Beyond Binary: When choosing sides isn't an option

[northsheep]

Snookered Poles

In the polarized US, the advocates of a variety of viewpoints have tossed around the concept of freedom like a political football until it is deflated of any clear meaning. Although most everyone can agree that a social contract should curtail some sorts of freedom, ranging from running stop signs all the way to premeditated murder; beyond that, the question becomes murkier, or at least more complex.
Highly visible at one pole are advocates of “free market capitalism”, which for some self-described conservatives appears to mean that in the domain of the economy just about anything goes, and furthermore, everything that occurs springs from the natural “invisible hand” of anonymous “market forces”. Hence, their logic goes, everyone will enjoy freedom so long as the public (as in government) does not interfere in the “free market”. One might object that the US capitalist system has evolved to the point where monopoly control reigns in every sector of the economy. In other words, most economic decision making, which pretty much shapes our lives, is in the hands of an elite minority that acts mainly in their own private interest, and thus undermines the imagined freedom of the majority. The trouble is, conservatives tend to focus on individual freedoms and overlook over-arching system-level power structures.
An instance of falling into that trap is the libertarian conservative who complained that an oil company’s hostile takeover muscled him out of a small business based on his invention of a more efficient electric battery, and buried the invention so that it would never compete with energy from oil. Had he an elementary knowledge of political economy – the study of power relations in a social system – he might have understood how the unfettered economic freedom he supported was his downfall. Conservatives’ advocacy of an economic system free of government interference also conflicts with their support for government-subsidized industries, expensive foreign wars that underwrite a lucrative weapons industry, protective tariffs, etc.
At another prominent political pole are those, often self-described as liberals, who traditionally champion freedoms defined in the constitutional Bill of Rights, such as speech and assembly, justice by fair trial and control of one’s person and private life. Liberals acknowledge imperfections in the free market system, but count on government regulatory agencies to fix the flaws. However, equally as ignorant as conservatives of power structures at the whole system level, they fail to understand that every such agency long ago fell victim to ‘regulatory capture’ by the very industry it was mandated to regulate. What is worse, liberals are especially prey to the illusion of government as elected servants of the people, whereas, due to the nature of the US structure of power relations, it is more like a stage show, where politicians promise to serve us, but then mostly serve the power elite who fund them. In the succinct synopsis of an early Supreme Court Justice, one can have most of the wealth in the hands of the few, or one can have democracy, but not both.
In sum, it appears that groups at both poles of the polity are being snookered in different ways. In both cases it stems from the ability of ruling elites to keep the public in the dark regarding the many ways that they exercise their power, or at least deflect our attention from it. It seems to be human nature to easily fall for elaborate hoaxes, false flags, and other fictitious official narratives about how the world works, narratives that elites relentlessly fabricate to deceive us.
An example:
Today we live in a similar time of outlandish moods, often indoctrinated, where the most preposterous and fantastical things can happen. Yesterday, no doubt spurred by the anti-Russian hatred spewing from German media and even its leadership, a crowd paraded in front of the German Reichstag in Berlin waving the swastika flag and calling for the genocide of the Russian people. Russians must be thinking: Did 27 million of us die in vain? Meanwhile it is said that here and there on the walls of Ukrainian villages is mysteriously appearing a mural of this babushka of legend; her red flag for most Russians now memorializing their victory over the scorched earth terror of the Nazi Operation Barbarossa.
http://karlnorth.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/babushka.jpg

[the-righterzpen (Renee Nichols)]

Unfortunately your assessment is likely accurate. If it comes down to “Mad Max” level survival skills. I already know myself and my son aren’t two that are going to make it. We’re both too sick and disabled.
Thus I seek a city whose builder and maker is God.

[time2help]

#currentthing

https://peakprosperity.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/cucucuc-1699634631.8591.jpg

[quercus-bicolor-2 (Quercus bicolor)]

I strongly disagree with placing humanity on a pedestal above nature.

