MightyMind

@BlueOak I'd encourage all to have a talk with AI about where the following leads to by 2030/40/50....., digitial ID, biodigtial convergence, internet of things, net zero goals, 17 SDGs, Agenda 2030/50. Ask it, what does it mean for city designs, property ownership, transportation, housing, etc. "hate crimes"/"hate speech" are also happening and being pushed for in Australia and Canada. Like "indicators of violence", they all work in tandem with the above mentioned.

This is happening across the west, not just the US, wake up people!

@Twentyfirst re-examine the history of Islam, their attempt to colonize Europe, and the Trans-Saharan Slave Trade.

Does anyone on here think that the marxists/communists/revolutionaries had good ideas? In particular I'm referring to the early 1900's. I'd like to gain more perspective on their world view to see if they had good reason to believe in what they believed in. Do they have anything to offer that is relevant for today? Please offer any sources you think would be a worthy consideration. Beyond that, I'll share what I've come to learn. I think many people would benefit from considering the following. As I saw the word fascism carelessly thrown around I became more curious about the definition and this inquiry has opened many doors for me and one of them is the world communism movement that was taking place during the early 1900's. First let's take a look at few definitions of fascism. (1927) Fascisti: Italian reform party organized in 1919 to oppose all radical and revolutionary movements in Italy (The New Universities Dictionary) (1944) Fascism: The doctrine and principles of the Fascismo: Fascism, a political and economic movement, strongly nationalistic, magnifying the rights of the state as opposed to those of the individual, in which both industry though remaining largely under private ownership, and all administrative political units, are controlled by a strong central government (The Winston Dictionary) (1945) Fascisti: A society to oppose Bolshevism in Italy, formed in 1919 by Benito Mussolini / Fascism: Doctrine of the Fascisti (Practical Standard Dictionary/ Funk and Wagnalis) As you can see, fascism didn't spring out of nowhere. According to these dictionaries it was a response to communistic and revolutionary movements. Also not generally known is how widespread they were around the world. We've been told many times the nazi's wanted to take over the world, but there was also a world communistic revolution happening. "The nazi's wanted world domination"...but no mention of the communists intent for a world revolution? AI mentions these movements are inspired by Marxism which were heavily influenced by the Bolshevik Revolution and aligned with the Comintern, adopting Marxist-Leninist principles. The Comintern, or Communist International (also known as the Third International), was an international organization founded in 1919 in Moscow by the Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Lenin, to promote and coordinate communist revolutionary activities worldwide. Its goal was to spread Marxist-Leninist ideology, support the creation of communist parties globally, and foster proletarian revolutions to overthrow capitalist systems. ------ This is also from Grok/AI Germany: The Communist Party of Germany (KPD) was founded in 1918, evolving from earlier socialist groups like the Spartacus League. Marxist ideas had circulated since the 1840s, with the Communist Manifesto published in 1848 by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in London, influencing German radicals. Russia: The Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP), formed in 1898, split into Bolsheviks and Mensheviks in 1903. The Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, became the Communist Party of the Soviet Union after the 1917 Revolution, dominating Russian politics by the 1920s. France: The French Communist Party (PCF) was established in 1920, splitting from the socialist French Section of the Workers' International (SFIO). Earlier, communist ideas were present in the Paris Commune (1871) and various socialist groups. Italy: The Communist Party of Italy (PCI) was founded in 1921, emerging from a split in the Italian Socialist Party. Marxist groups had existed since the late 19th century, gaining traction in industrialized northern Italy. Spain: The Communist Party of Spain (PCE) was formed in 1921. It grew during the Second Spanish Republic (1931–1939) and played a significant role in the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939). United Kingdom: The Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB) was founded in 1920, building on earlier Marxist groups like the Social Democratic Federation (formed in 1881). Austria: The Communist Party of Austria (KPÖ) was established in 1918, influenced by the revolutionary wave after World War I. Hungary: The Communist Party of Hungary was founded in 1918, briefly holding power during the Hungarian Soviet Republic in 1919 under Béla Kun. Poland: The Communist Party of Poland (KPP) was formed in 1918, operating under difficult conditions due to government repression and later Soviet influence. Czechoslovakia: The Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (KSČ) was founded in 1921, splitting from the