Scholar

You don't get to lock a thread because you don't enjoy being confronted with the truth.

If I talked to a nazi from germany during the holocaust, I would not take his opinion seriously, especially if he was as blatant in his ignorance as you are. The fact that you are native makes you more bias, not less. It makes you more prone to delusion and self-deception, and less informed given you have a clear identity build around the idea that this regime is something that you want it to be. This is just self-deception.

You self-serving lies and delusions will bring nothing but suffering.

You are delusional.

Ah yes, that has aged so well.

What is this standard? Congratulations, you are more educated than a stone-age neanderthal. Is that really the way we measure reason? The people around you are so stupid Leo you don't even understand how profoundly degenerated US culture is, in all regards.

That is not impressive given this his literally his job. He is not a very robust thinker.

Doesn't take much to be one of the smartest progressives. The guy is still a baffoon.

A lot of people accuse progressives of being extreme without understand why they hold such extreme positions in the first place. I will keep this short, but the problem is pretty basic, if we take immigration as an example: If there is a certain group immigrating the country, conservatives will seek to stop that immigration from happening. To do so, they will use arguments that the immigrants are, for example, more likely to commit crime. Now, this could be a reality, but the problem is that the progressive cannot ever admit that (assuming that it was true that immigrants cause more crime) this is a reality because as soon as they did, they would validate the extreme position of the conservatives. The conservatives just need an excuse to ban immigraiton, and even if it was a 2% higher instance of crime, all of them would rally behind that number and feel justified to ban immigrants. So what the progressives have to do is deny reality. They cannot ever admit that the higher instance of crime exists, because they know this might convince the masses of anti-immigration policy. And this applies to everything we see. Trans issues: Conservatives will basically use anything as a boogeyman to severely restrict these issues. The risk of a false positive among a trans person to them would justify taking away all trans treatments for adolescence, therefore progressives must deny any significant risks of false positives among individuals who identify as trans. Abortion: Progressives do not admit that abortion can ever be immoral, it is always "My body my choice", even if the child is already fairly developed, because conservatives use any amount of risk to a child as reason to ban all of abortion. This leads to the extremist position that all abortion must be legal. Islamophobia: Conservatives will use any negative aspect of islam to justify severe discrimination against muslim individuals, as well as banning individuals from immigrating from war zones. This leads to progressives denying all problems with islam, staunchly opposing even feminists who criticize islam for it's patriarchal attitudes. Gender Identity: Progressives will accept any gender construct because conservatives use the same reasons that mock "Cat-Gender" as they use to mock completely valid identities like non-binary or transgender. This leads them to view any resistance to any gender construct as deep discrimination, radicalizing them in the acceptance for all sorts of genders. Consanguinamory rights: Progressives will radically accept any incestuous relationship, even between parent and child, and deny problematic dynamics, because conservatives will dishonestly deploy "power dynamics" or "social cohesion" arguments to justify their persecution of cousin and sibling relationships, even though these standards are blatantly unreasonable. This leads to progressive denying the potential risks of such relationships entirely, because any admission will give credence to the inhumane treatment such minorities experience by conservatives. Notice that the conservatives then use the extermism of the progressives to justify their staunchly conservative stances. "Well, clearly we can see where all of this is going, if we allow them an inch, they will degenerate and leave us into the end of civilization!". But this is literally a self-fullfilling prophecy. The progressives have such difficulty ever admitting problems in their object of activism because the conservatives apply completely unreasonable standards to those problems. A single terrorist attack justifies banning people coming from a war zone entirely. A single misidentified transgender person justifies going back to mocking the idea of transgenderism as degenerate. A single person who goes by "catgender" justifies dismissing the entire idea of non-traditional genders. A single immoral or unreasonable abortion justifies banning all of abortion. A single toxic relationship between two siblings justifies imprisoning and publically shaming all of them. So the progressives have it difficult here because they have to fight the urge to become extreme, which is not easy when the other side will exploit any problem with their causes to frame them as degenerate.

It's the shift, in the US, from a dominant blue to a dominat orange culture. Green is more collectivist and restrictive on freedoms, like blue was, and orange is generally for liberty. But it's a bit more complicated than that.

After Leo told you.

When do we get the Leo cult monkeys who book you appearances on JRE?

You only say this because Leo said it.

Americans are pretty much the most vile, selfish and delusional out of all developed nations.

That's because women generally are raised to be children.