Yes, humility is essential. We are not special. We have some unique qualities possessed by no other species, but they are as much a curse as they are a gift. In the end, there is no separation between consciousness and matter. They are different ways of looking at the same creation. If I were to assign a purpose to creation or the universe or whatever it is, I would say to know itself, to experiment with the goal of constructing systems of great complexity beauty and resilience, but to revel in the "failures" as much as the "successes" and when such a "failure" occurs, to allow it all to fall apart as much as necessary to back out of that dead end and conduct another experiment. Much of the beauty is in the fact that these are not like simple scientific experiments that are at least mostly controllable and don't leave much to chance, but experiments of such great complexity that the outcome can only be predicted in general terms and for a very limited window into the future. We can see the experiments as performed by the will/intuition of an unlimited number of "separate" bits of consciousness, that in reality, beneath the surface, are all connected and act as much like a universal consciousness as they do like individuals.

[chiara-fjm (Walberga)]

Christianity Teaches Love To All

Did Brett say Christianity does not accept all of humanity into the circle of empathy? As a Catholic Christian, I would say this is absolutely wrong.
Saint Paul said the greatest virtue is love and he gave no conditions on it. Neither did Jesus. “Love thine enemy.” “Do unto others…” Brett mentions the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus gives the Beatitudes…“Blessed are the merciful,” etc. No stipulations “but not those people.” He mentioned the Good Samaritan. I am happy he is literate in the Gospel, but what is Brett smoking?
Is he talking about the practice vs the teaching of Christianity? That’s another matter altogether. There are bad Christians. There are hypocrites and I am the first to admit that many of them are in the Catholic Church and even myself on occasion. But you don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. You fix things. And there are many who are trying to, including myself in my own small way.
War and the Mosaic Law…not touching that one right now!

[davefairtex]

I have noticed that - Christians who are inspired by the Old Testament behave differently than those who are inspired by the New Testament.
While I don’t always agree with Clif High, his suggestion that the OT was (basically) written by space aliens trying to control the behavior of their cattle (i.e. their human slaves) feels more correct than not. OT punishments for rule-breaking often involved death.
Now contrast that tone and philosophy with the teachings of Jesus - it just couldn’t be more different. They are two wildly different philosophies. Isn’t it interesting that “someone” decided to join them both together, long after Jesus himself had left the earth?
To me it feels like the Oligarchy of the time joined the two books together, because they wanted a harsh punishment/rulebook, and they thought they could leverage the incredibly popular and revolutionary teachings of the loving Jesus in order to sneak in the harsh rulebook on “their cattle.” And then they said the whole mess was “written by the Lord”, and it could not be questioned.
Just my sense.

[elina90 (Elina)]

The problem with national conflicts has existed since there been nations. After the League of Nations was observed to be failing early in the last century it was pointed out, in probably every major newspaper in the U.S., that as long as nations have wide cultural, religious, and material differences and no recognized common humanity that overrides all these, there will continue to be these major conflicts. Upon that thesis the following was penned to seed the national consciousness with a more universal concept of humanity’s spiritual nature:
   “Every true student of metaphysical philosophy realizes that the soul of man is the intelligence of God; that it pervades all mankind alike. This infinite intelligence is the directing force of the universe. It has the answer to man’s oft-asked question, ‘Why am I, I?’ If man but turns to this force, resident in his inner being he comes to know and understand his place in the universe, and why he is. He also learns why all men are; he divests himself of his outer vanity, bigotry and suspicion; he learns that the real differences in men lie in their degree of appreciation of the soul-consciousness within. The greater the spiritual development of the individual—that is, the greater he heeds the voice of the self within—the more he seems to understand his fellow men. The farther man goes within himself the closer he becomes to mankind. He knows that all that man is is that he is. In other words the thing, the infinite essence that gives life to man is man, and in that essence we are alike. When we enter transition, or death, that which made man man goes on; that which man assumed to make himself he leaves behind. Therefore the glorification of that which is not part of man is false and proves its falsity when man must forsake it. If all men could alike come to know this, alike would they appreciate the futility of the material and the physical except as a stepping-stone. They would not check each other’s real advancement by dwelling on the superfluities of life.”
    “Before nations can comprehend each other, their integral parts, the humans, must know each other by knowing themselves. By knowing themselves they come to understand the sympathetic bond between them, namely, the soul-force or infinite intelligence. The most powerful nation in the world is the weakest if it has gained its supremacy by the exercise of its material influence for that very mental attitude in its people, in their character, in the personality, will cause eventually internal disruption.”
    “The nation composed of materialists alone will tear itself asunder, as the individual continues in the display of his greed, intolerance and attempt for material power. The more men and women who become independent thinkers and students of their inner forces and live accordingly, as they understand the dictates of the cosmic intelligence, the sooner will there be an equality of men and nations.”

