Russian. America has a huge sway on Europe and meddles in its politics. They are the main foundation holding the security architecture of Europe together via NATO. In 2023, the U.S. accounted for about 68% of total NATO defense spending, amounting to approximately $860 billion. This figure is more than ten times the defense spending of the second-highest contributor, Germany. So of course we have to include them in discussion. But if we want to look at Europe then let’s take a look at what was behind Nord stream, who gains from that? Why hasn’t Sweden released its findings due to the “sensitive nature of the findings”. Why did Boris Johnson who’s a lapdog of the US possibly sabotage early peace talks when he met Zelensky? Who does it circle back to, who gains. US provided 5% of Europes Gas before the war which has now jumped to 20%. The Western narrative is that this is about re-establishing Russian nationalism and imperialism. Why would Russia who is already the largest country in the world with some of the richest resources and a very long border it has to protect with an ever shrinking number of men needed to protect it - wish to destabilise themselves further with a war creating a sink hole for their already declining demographics and expanding their borders even more which need even more men to protect it. Russia, just due to its demographics would have faded in its power anyway, this disruption, provocation and entanglement only hastens their decline. Which is what the West want, to disrupt Russia and China. The difference between them and the West in terms of war is that the West goes into war whilst looking for the next one - they go to war out of necessity. Don't mind the silly title of the video, the full Piers Morgan / Jeffrey Sachs interview was insightful but heres a shorter version: You say BRICS topple governments and invades countries but beside Russia invading Ukraine, who have they toppled or invaded? Let’s not get started on the long line of colour revolutions, coups and invasions done by the US - it will go into more pages than the Israel / Gaza thread Leo had to lock lol. Just two years ago Imran Khan was taken out by corrupt elites thanks to US backing, which he boldly said was US was behind on Sky news. Meddling in a nuclear armed country sitting on fault line of another nuclear armed country (India) and with a population of over 230 million, talk about being a stabilising force in the world. All because he denied the US to use his country to host US bases and was on good terms with China/Russia.

A different paradigm: The concern isn’t the condition of Biden, it’s the condition of a system that props him up in the first place. The concern isn’t about the state of the candidates, but about a structure that enables their rise. What it makes clear is that who sits at the seat isn’t running the show, but that who is running the show is obscured from the public eye. The fact that these are the options in a nation of over 300 million full of talent exposes a political machine that maintains the status quo of entrenched interests.

Money is the lifeblood of American politics, seeping into every corner of the system and corrupting it from within. It’s not democracy, it’s oligarchy with the lipstick of the democratic process. - The ballot box is a suggestion box. Voting has become a hollow ritual, a pressure release valve for public discontent rather than a genuine mechanism for change. We're given the illusion of choice, but the menu is curated by two parties not allowing for anything else. - As voting rights expanded, the relevance of those votes contracted. Allow the public to cathartically shout into a sound proof room, but let them know their grievances are heard. We've won the right to participate in a system that's been quietly hollowed out from the inside. Voting became democratised, but the power behind that vote has been diluted to homeopathic levels. - The Supreme Court ruled corporations with personhood status alchemizing them into people and money into speech. Money literally talks, but what language? Money became words. Words became votes. Votes became commodified. It's a legal fiction that's metastasized into a political cancer. By equating money with speech, they've essentially given megaphones to the wealthy while the rest of us are left shouting into the void. It's turned democracy into an auction house where policies go to the highest bidder. This unholy trinity - the neutered ballot box, the diluted vote, and the corporate citizen - forms the backbone of our modern oligarchy. It's a system where the appearance of democracy is maintained while its substance is stripped away, leaving us with a plutocratic skeleton wearing the tattered skin of a republic.

Its a breath of fresh air for the uninformed who are just peddled self loathing hate and white man bad rhetoric, to learn that slavery was a wide spread scourge on the planet not uniquely done by “White people” and the fact that Britain played a major role in ending it. I’d add that other details should also be acknowledged for the full picture to avoid simplistic conclusions. It’s good the commentary noted how abolition wasn’t solely moral but incentivised by economics / self interest. The bottom line of businessmen and monied elites seemed to coincide along moral lines, just like today. The overlap between the Industrial Revolution and the abolition of slavery points to economics as also being a factor behind ending slavery as the transition from an agrarian economy to an industrial one occurred. Theres a complex interplay of economics, morality, and technological advancement driving changes. The American slave trade, being the most recent large-scale example of slavery in the West, has disproportionately shaped our perception of slavery as a whole. Its particularly brutal and racially-driven nature has been projected onto historical slavery practices worldwide. We think how they practiced it is how everyone else practiced it. While all forms of slavery are inherently disgusting, the American system was uniquely severe in many aspects, distinguishing it from others. From Chat gpt: “Islamic slavery differed from the Atlantic slave trade, being generally less oppressive. It wasn't racially based and offered more rights, integration, and social mobility. Slaves had legal protections under Sharia law, including property ownership and access to justice. There are cases of slaves winning cases against masters and becoming wealthy merchants. Manumission was also encouraged (freeing of slaves). Prophet Muhammad - “Your slaves are your brothers. Allah has put them under your command. So whoever has a brother under his command should feed him of what he eats and dress him of what he wears.” About Eunuchs - they weren’t just used in Islamic societies but globally including in Europe. Christian regions such as the Byzantine and Balkans were a source of eunuchs as it was culturally accepted and practiced there including in Africa and central/East Asia. Castration wasn’t permitted in Islamic Sharia ruling and didn’t occur within Islamic jurisdiction or societies - eunuchs were bought from regions partaking in the practice even predating Islam. Historically, eunuchs were trusted and integral members of households of royalty and kings due to their inability to produce heirs. They held positions of trust within the royal court, especially in the roles involving close contact with the royal family which raised them to a certain status compared to other slaves.'' As for the guy in the last video: he explains that the many groups fighting each other are Muslim, then conflates the fact that they’re Muslim as the main reason they’re fighting - attributing Islam as inherently violent. So when Muslims fight, it's because of their religion, but when Christians spent thirty years turning Central Europe into a blood-bath in the 30 years war as just one example - thats just politics as usual. Europeans, Christians, Muslims and Asians all fought against and within each other, so it isn’t uniquely a creed thing, just a human thing.

At least with Trump in office it will be comedic to see how MAGA fans spin every move he makes as some aikido move to 'drain the swamp' or 'fight the deep state.' The same crowd that rightly criticise Democratic drones strikes and interventions will slap a MAGA stickers on the same actions under Trumps oversight and claim it as some stroke of genius. Empires gonna empire. It's genuinely painful to see an old man unable to keep it together and struggle on stage. Anyone who's had a loved one suffer from mental slowdown will feel for him. That only says more about the political structure than it does the candidates - its a revealing ass crack in the facade of American democracy. Only the most trusted will be allowed to steward the titanic ship of a fading empire, we'r just having fun re-arranging seats on the deck and playing musical chairs.

@Gennadiy1981 and any other Israelis. This offers a different perspective you may find interesting - whilst not everything is agreed with it’s another angle to look at the situation from.