Social Democratic Party, and gained significant support in the interwar period. Bulgaria: The Bulgarian Communist Party (BCP) was established in 1919, evolving from the Bulgarian Social Democratic Party (founded in 1891). Romania: The Communist Party of Romania (PCR) was formed in 1921, though it remained small and often underground due to government bans. Yugoslavia: The Communist Party of Yugoslavia (KPJ) was founded in 1919, becoming a major force under Josip Broz Tito by the 1940s. Greece: The Communist Party of Greece (KKE) was established in 1918 and grew influential during the 1930s and 1940s, especially during the Greek Civil War. Finland: The Communist Party of Finland (SKP) was founded in 1918, operating in a semi-legal status due to government restrictions. Sweden: The Communist Party of Sweden (SKP) was formed in 1917, splitting from the Social Democratic Party. Norway: The Communist Party of Norway (NKP) was established in 1923, following a split in the Labour Party. Denmark: The Communist Party of Denmark (DKP) was founded in 1919, influenced by the Russian Revolution. Belgium: The Communist Party of Belgium (PCB) was formed in 1921, emerging from earlier socialist movements. Netherlands: The Communist Party of the Netherlands (CPN) was founded in 1918, building on Marxist groups active since the late 19th century. Switzerland: The Communist Party of Switzerland was formed in 1921, though it remained small due to the country’s conservative political climate. Portugal: The Portuguese Communist Party (PCP) was founded in 1921, operating clandestinely under the Salazar dictatorship from the 1930s. Albania: The Communist Party of Albania was established in 1941, though Marxist groups existed earlier in the interwar period. Canada: Communist Party of Canada (CPC): Founded in 1921 in Guelph, Ontario, the CPC emerged from earlier socialist and labor groups, influenced by the Russian Revolution and the Comintern. It initially operated underground due to government repression under the War Measures Act. United States: Communist Party USA (CPUSA): Formed in 1919, the CPUSA emerged from splits within the Socialist Party of America, particularly after the Russian Revolution. Two initial groups, the Communist Party of America and the Communist Labor Party, merged in 1921 under Comintern guidance. China: Communist Party of China (CCP) 1921: Founded in Shanghai by Chen Duxiu and Li Dazhao; grew rapidly among urban workers and peasants, leading to rural soviets by 1931 and the Long March (1934–35). Revolutionary against Kuomintang rule; peaked in influence during the Chinese Civil War (1927–1949). Mexico: Mexican Communist Party (PCM) 1919: Emerged from socialist groups post-Mexican Revolution (1910–1920); advocated for land reform and anti-imperialism. Participated in labor strikes and influenced agrarian movements, though faced repression. India: Communist Party of India (CPI) 1925: Formed in exile (Cawnpore/Kanpur) by M.N. Roy and others under Comintern guidance; revolutionary focus on anti-colonial struggle and peasant uprisings. Active in trade unions and the independence movement. Japan: Japanese Communist Party (JCP) 1922: Founded clandestinely amid post-WWI labor unrest; aimed at proletarian revolution against the emperor system. Faced severe crackdowns (e.g., Peace Preservation Law, 1925), operating underground. South Africa: Communist Party of South Africa (CPSA) 1921: Originated from International Socialist League; revolutionary against apartheid precursors and colonialism, organizing Black workers and strikes. Later renamed South African Communist Party (SACP) in 1953. Australia: Communist Party of Australia (CPA) 1920: Split from socialist groups; focused on revolutionary unionism and anti-capitalist agitation during the Great Depression. Influential in waterfront and mining strikes. Argentina: Communist Party of Argentina (PCA) 1918: Earliest in Latin America; formed by anarcho-syndicalists turning Marxist post-Russian Revolution. Revolutionary activities included general strikes and anti-oligarchy campaigns. Brazil: Communist Party of Brazil (PCB) 1922: Founded in Rio de Janeiro; led urban revolts (e.g., 1935 uprising) and peasant leagues. Banned multiple times but key in labor movements. Chile: Communist Party of Chile (PCCh) 1912 (as Socialist Workers' Group; formalized 1922): Early Marxist circles post-1900; revolutionary against semi-feudal land system, joining Popular Front in 1930s for anti-fascist actions. Uruguay: Communist Party of Uruguay (PCU) 1925: Emerged from socialist splits; focused on revolutionary trade unionism and anti-imperialism against U.S. influence in the region. Indonesia: Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI) 1920: Founded as Indies Social-Democratic Association; largest non-European communist party by 1920s, leading peasant revolts (e.g., 1926 uprising) against Dutch colonialism. Iran: Communist Party of Iran (Tudeh Party predecessor) 1920 (as Justice Party; communist turn 1927): Early revolutionary group against monarchy; influenced by Baku Congress (1920), focusing on oil worker strikes and anti-Shah agitation. Turkey: Communist Party of Turkey (TKP) 1920: Formed post-WWI amid Ottoman collapse; aimed at proletarian revolution but suppressed by Kemalists, operating in exile.