[the-righterzpen (Renee Nichols)]

Well, I will say that my experience studying the Old Testament is that a lot of what people assume some passage to mean “on the surface”; isn’t actually what it means. Man too quickly assumes evil of God.
There’s also the dichotomy too between “the Law” (which can only condemn the sinner) and the atonement. Which redeems sinners and also delivers them from both the slavery of continuing to live a lifestyle of sin; as well as the consequences of what the Law meets out for transgression against God. The only outcome for transgressing the Law is total and utter destruction. Thus the metaphor when looking at how warfare is conveyed in the Old Testament.
On the flip side of that too though, there were still provisions allowable for mercy. Non combatants that fled were allowed to do so and those who surrendered were not to be treated unfairly as captives. (They weren’t to “oppress the stranger within their gates”. Deuteronomy 24:14) Particularly when those strangers were converts; thus only those who converted to Mosaic Judaism were allowed. This is another thing that “gets lost” in the modern definition of tribalism.
Even in the Old Testament; “the camp of the congregation of Israel” wasn’t strictly descendants of Jacob. In Exodus; a lot of Egyptians left with Moses. (Who could blame them; Egypt had been totally destroyed.) Even in the direct blood line of Jesus were several “foreign” women. (Rehab - who was what ever ethnicity the people of Jericho were; Bathsheba was a Hittite and Ruth was a Moabite.) Those considered “the Israel of God” have always been “of every kindred, tribe, tongue and nation”.
Ezekiel 16 describes “Jerusalem” as: their father was an Amorite and their mother was a Hittite. Well interestingly, according to era Egyptian art; Amorites were depicted as Northern Europeans and Hittites were depicted as sub-Saharan Africans. Thus this covers the racial span of humanity.
Then when we get to Acts and Pentecost. Every foreigner heard the Apostles preach Christ in his own native language. Personally, I have a theory that the apostles were actually speaking what ever language existed at the time of the Tower or Babel; though all the foreigners heard their own language. (Prior to the dividing of language the “origin point” of all language came from the Tower of Babel.) Yet Pentecost demonstrated the gospel going into all the world in every language; thus uniting all humanity under one redemption plan.
There’s one Redeemer for all humanity. It doesn’t matter if one is Jewish, Palestinian, American, Russian, Chinese or name any ethnicity or native that has ever existed in this world. I think there are people Jesus Christ atoned for; who lived in eras where they had never heard of Jesus, or the Old Testament.
As a component of being created in God’s image; we all have a conscience and we all have the witness of creation; which declares the invisible things of God “including His eternal Godhead and power; that they are without excuse”. Yet that phrase “without excuse” can also be translates as “they have not been left without a witness”. Creation itself is also capable of declaring the gospel. It just does not articulate the specific revelation the written Word conveys.
Still God is just, God is fair and He is still capable of redeeming someone outside of particularly revelation. God is sovereign!
“And all God’s people said: Amen!”

[quercus-bicolor-2 (Quercus bicolor)]

Regarding Pushing Buttons Vs Nonviolent Communication

A good friend who is renting a room in my house and I have an agreement that it’s good and desirable to push each other’s buttons intentionally to help us find our wounds/shadow. It works wonders. We also have an agreement that we can ask the button pusher to stop when we’ve been out beyond our edge for too long or we’re overextended/tired/stressed at the moment.
With that said, NVC or something like it can be useful in some moments to point out when we’re beyond our limits or to communicate exactly what’s going on in the shadow or, especially to introduce someone to the idea of button pushing as a means of personal growth and healing.

