Fleetinglife

I have socialist biases, I read some socialist writers, I ain't no ML though - didn't read all the THEORY and have limited knowledge and understanding of dialectical materialism and how to apply it in concrete examples - just read some other writers who have that perspective on it. I mostly use it as a reference and useful though (dialectical materialist perspective on society), not to readily buy into any dominator ideologies that the ruling class here where I live tries to sell and trap people into and use excerpts from Lenin's writing sometimes as a reference point when considering or discussing some political issues.

May I ask which country is that my fellow actualizer, if it's not too of a personal privacy and anonymity infringing question for you on this forum? I am personally from a very Russia-friendly and Russophilic country both politically and culturally among the general populace, which perceives Russians as ethnically, historically, and culturally similar and brotherly through shared sentiments and political alliances, and cultural goals throughout history. A paradox, a political and religious power manufactured and pragmatically, historically and culturally nonsensical ideology and a limiting cultural paradigm if you will in opposition to the mass perception of much more ethnically and historically culturally similar other South Slavic peoples on the Balkans.

Putin is an ethnonationalist autocrat who romanticizes the old days of what Lenin called ''Greater Russian chauvinism'' by denying Ukrainians the right to a free volitionally formed national identity and a separate national culture by promoting a conspiracy theorist perspective that it was formed in aid by Polish Catholic elites in Western Ukraine to divide ''the Great Rus'' people who, from his POV, essentially have the same culture and language and were artificially divided by foreign powers historically to weaken the influence of Russia and of Orthodox culture from Europe, and thus considers Ukraine to be a part of ''Malorossiya'' or ''Little Russia'' and Ukrainians to be historically in actuality ''Malorossiyans'', as it was historically called up until the 18th or 19th century, and therefore though part of the Russian influence zone, and Ukrainians attempt to form their own separate national identity in the age of nationalism in the 19th and 20th century to be null, artificial and void of their primordial ties with ethnic Russians and Russian culture. He talks about this openly in his official article published as President of Russia on the Kremlin website: https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/analyses/2021-07-13/putins-article-historical-unity-russians-and-ukrainians ''dominated by the claim that Ukrainians are an ancient, inseparable part of the ‘triune Russian nation’. This community is based on a common history spanning one thousand years, the language, the ‘Russian’ ethnic identity, the shared cultural sphere, and the Orthodox religion. Their bond with the Russian state is special and organic; it guarantees Ukraine’s development, and any attempts to sever or weaken this bond (which could only be inspired by external actors) will inevitably result in the collapse of Ukrainian statehood.'' ''Putin’s article reflects his attachment to Russia’s imperial history and its ‘history-making’ destiny to determine the fate of the Ukrainian and Belarusian peoples. He reiterates, in an oversimplified manner, the basic assumptions of 19th-century official historiography of the Russian Empire. He also refers to conspiracy theories formulated by Russian far-right groups, claiming that the Ukrainian nation was a Polish (and later an Austro-Hungarian) anti-Russian political project. In order to prove his main argument, Putin passes over events which are inconvenient for Russia and presents many others in a biased or blatantly distorted manner. This falsified ‘common history’ is intended to legitimate Russia’s influence on Ukrainian society, in order to correct the mistakes made by the ‘puppet’ government in Kyiv.''

Thanks for the health heads up! Really Appreciate it and the advices! I didn't have any adverse side effects after the first two I had in February and Spring this year, just my right arm sored a bit for a couple of days, and that's it but I will keep in mind in preparing of perhaps having some of these symptoms afterward but I will be sure to be ready for them in advance as you said with a healthy diet. I have my grandma's veggie cooking that we supply her with, with whom I currently live with an assortment of teas and salads to back it up. So that's some of it covered right away I guess and I will see about these few extras if I start feeling some of the symptoms and side effects you mentioned your friends, unfortunately, went through after their booster shot, so thanks once again for the health recommendation and heads up! Thanks for the recommend. I may check him out if things get to that. I seriously though hope not

I am going to get my first booster shot tomorrow, thus completing my Holy Trinity - a Trinitarian formula if you will - and will officially become a Trinitarian in my worship of the triadic God - one Godhead existing in three coequal, coeternal, consubstantial persons and one essence - and also admitted as one of the disciples: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.'' Hallelujah! Come join me, brother in receiving ''the grace of Jesus Christ, the love of God and the Holy Spirit''! "Because there are three in Heaven that testify — the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit — and these three are one."