@Leo Gura have you elaborated your views on how "all three are delusional" on any threads?

So isn't this interesting. Here you have Marx (a jew) who is critiquing Jews. Am I wrong to think that Hitler and Marx had similar views about certain jews and religion? Am I missing anything? or how else could this be interpreted? "What is the secular foundation of Judaism? Practical necessity, selfish interest. What is the secular cult practiced by Jews? Usury. What is their secular god? Money." On the Jewish Question. Karl Marx. Karl Marx's most controversial book: "The Jewish Question" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAaAhj_7-CU

@UnbornTao no worries, I liked it

@UnbornTao well then feel free to contribute

"alliances between communists and liberals."... it's also happening today but those who call themselves democrats don't realize what's happening in their own house "Alexander Trachtenberg (1884–1966), a prominent member of the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) and head of its publishing arm, International Publishers. Trachtenberg was indeed a speaker at the CPUSA's National Convention held at Madison Square Garden in New York City from May 20–23, 1944. The convention was a major event attended by over 1,000 delegates, focusing on wartime strategy, the "People's Front" against fascism, and post-war planning, aligning with the broader context of World War II alliances between communists and liberals." AI: "Based on multiple secondary sources, the most common full version of the quote is: "When we get ready to take the United States, we will not take it under the label of Communism; we will not take it under the label of Socialism. These labels are unpleasant to the American people, and have been smeared too much. We will take the United States under labels we have made very lovable; we will take it under Liberalism, under Progressivism, under Democracy. But, take it we will." Key differences from your version: "Speared" is almost certainly a transcription error for "smeared" (meaning tarnished or defamed through anti-communist propaganda)"

@Apparition of Jack Feel free to drop any videos and specific insights that you think would be beneficial to consider. I work outside and I've been listening to videos all day long so give me some content! I do wonder though, if oligarch's fund both sides in order to create a problem-reaction-solution scenario.

@Elliott Tough Guy Trudeau actually came to the office and told Cherry to get the fuck out. Juuust kidding I was responding to the sentence..."We are seeing free speech being dismantled and a potential rise of dictatorship." The liberal party (Canada) in what they support and promoted, it has created the conditions where bureaucrats police the working class.. Amy Hamm is a good example of this. Another example is if you question "reconciliation" and any of the claims made about residential schools, it's being labeled as hateful and racist and in turn it shuts down conversation. Example: Frances Widdowson. Her youtube channel is interesting to check out. In this video she talks with a Chief. He is a great example of finding middle ground and who supports transparency and ongoing dialogue. "Frances Widdowson & Chief Pete DEBATE the Unmarked Graves Story" (it's more of a dialogue) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR0XyUvmZoc

@theoneandnone this is not new and has been going on for some time. Look to Don Cherry in Canada. Or Amy Hamm (nurse in British Columbia) who basically tweeted that men can't be women and she was suspended from her job ("transphobia") and she's been asked to pay nearly $94,000.