[quercus-bicolor-2 (Quercus bicolor)]

This interview suggests that Brett can see the nuance. Has he responded publicly in any way that lets us see exactly where he stands regarding Waters and (Glenn Greenwald?) or if he regrets what he said.

[spork]

Cognitive Dissonance And Self-deception . . .

. . . and the dismissal of inconvenient logic … these things are, shall we say, inimical to the practice of independent intellectual rigor, which is Prof Weinstein’s stock in trade these days. 
‘The Conflict in the Middle East’ qualifies, I think, as a Predicament, and so talking of ’Solutions’ is pointless, if I allow myself to be reductionistic again.
The outcome will be so much more blood, misery and death - meted out to the maximum of all parties ability to do so. 
One side likes to maintain a 20:1 casualty ratio
https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/16516.jpeg
https://www.statista.com/chart/16516/israeli-palestinian-casualties-by-in-gaza-and-the-west-bank/
And apologists for that side seem fine with that proportionality, though there are extremists who would prefer 1000/1.
We can use this number to predict another lull in the violence may occur once they achieve 30,000 dead, though maybe, as with addicts, higher doses are increasingly required. 
Impossible to square numbers like this with a signatory states obligations under the Geneva Conventions, but in this century more and more states are proudly, brazenly Not Agreement Capable.
Now, Prof Weinstein has been a brave warrior against those in his milieu who are proudly, brazenly Not Rationality Capable. And, I think his thinking has been sophisticated enough to explore how, for the ‘Woke’, the contradictions in their dogma can be almost literally painful to explore, and pain must be caused by violence, which bad people do. Therefore, scrupulously avoided, drowned out with shouting, debating disallowed, even if Steve Kirsch is offering $1million. Very frustrating for us in the Reality Based Community, clinging to the frayed fabric of the Age of Reason.
There are plenty on both sides of the ‘The Conflict in the Middle East’ Predicament who do not suffer from cognitive dissonance - these are exterminationist, religious fanatics, even with an eschatological End Times theology, who fervently believe that they and only they have the biggest, baddest mafioso “God” on their Side, and everyone else deserves whatever nasty fate occurs. I suspect there are cold rationalists in Langley who know, deep down, that in a truly ‘Dead Hand’ or Apocalyptic situation, where the molten remains of Tel Aviv glow in the night, They know to quickly relocate somewhere deep under 1000’s of feet of granite, because the Samson Option includes US. And of course, the jihadists might one day produce a worse, un-manipulated version of Osama bin Laden, whose violence will not be calibrated and timed just for optimal police state expansion.
But, the painful, rationality destroying, Cognitively Dissonant position is occupied by those who really, really don’t want the Leaders of their Side to be sitting at the historical table with the likes of Idi Amin, Benito Mussolini, Saddam Hussein - mid tier historical monstrosities with death counts in the low single digit millions, but enough torture and other hideous misconduct to deserve eternal condemnation. Their ratiocination produces a high pitched whine, their shibboleths are fervently uttered, but this is the kind of company in which they objectively belong, especially given another 30 years on this trajectory.
This issue Cleaves. As Greenwald/Carlson have recently pointed out, many right wingers are destroying their recently gained Free Speech/First Amendment credibility with calls to silence and punish apostates on this issue. I’m old enough to remember their enthusiasm for Bush’s War on Terra’, and how quickly they toggled from quavering fear under Clinton of United Nations Black Helicopters to belligerent support of USA JSOC or (JSOTF) helicopters snatching beardy men wherever for whatever, so such sudden reversals are unsurprising.
So I guess I urge Bret and others trying to occupy difficult/impossible middle grounds to do some more of their own research, starting maybe with the works of Norman Finklestein (http://www.normanfinkelstein.com) and Gideon Levy (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGO3eBxQX7Q)
Because unaddressed cognitive dissonance will eventually corrode credibility.