Beautiful and insightful poem for the topic of how to forgive and have a meta understanding and approach to forgiveness by Chuang Tzu. Thank you for sharing it here it is very relevant for people to learn how to forgive in their own minds!

Well, they stripped it themselves since they ethnically cleansed almost all of the people they could harm from the region inhabited and populated historically and in the past by those people and made the country in majority ethnically pure or monolithic and only continue, some of their nationalist people, to discriminate here and there that remaining national minority (which the state degraded them to that status as before those people were considered one of the two constituent people in the country who were equal in political and legal rights) that has some parliamentary representation within the country. So they don't have the legal ability currently to harm again since those people are no longer within their borders and rights of national minorities are legally protected by the Constitution, and I think there is no longer an ideological mood to harm them again in the same way they did before with the coming of new generations. You forgive them for their ignorance, pettiness, and smallness of mind and if they still believe what they do and if they can no longer harm you and your family or relatives.

Mhmmm thanks for the advice on the visualization technique. It makes sense since whenever you interact with said people you interact through a person, as it was in my experience, and you project your assumption of their collective shared national beliefs and feelings and their ancestors or family's deeds as being harbored by that person, even if you don't know that or anything about them and you only go on your assumption based on your interpretation of the meanings behind their statements as a window to their thoughts and feelings towards you that you yourself feel or construct in your head. And it is also worth knowing as a rule of thumb of history that no society or people becomes the oppressor or enacts horrific crimes and dehumanization upon another people for the sake of it but almost always as a result that they collectively felt that they were the first ones victimized and oppressed first and that they have to lash out against or enact revenge themselves or because of selfish careerist and opportunist motives under a dictatorial, exclusionary, authoritarian or oppressive regime.

''Ted Cruz seems to think that the job of a United States senator is to shitpost on Twitter and own the libs. But playing at culture war can get people killed. Cruz either does not know or does not care, that this is exactly what Putin is trying to achieve.'' Out of context making fun of and criticizing that concept with another unrelated one in another specific situation and context of the sometimes problematic motivations behind that type of behavior Source: https://www.thebulwark.com/meet-the-texas-secessionist-movement-brought-to-you-by-russia/

Do you know what the coalition of liberals, environmentalists, nationalists, and others who are not in the and are against the one-party ruling system here in Serbia did and are doing right now over a couple of days ago(also now effectively heading towards another Hungary or Poland in terms of the prevailing political culture and governing)? Organizing and trying to block major highway tracks and roads with a few dozen people in an attempt to emulate and show to the public what a general civil disobedience movement would look like and a national general strike to block the normal functioning of the economy in order to send the message to the regime that they are not insulated from the people and that they can't claim to represent the interests of them all in their populistic simpleton rhetoric - the current state holders are not the sole dictators and shapers of what the current interests and aspirations of the people are.

This is basically exactly the same as the plot of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World sci-fi novel and I fail to see how is this a separate series from that plot and narrative wise, they actually made a remake of the Brave New World series on Netflix a year or so ago, that I haven't watched.

Not perhaps as the one paradigmatic theoretical framework for explaining away all the foundations, changes, phenomena, laws, and relations in modern society and the world today, but for individual development, lifestyle, and growth they are still relevant today as useful guidelines and insight generating work for one's life and for some mistakes and problems humans still make in society. Though I think generally agree they are not as relevant as political and social go-to's as much today. ''this is Aristotle's moderation, finding that in the middle. Because missing the mark is either going too far or too short. Yes, I would think absolutely so and that’s why the prophet Muhammad and the Buddha called his way: The Middle Way. There is a really interesting story of the Buddha, he had been an ascetic and had been this anchorite that has wasted his body, but he saw a musician teaching somebody how to tune a sitar and he said: ‘’You don’t want to tune it too tight because it will break but you don’t want to tune it to low because you will not get a tone. You want to find that middle spot and that was his beginning of the understanding of the sweet spot, tuning the soul.”