This is what is most dangerous about the current political environment in the US: The presidency is no longer an expression of the will of the electors, but rather, the President has become the one who has full control over the will of the electors. This is what is so dangerous. MAGA-supporters don't have any real stance, principles, values other than following Trump. At this point it's true to an absurd, carricature level. Trump could literally do anything, and not only will his followers accept it, they will fully support it and fit what Trump is doing into the value system, that in fact they are in radical support of what he is doing. This is a cult of personality. Trump could have literally pissed into Zelenskies tea and told him during the interview, told him that he will now fully support Russia because Zelensky is a bitch, arrested Zelensky live on TV and drawn a penis on his forehead, and then send him back to Ukraine, or in fact even Russia, via boat. He could have done all of this and suddenly all his MAGA supporters would be pro-russia. He could say that he wants to make friendship with China and invite them to restructure their entire government, so that peace and prosperity can be achieved such as the CCP has achieved it, and he could easily get away with it and all his MAGA would support and love him for how amazing of a leader he is. The guy is basically one step away from becoming a US version of Xi.

Trump is extorting Ukraines position right now to extract a robber-baron mineral theft deal from him, basically blackmailing Ukraine that if he will not sign his deal, he can "fight alone", which will mean Russia just takes over Ukraine. The US has contributed less than the EU, and especially for the size of their economic their contribution is one of the lowest overall proportionally speaking. The US has never supported Ukraine in a full way, and if it had, the situation on the ground might look different right now. Right now the goal is literal survival of the Ukrainian state and it's sovereignty. The plan is to stop holding back on the aid and actually supporting them so they can position them selves better for potential future peace offer, or wait for the Russian state to collapse in it's current form, which is inevitable given the amount of pressure on the economy. They don't have infinite reserves.

THe news sources are trash because the humans that watch news are trash, that's literally 99% of the problem.

That doesn't change that it's an illusion. It only makes sense in relation to the construct that you are, which in the end just relates, as you know, to survival.

You don't have a position, because you have not explained how the death penalty is in any meaningful way necessary for order. It's just a intuitive stance you assume without feeling the need to justify it. The correct stance is that the death penalty leads to more disorder.

@Emerald Connor is a good example of ones fear defining one, in relation to ones reaction to those fears. Connor Murphy's desire to be unashamed, to be able to be as crazy as he wants without feeling any peer pressure, to be free, is a direct result of his social anxiety. What is interesting is that, in essence, he has not freed himself from his peer pressure, but rather, he has transmuted it, he has inversed it and therefore is still defined by it. The fact that he is so obsessed with being weird, coming across as strange and unhinged, because he doesn't care about what people think of him, is still a form of existence which has been shaped by his fear. It's not centered, rather it is just a reaction. The egoic structure in question has not dissolved, but has inversed itself. This is why all spiritual pursuits, and their results, are inherently and necessarily a result of ones nature. There is no such thing as an existence which can free itself completely from this, because any form of existence must define itself through such an illusion of duality. This is why the obsession with "higher consciousness", the dismissal of "ego" and "duality", in and of itself necessarily is defined by the very thing it seeks to reject or dismiss. If higher consciousness were not a reaction to lower consciousness, you could not even refer to such a thing as higher consciousness. This means higher consciousness is an illusion. Another good example of this is a human taking psychedelics, and then exclaiming "I am God!". That exclamation is evidence of the humanity still present (in terms of the illusion) of the individuals making that statement. It's a profoundly human reaction to the dissolution of certain egoic structures.

The internet is becoming like a leech filled pond in which parasitic leeches feed on each other to survive. Turkey Tom is a leech, Connor is a leech, AI is leeching, Crypto is leeching, most content that is produces is in some way leeching, I mean just look at reaction content. It truly demonstrates why most animals in nature are self-serving thieves who steal the calories others have put hard work into to produce.

I have no emotional attachment to the death penalty, again, what I get flabbergasted by is your way of reasoning.

The death penalty isn't the "dogmas of liberalism". You have such a reactionary stance. You have to have actual, good reasons for why any given "liberal" thing is actually negative. If I am for trans acceptance, you can't just say "Liberalism has gone too far, strict gender are necessary for the function of society". And basically, that's the first thing you'd have to say if you wanted to talk about the dogmas of liberalism. The response here is not going back a century to appease the bigots. The response is to find a new, more sophisticated manner of steering individuals.