[chiara-fjm (Walberga)]

Hello to another Clif High fan…I disagree with all of his Gnosticism, but he sure is interesting and entertaining. I don’t understand half of what he says, I just take it in and try to get 10% of it.
This may surprise you: I would have defended the Mosaic Law, but chose to not deal with that right now. Since you raised so many issues, I feel compelled to explain Judeo-Christianity as briefly as possible. The following is not apologetics, it is simply what all Christians generally believe…
The Creator made man and woman. We fell from grace. Until Abraham, mankind was solely under Natural Law, which was written in all of our hearts. God established His Chosen People with Abraham, to reveal Himself. Between Abraham and Moses, the Jews were under a partially revealed Law, which set them apart from the Gentiles. From them would come the Messiah who would give His life as the only acceptable sacrifice (since He was Divine) for the sins of man, to reconcile us to God and be able to attain eternity in Heaven. Moses was given the full Law. Holy Scripture prophesied about a coming Messiah.
The Son of God was made incarnate and lived as a fully practicing Jew. He was killed for being a threat to the Jews in power in Palestine. It is incorrect to say “the Jews” killed Him. His Apostles were Jews also. The Romans executed it to keep the peace, so they were culpable as well. Those Jews who accepted Jesus went on to spread the word to the Gentiles and Christianity was born.
Christians fully accept the Old Testament as the Old Covenant. Now we have a New Covenant with God due to the sacrifice of His Son. The Law is now changed and perfected because we are now given the grace to adhere to a perfect Law.
“Do not think that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” Matthew 5:17

[chiara-fjm (Walberga)]

Interesting points (please see my reply to Dave). I love how you bring a lot of Scripture into this.

[goat-lady]

Fabulous Discussion

Just wanted to thank the two of you for a fantastic discussion. Would love this to become a monthly event!!

[notedanser]

?? That’s hilarious

[notedanser]

Weinstein Interview…

Been following Bret and Heather since the Evergreen college debacle in 2017 (he lives in my state) You both came to the same conclusions on covid. He was a little later than you, but came to his conclusion independently and honestly. That being said, for the love of God he rambles. He could do with some self editing.

[amandac (thepeppermintleaf)]

Raising Kids

I really enjoyed the encouragement of cosleeping and breastfeeding (probably confirmation bias lol), but being a sleep deprived mom it is still nice to know that others think you are making the best decisions for your kids. I am intrigued by the whole chewing-on-hard-things mitigating the need for orthodontic intervention. I have never heard that before and would love to learn more including how to practically implement that with young kids.

[davefairtex]

Sure, that’s the explanation the Oligarchy has provided - to keep their diktat-totalitarian-OT rulebook in place (underpinning crusades, Papal infallibility, inquisitions, etc). Oligarchy loves the OT. It is literally perfect for them. It demands punishment (often death) for the little people if they step out of line. Little person has sex with a sheep? Kill the little person - AND the sheep! What ruling class wouldn’t love that structure?
This whole juxtaposition caused a great deal of underlying confusion when I was a kid, because none of it resonated. It just didn’t make sense. But after the WEF’s hijacking of science during Covid, I now understand why. The two books do not belong together. Once I realized that the Oligarchy wanted to install totalitarianism in the West by hitching a ride on the popular and revolutionary advances brought to earth by Jesus - then it all makes sense.
And then they slapped the label of “the Lord wrote the book” (“science is settled” - disagree and you’re a “science-denier”) so nobody can question their favorite OT-little-people control mechanism. And if any do, its Blasphemy, Excommunication, Inquisition, and - as usual - death as a punishment for dissent.
“Religious mis/dis/mal-information”. Sorry little people. You must comply. Teachings of Jesus is the carrot, while the OT is the stick.
This explains why I’m inspired by the teachings of Jesus but - for some reason - organized religion (and Oligarchy-controlled science) just doesn’t do it for me. Mainly, because the vibe doesn’t match at all.
Yet another COVID dividend.

[humanity-is-my-lane]

Is It About The Canal Or About The Gas/oil?