What!? How dare you! I was taught in my sociology class that Ibn Khaldun is considered by some to be the proto founding father of the scientific discipline of sociology (I kid you not I was taught this as a part of one of my classes (and had to briefly check out his work) my former study field with the content of his writings and providing the first generalized social theory explaining and formulating a law for changes within in human society and their way of social organization) before it was officially formalized as an independent scientific field in the 19th century. So, once again, sir, I ask you: How dare you!? To think you would not ever hear about Ibn Khaldun again, I did not pretend to study my field in vain so I would not know or ever hear again about such 'relevant factography for discourse about modern society' and I promise you this is not the last you will hear of him again! (Jk )

A Tax for having superior genes, we would be once again bending the laws of natural selection in order to suit human egos and ease and satisfy the spiritual emptiness of people suffering from envy, vanity, and an inferiority complex. Tax the average, below average looking, and ugly plutocrats and their political allies and servants who run the world now.

Here is a brief educational summation exposed by the BBC of how a stage RED/BLUE power tyrant and conspiratorial mindset works: This is one of the finest display of the sin of WRATH/PRIDE if ever saw one and what it does to person centered this much in it in his being, paranoid and overprotective of his power and ego and what dangers it posses for the people of his country with a ruler so much soaked in it and with is being centered around it. He looks like an oversized angry man-child in his demeanor, gesticulation and vocabulary that used several Stalinistic terms straight from the Moscow trails period like 'liquidate' at moments:

Don't you dare badmouth our former Marshall on the day of the Republic for the remembrance of the founding of our once shared brotherly panslavic international socialist state, though you did not quite do that since you wrote the comment the day before - so you are only part of the hook on that one, still blasphemous non the less! Jk But still on a serious note, Tito was more progressive for his time period than Janez Jansha and Vuchic are for today's world standards both combined tbh (liberal culture from the West and even the LGBTQ community was arguably for that time period in the world more accepted and even became a flourishing youth and new subculture in Yugoslavia's (in contrast with the Soviet Union for example) existing progressive and liberal enclaves of some major metropole than they were at first when the breakaway republics returned back to religious traditionalism and national conservatism as their go-to political ideology, culture, and norms for their respective ethnic majority national societies), they are both ethnic cope leaders of their respective banana republics we got leftover, though Serbia much more so arguably than Slovenia. Btw Happy Republics Day to You!