@Raze google fritz the cat

@zurew label all you want but I still don't see an intelligent and conscious deconstruction and articulation of what many of the "nazis" actually think or believe. I mean if violence is a concern why don't I see people talking about how the left houses antifa/communists who support an actual doctrine which supports violence in order to make change? It's odd. On youtube you can't find Mein Kampf audio book but you can find The Communist Manifesto which advocates for revolutionary change, which includes the potential for violence. Think about how many more died guided by that manifesto. Exceptionally higher number. Meanwhile there' no shortage of universities professors who advocate it in order to bring about change.

@Inliytened1 and to understand the term nazi, or fascist, I highly recommend you look at older dictionaries/sources. There are important details not mentioned in newer dictionaries. In particular that fascism is a response to communism and revolutionaries trying to over turn government.

@Inliytened1 That's why I'd like to hear how he defines it. I wouldn't be surprised if many who use that term on here have differing definitions. I agree. Labeling people as a nazi over and over again, people begin to believe it so, and then they think violence is justified, "because nazi's are evil". if someone has bad ideas, counter them. Expose them. Deconstruct them. It is much more effective than name calling.

How would you define a nazi?

There's also this. "Bipartisan US support reminds Israel that true friends stand by us, official tells 'Post'" - https://archive.is/xSxHQ

Has anyone made a thread about Israeli relations and influence on the US? I can assure you, you've got bigger worries than the right/left. Investigate the reality of just now, 250 legislators — arrived today as part of the “50 States, One Israel” campaign "Bipartisan US support reminds Israel that true friends stand by us, official tells 'Post'" - https://archive.is/xSxHQ

@Daniel Balan Both support K-12 approach to education which creates a collectivist who is prone to being easily manipulated by propaganda and misinformation\ Both are reacting in two direction when it comes to climate change. The left's take climate action guidance from the UN (17 SDG's) which at the end the day benefits the billionaires (and not the people) and these people and orgs are the one who profited off of the industrialized age and will be the ones now profiting off of "climate action". Climate action that is guided by the UN leads to digital gulag (SDG #11 = AI (Israel technology) tracking and monitoring all the moving parts including humans/). The right just pushes back and reacts in the other direction without finding middle ground and aiming for a reasonable approach to being more sustainable. Neither seem to know how to think for themselves and provide a more reactionary. LGBTP+ are human beings who already have rights. Identity is not the same as biological and so why are they treated as such? Should all identities have extra protection? And why do we need extra protection? Why not provide quality protection for all? Planned Parenthood has no shortage of people who have worked there and have spoken out about the realities of them selling baby organs and tissue for profit. There's more going on to that reality. Both parties swing in extreme directions and so I see that both parties/sides, and the representation at the top and ideas they put forth, they not very conscious. Both are limited in the ability to hold a vast array of perspectives which in turn impacts their ability to put forth adequate solutions that attend to the complexity and depth of reality.

Thank you for staying focused and putting forth thoughtful replies! "Those "unhealthy" leftists are still marginally more evolved and conscious than the average conservative, who's largely on autopilot and takes life for granted." - This is what I find problematic and it seems like an oversimplification where there are more layers and complexity. How does one qualify and grade that an "unhealthy" leftists is more evolved and conscious than the average conservative? They may be more conscious of certain realities that the average conservative is not aware of but I guarantee you could find that the average conservative is more aware of certain realities that the "unhealthy leftist" is unconscious of.