When folks say all wars are resource wars, you’ve got to wonder if this might be true. I came across this little titbit. & thought I’d add it to our knowledge base as I’m also seeing podcast that are talking about the possibility that oil/gas rights have been signed off to company’s. Might be worth digging a bit more (pardon the pun).
https://frontierindia.com/all-you-should-know-about-the-israeli-ben-gurion-canal-project/
The screenshots are from other podcast. I’ve not had the opportunity to delve more into this, hope to do when I get chance. However it should give PP a starting point to look into.
To Brett’s point about genocide. When humanity closes its eyes to one population being wiped off the map then we open the floodgates to this happening time & time again. The poem by Martin Niemöller ‘first they came for’ rings as true today as it as always has.
It’s Armistice day today and in half hour I will be remembering what was given & lost by many so that I can be free. I intend to remain free.

[yaanymimi]

Taking Sides

To preface what I’m going to say, I’d like to make it clear that I’m neither Muslim nor Jewish, and that in my wide-eyed youth I was a volunteer on an Israeli kibbutz; while I was there I also visited to the Golan Heights and spent some time in the West Bank, talking to Palestinians there. I have no reason to take any side in all this, aside from the history and context and the way it’s all unravelled since. Also, apologies to Spork if I’m re-hashing some of what s/he said.
My main point here is that, in a similar way to if you’d chosen Apartheid South Africa to illustrate the danger of a binary choice, I think you chose the wrong conflict to illustrate this here. This is gonna be a long sentence, so I’ll take a deep breath… Clearly war crimes were committed against Israeli civilians, but I think you’re jumping the gun to condemn – in genocidal terms – Hamas (who, incidentally I see as a rather dodgy Muslim Brotherhood organisation that – in a divide-and-rule tactic – was helped to gain and stay in power by the Israelis themselves) before the fog of war has cleared, especially keeping in mind the propensity of the Israeli regime to lie outright (e.g. books have been written on Mossad’s use of deception) and the huge advantage the Zionists have with their very strong influence on international media and US foreign policy (think AIPAC and the ADL), along with the huge resources they have to pump into their propaganda war or ‘hasbara’. Please see Scott Ritter talking about the Hamas attack with Richard Medhurst (definitely not a ‘confirmation-bias’ discussion): https://rumble.com/v3uomkv-gaza-hezbollah-iran-and-regional-war-prof-marandi-and-richard-medhurst.html [doesn’t seem to have automatically added a link, sorry]
I think you need to view the current conflict with the following thought in mind: no-one any more is remembering lamentably the innocent victims among the white women and children of Apartheid South Africa (such victims did, indeed, exist, and Apartheid South Africa did use them as part of its propaganda war against black freedom fighters). Israel has been denounced by many human rights organisations (including at least one Israeli one) as an Apartheid state, and is clearly an occupying power that is trying to ethnically cleanse large parts of the territory it occupies. Hamas doesn’t have the right to rape, torture and slaughter innocent civilians and there should be severe consequences for them if they did (I think we should withhold judgement until the facts on this are truly independently verified), but it does have the right (enshrined in international law) to resist occupation of Palestinian lands, including through military means. And no-one seems to give Hamas the credit it deserves for already trying to get the Gazans out of their occupied predicament using peaceful means with its Great March of Return. The Israeli response was to use snipers to ruthlessly slaughter and maim hundreds of innocent men, women, children, medics attending to the killed and wounded, and journalists with ‘Press’ clearly marked across their jackets.
I don’t think history will look back very favourably at your framing of this conflict as simple war with two parties that are roughly equally to blame, and proponents on both sides who are just about as bad as each other (do tell me, by the way, if I’ve misrepresented you).
I do very much agree, however, with Brett’s statement that it’s innocent civilians on both sides who we should should be supporting.
The last thing I want to say relates to Chris’s comment: “If this mind virus is not somehow checked, it ends in mass atrocities.” I imagine any Palestinians listening to that might feel that it’s now too late to stop the mind virus that has taken over those who hold sway in Israel.