No doubt that they have a certain bias against Russia and its remaining political satellites since it is a European military superpower they don't have control and accountability over since its not part of any American led transnational military pact or org., but Putin and Lukashenko are intensely liberalophobic in this overblown response to everything being a political or domestic threat that comes from the West, even org. for LGBTQ rights or something propagating a more liberal and secular culture in Russia. NGOs are non-governmental organizations and they can be domestic, international, or from any country in the world. They are not by default vectors of imperialism of another country, only if they are financed by a governmental agency of another state actor to promote political aims and goals in the said country that align with the interests and goals that foreign country has for the country it is financing them in via their governmental agencies. NGOs should work on problems that exist in said countries society that there is no adequate government agency for or if that said agency is doing poorly or not adequately, their task is to explicitly be a non-aligned third party between the state and civil society in dealing with problems and malfunctions that exist between the relations of these two within a country and to be independent of both of them at the same time. A country's state shutting down supposed foreign state actor-sponsored NGOs on the sole accusation of them practicing activity or explicitly promoting content against the state advocating its destabilization or overthrow is a serious accusation that needs to be first proven if it is supported, financed, and sponsored in the interests and for the goals of another state actor and if they are guilty of that said activity provoking such a response. If a country's state starts arbitrarily shutting down NGOs without proving any of the following it is a form of state tyranny and it signals a desire and intention for totalitarian control of the civil society by the state of the said country, since it is severing any free volition ties between it and any non-governmental entity over which the government doesn't have control or accountability over, it is a form of arbitrarily practiced state tyranny to solidify power and control of the state bureaucrats over the civil society and as a result, you lack freedom, autonomy, and independence of the individual, groups of citizens and their orgs. in the society itself and have a totalitarian culture of fear and indifference to any violations of citizens' constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms in place. This as far as I know after Petr Poroshenko's vow to have closer ties and to move closer politically to Russia and to snub a possible EU membership of Ukraine was facilitated and promoted directly and openly by among others US government officials and ambassadors to Ukraine, not a specific group of NGOs and besides there was large opposition in one part of Ukraine to his policy, the Eastern more Ukraine nationalistic and Orthodox Catholic part, and several ultranationalist and pro-fascist political parties and organizations were helped and got support from some US NGOs but that's about it in terms of meddling, the Pro-EU parties in Ukraine did hold their own and enjoyed by their merit support from the general populace in those pro-EU parts of Ukraine. It's a cop-out and an exaggerated excuse of an external threat blown out of proportion that tyrants and autocrats love to use when they don't enjoy full domestic support and or are not comfortable domestically with the overall public support that they need to ground themselves in the overall populistic extended rule of overall majority support and 'presidency for life' (which is an oxymoron of what that term originally meant - someone who temporarily presides over the affairs of the state in a republic) and if they don't they have to explain away their overall failing confidence with the public support, not as a result of their won failings or failed policy but with a conspiratorial narrative outside interference or meddling in the state by some foreign state actors, which is the personal favorite enough vague and non-concrete explanation of the dictator and his sycophants not needing any specific or strong evidence and proof for it to be unscrupulously spread around in the public arena like an 'idea viral epidemic' with a permanent aura of fearmongering, blame-shifting and uncritically, lazily and stupidly formed quick unexamined and unquestioned assumptions following it wherever it finds some root and grows like a weed in some easily molded, influenced and impressionable minds. and also those who want to alienate the public from their 'beloved leader'. They don't have to do anything with this guy, just ask him questions as a news agency does and film his unhinged and outright terror sowing and tyrannical responses as a head of state, it is like interviewing the school bully and asking him why is he bullying, intimidating and stealing and extorting money and lunch from other kids and he goes onto say that it is the kid's fault for being weaker than him in the school grounds, better at school, more likable and popular among other kids and different from him and he goes onto blame everything on his upbringing, 'situation at home and parents. That school bully in Belarus is Lukashenko blaming NGOs for him and his ideas not being popular among the people unanimously as before in Belarus anymore and it's a conspiratorial explanation for his personal failings and the failings of his policy at home.

Damn this is sad. Like an ending of a tragic epic and drama: Despite the criticism, Lenin praised Luxemburg after her death as an "eagle" of the working class: ''But in spite of her mistakes she was – and remains for us – an eagle. And not only will communists all over the world cherish her memory, but her biography and her complete works (the publication of which the German communists are inordinately delaying, which can only be partly excused by the tremendous losses they are suffering in their severe struggle) will serve as useful manuals for training many generations of communists all over the world. 'Since 4 August 1914, German Social-Democracy has been a stinking corpse' – this statement will make Rosa Luxemburg's name famous in the history of the international working class movement. In later years, Trotsky frequently defended Luxemburg, claiming that Joseph Stalin had vilified her. In the article Hands Off Rosa Luxemburg!, Trotsky criticized Stalin for this despite what Trotsky perceived as Luxemburg's theoretical errors, writing: "Yes, Stalin has sufficient cause to hate Rosa Luxemburg. But all the more imperious therefore becomes our duty to shield Rosa's memory from Stalin's calumny that has been caught by the hired functionaries of both hemispheres, and to pass on this truly beautiful, heroic, and tragic image to the young generations of the proletariat in all its grandeur and inspirational force.'' Immense love of the people - l'amour du peuple as the French socialists would say.

Yes, I basically agree with this notion for the developed capitalist world today and that it made more sense in a more industrializing and Fordist oriented disciplinary society of vertical chain of command for production in short while the global economy today is situated more in most of the developed world along post-Fordist and Toyotist with more horizontal chain of production lines dispersed globally.