"Conservatism is by definition about maintaining the status quo and ultimately about preserving one's identity" - I think you could argue it's more about preserving and conserving culture and current ideas that benefit the people and which would be better for all people, not just themselves. That is, if you had conscious human being who leaned more right, the ideas they put forth could be very beneficial. "leftists aren't pure vessels of ideology, but a hodge-podge of different ideas, identities and life situations (like being middle/upper-class)." I've see no shortage of ideological driven people on the left with many parroting group talking points which they have not questioned and sifted through. You could also find that in the "right". And on the right, there is no shortage of examples of people who are not aligned with each other. You're about perceiving the nuances that come with the left but then are strawmanning the right, which I think is an example of how spiral dynamics can be used in a way which does not adequately overlay with reality. Know though, I have not studied spiral dynamics and so maybe I'm missing something. Years ago I did listen to various talks and I have put in my hours of listening to Wilbur, but again, in how I see people on this site use the framework, it seems to be used in a way which over simplifies that which is much more complex.

@oldhandle I'm getting the impression that Islam is not one thing. Nor is there just one Quran. So this is something to consider. Thousands of years ago mystic philosophers (Europe) fled persecution and some made their way to the middle east. It appears these people and their writings heavily influenced middle eastern spirituality where you see a blending of western intellectualism and middle eastern spirituality. This guys take is worth while to investigate. He has a few videos (dialogue/debates) on youtube https://www.khalilandani.com/ There's also Sufism. I'm quite sure Rumi could be classified as a Muslim Sufi If I'm wrong on any of this, feel free to correct me! https://sufism.org/sufism "Who gets up early to discover the moment light begins? Who finds us here circling, bewildered, like atoms? Who comes to a spring thirsty and sees the moon reflected in it? Who, like Jacob blind with grief and age, smells the shirt of his lost son and can see again? Who lets a bucket down and brings up a flowing prophet? Or like Moses goes for fire and finds what burns inside the sunrise? Jesus slips into a house to escape enemies, and opens a door to the other world. Soloman cuts open a fish, and there’s a gold ring. Omar storms in to kill the prophet and leaves with blessings. Chase a deer and end up everywhere! An oyster opens his mouth to swallow on drop. Now there’s a pearl. A vagrant wanders empty ruins. Suddenly he’s wealthy. But don’t be satisfied with stories, how things have gone with others. Unfold your own myth, without complicated explanation, so everyone will understand the passage, We have opened you. Start walking toward Shams. Your legs will get heavy and tired. Then comes a moment of feeling the wings you’ve grown, lifting." Rumi

@Basman While this sounds nice in theory, I think it's an over simplification which when overlayed with reality it creates a false worldview. For example, thinking a conservative mind is more driven by fear...this is false (but I'm open to examining). The lefts (+ progressives) own fears (media programming, not original thoughts) have them viewing the other side as demonic...simply by association, people are viewed as evil - this is fear driven. Hence forth this why so many people were literally celebrating the death of Kirk and posting it, their fears had them feeling justified in becoming a monster themselves. To further emphasize my point of media/entertainment/political programming about the right being like Nazi's/Hitler, consider that Trump was bailed out by the Rothschild (in many cases) and his whole party is filled with Zionists and wealthy jews. And so how is it that they are just like Hitler? I'd suggest they are not. Sure, there may be some similarities that relate, but to then label and classify all who are in association with the right as evil, this is driven by fear.

I think your working with a theory that's not tethered to reality. Both parties are compromised with representations on both sides who are in it for profit and a lavish lifestyle. I mean, do you really think conservatives are pro slavery? Meanwhile progressives push for green technology which involves slavery in Africa for minerals. Could I make the case that therefore progressives are pro-slavery? Or, would that be a mischaracterization for something that is more complex? Here in Canada left leaning parties want free clean drugs for drug addicts, and this is there solution. This is an incomplete solution and one that perpetuates addiction which involves one getting high every day which then leaves them in a world of hell once they come down. Day after day, hell, hell, hell, they get to experience. This is mindless compassion which leads to more suffering. I'm not suggesting this is worse than what a standard conservatives would offer, but that an unconscious progressive is no better than any other political leaning Overall, my point is that all parties are parts of what needs to be brought together a one, a wholly politic of sorts.