Luxemburg though had more sympathy to the Bolsheviks in her time (she saw their struggle and successes in Russia connected with the struggles and duty of the German socialists to lead and to set the foundations to carry out a revolution of the German proletariat in a developed capitalist country such as Germany at that time following the one in Russia in classical Marxist sense), even though she criticized their regime heavily and advocated for the adoption of revolutionary socialist democracy in Germany (or the concept of Luxemburgian democracy in Marxism as some movements such as PCInt in Italy lead by left communist Marxist theorist Amadeo Bordiga adopted in opposition to the policies of the Soviet Union which he described as state capitalist similiar in the sense that Lenin used at the begining of the consolidation of the RSFR in Russia) and opposed the implementation of top down one party bureaucracy in Russia but was even more merciless to the German Social Democrats because of their capitulation and going along with voting on the war credits for the German government in the outset of WWI and accusation of social chauvinism for fomenting national prejudices within the German proletariat versus the proletariat in other countries: ''The Bolsheviks have certainly made a number of mistakes in their policies and are perhaps still making them – but where is the revolution in which no mistakes have been made! The notion of a revolutionary policy without mistakes, and moreover, in a totally unprecedented situation, is so absurd that it is worthy only of a German schoolmaster. If the so-called leaders of German socialism lose their so-called heads in such an unusual situation as a vote in the Reichstag, and if their hearts sink into their boots and they forget all the socialism they ever learned in situation in which the simple ABC of socialism clearly pointed the way – could one expect a party caught up in a truly thorny situation, in which it would show the world new wonders, not to make mistakes? The awkward position that the Bolsheviks are in today, however, is, together with most of their mistakes, a consequence of basic insolubility of the problem posed to them by the international, above all the German, proletariat. To carry out the dictatorship of the proletariat and a socialist revolution in a single country surrounded by reactionary imperialist rule and in the fury of the bloodiest world war in human history – that is squaring the circle. Any socialist party would have to fail in this task and perish – whether or not it made self-renunciation the guiding star of its policies. There is only one solution to the tragedy in which Russia in caught up: an uprising at the rear of German imperialism, the German mass rising, which can signal the international revolution to put an end to this genocide. At this fateful moment, preserving the honour of the Russian Revolution is identical with vindicating that of the German proletariat and of international socialists.'' https://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1918/09/11.htm ''Freedom only for the supporters of the government, only for the members of one party – however numerous they may be – is no freedom at all. Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently. Not because of any fanatical concept of "justice" but because all that is instructive, wholesome and purifying in political freedom depends on this essential characteristic, and its effectiveness vanishes when "freedom" becomes a special privilege. [...] But socialist democracy is not something which begins only in the promised land after the foundations of socialist economy are created; it does not come as some sort of Christmas present for the worthy people who, in the interim, have loyally supported a handful of socialist dictators. Socialist democracy begins simultaneously with the beginnings of the destruction of class rule and of the construction of socialism.'' https://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1918/russian-revolution/ch06.htm

Yugoslavia? Vietnam? Mondragon Corporation in Basque? Coop in Italy? ''A number of market socialist elements have existed in various economies. The economy of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is widely considered to have been a form of market-based socialism, based on socially-owned cooperatives, workers' self-management and market allocation of capital. Policies similar to the market socialist proposal of a social dividend and basic income scheme have been implemented on the basis of public ownership of natural resources in Alaska (Alaska Permanent Fund) and in Norway (the Government Pension Fund of Norway).''

I apologize for my attitude, passion as well, I was probably struck with my own reactiveness, lack of understanding for the perspective of the other and seeds of unprocessed personal anger, wrath and false sense of attacked fragile pride and dignity at the moment in replying to your post. In other words my own ego also got the better of me in replying to you, so I also apologize for that. As well, I can feel yours as well and therefore respect it, so sorry for the projected and judgemental words from a place of bias on my part, since it comes from the place of sincerity Yes, I am, I am having a problems with several of those. Thank you for being understanding of that and for the compassion for the offered help and suggestion. I will check it out after I finish attending an online class I now have. Thanks again for the offered help and suggestion regarding dealing with my emotional problems that I have, really appreciate it and respect it on your part!

@Raptorsin7 ''The people on this forum and the mods are not honest people, they do not speak, live the truth'' ''I have said my peace'' You made a pledge with yourself regarding this topic and issue. ''Until then we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person'' So did I Lets both honor our pledges, be honest with and respect the words we said and the promises we made to ourselves on this topic by saying our peaces this way. Peace to you and me ? .

Did Rittenhouse know in advance their past mental health records and criminal records when he pulled the trigger? Did he know who the people were that he was shooting apart from them being of group protestors who went ahead and destroyed and looted private property in an act of civil rebellion? (I wont use the simplistic emotionally loaded fearmongering and demonization term exploited by the Right - rioter and looter - since it obfuscates the wider issue - ''It has been argued that, while both civil disobedience and civil rebellion are justified by appeal to constitutional defects, rebellion is much more destructive; therefore, the defects justifying rebellion must be much more serious than those justifying disobedience, and if one cannot justify civil rebellion, then one cannot justify a civil disobedient's use of force and violence and refusal to submit to arrest. Civil disobedients' refraining from violence is also said to help preserve society's tolerance of civil disobedience.. M.L.King regarded civil disobedience to be a display and practice of reverence for law: "Any man who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and willingly accepts the penalty by staying in jail to arouse the conscience of the community on the injustice of the law is at that moment expressing the very highest respect for the law." ''In his best-selling Disobedience and Democracy: Nine Fallacies on Law and Order, Howard Zinn takes a similar position; Zinn states that while the goals of civil disobedience are generally non-violent, ''in the inevitable tension accompanying the transition from a violent world to a non-violent one, the choice of means will almost never be pure, and will involve such complexities that the simple distinction between violence and non-violence does not suffice as a guide ... the very acts with which we seek to do good cannot escape the imperfections of the world we are trying to change'' Zinn rejects any "easy and righteous dismissal of violence", noting that Thoreau, the popularizer of the term civil disobedience, approved of the armed insurrection of John Brown. He also notes that some major civil disobedience campaigns which have been classified as non-violent, such as the Birmingham campaign, have actually included elements of violence.) Did he make an assumption that they were all rioters and looters by default fed by the media he consumed, and not part of civil disobedince protests for racial justice, police reform and judical reform that swept the country, and therefore they shouldn't be maimed and but shoot by default treated as violent criminals who automatically deserve the death sentence? You don't see the problem with this kind of reasoning of divorcing these people from the wider protests that swept the country over police brutality, extrajudicial killing of a member of an already discriminated racial group in terms of policing and the criminal justcie system and branding them as criminals where vigilante justice is thus justified against them in any measure or response deemed appropriate to the Second Amendment right holder? Why does the Second Amendement right: ''A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'' trump the First Amendment right to protest and why should an act of civil disobedience or rebellion earn the death sentence from guy abusing his Second Amendment rights in order not to get criminally charged or proven guilty on any verdict? Why? Why just not maim him, why kill him? Its a human being and his life no matter how dellusional or in affect in the moment he might seem. Kyle was supposedly a trained marksman at the shooting range. Why assume instinctively that he is criminal lunatic that is going to kill you and you not trying to maim him at least if he attempts to disarm you. Why respond fearfully and reactively reciprocating more fear and reaction? If somebody shouts shoot me nigga at you, you don't assume he is frieghtened of you being a threat to him with you being a stranger openly carrying and pointing a gun at him, not part of any law enforcement agency but an unmarked vigilante militia rando, and you shoot him to kill him and don't instead point the gun down or get out of there or make any attempt to descalate if you percieve he is in affect or crazy. He acted in a way that he didn't want to show fear and submission to random self-appointed gun touting militia kid to police him in the guise of Second Amendmen rights that was pointing a gun at him and didn't want to back off the protestors when he was told to. That's an act of a highly desperate person who thought he was being coerced through fear of intimidation and lethality by an arm carrying vigilante kid to scare him and the other protesters out of there to abandon their right to protest and to organize over systemic reform of the policing and criminal justice system. Interesting causation following. Yes I agree possibly that that dynamic socio-psychologically played out in that way in SD terms in regards to some among the protestors but it cannot be said of all them . But you make this assumption that all the protestors there were mentally deranged or wanted to cause chaos (during the nation wide protests where civil rebellion, rioting and looting in the night was widespread in all states in protest of extra-judicial murder by the police of a minority group member) in for staying there based on the later revealed fact, not during the protests, that some of those people among them had a prior criminal or mental health record and therefore are legitimate targets in the eyes of vigilantes. You are showing me in an end sentence pattern of phrasing your conclusions in a language excusing random vigilante or Second Amendment gun touting violence and actions against them and to anyone they deem a threat. Call me biased or not, that's what I am noticing. 1. BLM is stage Green in essence encompassing all the deemed oppressed and marginalized minorities unjustly discriminated by the policing and criminal justice system in society, and yes some of them will be stage Red, that's how that works of accepting all of them and the marginalized and oppressed in society, you will also have stage Red people lending support who had encounters with the police and criminal justice system in society, justifiable or not, because the movement is about the reform about those said systems, but it doesnt mean that they are stage Red anymore at that moment or what you percieve to be and judged to be stage Red and not toxic Orange. 2. The mental health record was later uncovered and I don't how he was looking for violence from a random stranger kid that showed up there and didn't want to stop policing them and leave and stop pointing his gun at them 3. You decided in your mind at that moment there is no equivalency in your mind between their humanities. You erased one of them from an actor in this situation. 4. Even though they shouldn't be shielded by the law everytime to have an opportunity to have an excuse to kill in self-defense in a widespread national crisis situation and legally contested situation like a protest, civil disobedience and civil rebellion situation in the country whenever they feel like they can get away with it just because they are carrying an unconcelead weapon. That's the problem and the current prescedent this case set with the verdict and that's why people are up in arms and outraged by it of what this might justify in the future. 5. What is the character and agression of Kyle Rittenhouse in this situation. Is he justified by being perceivedly a higher stage in SD terms than the person in question in this situation to kill him without trying to or to attempt to maim him first? 6. Rittenhouse responded in fear and like a proud, wrathful and egocentric cowardly mentally undeveloped kid would who bit more than he can chew by putting himself delibaretly in this situation clutching to his lethal weapon to the persons he percieved as criminals and shooting a person lethally after he deliberately put himself in a dangerous situation and didn't heed the warnings of any of the protestors to leave, which was showed and revealed by his breakdown and crocodile tears display in court in order to garner public support of him being an innocent white minor who can't possibly be sentenced for such a long time in prison and for him to avoid any shred of guilt or responsibilty for his actions. 7. You know I cannot but be reminded and not see some parallels with how this case turned out and aftermath reaction of some people towards Rittenhouse with the way the Horst Wessel case in Weimar Germany turned out in the 1930's. Communist militant Albert ''Ali" Hohler, and also a part of the political labor organization Red Front League, with a criminal record kills a Nazi brownshirt 19-year old paramilitary Horst Wessel that together with his unit attacked and terrorized communist activists, their political headquarters and their labor organizations. The Nazis arrange to assasinate Hohler in reciprocation. They turn Wessel into a martyr, Germans deeply crave for the restoration of law and order and economic stability in the country after the economic depression, almost constant chaos, violence and street clashes in Weimar Germany in the 1930's, the Nazis shove their way in as the only Party that will do just that and he becomes Germany's national hero while they are in power, who was petty thug and criminal also before that. I see it also now in the developmental level of people's response to the Rittenhouse case and to Rittenhouse himself, some people on the SD level of the American Right have turned him almost into a national martyr and hero and are not seeing the similiarties and striking parallels in the way how they are treating and seeing Rittenhouse in the same way Nazis and some Germans saw Horst Wessel in the 1930's and in regards to their percieved threat from the communists and the communist movement in Germany, who were seen and branded by most of them as violent criminals, degenerates and rioters.