Banned by HWA recently posted some commentary on a video produced by Dave Pack which purports to definitively answer the question: Does God Exist? In fact, Mr. Pack's video is only one of many offerings from the ACOG's on this topic - The founder of the movement, Herbert W Armstrong was the first of this tribe to discourse on the subject.
The problem with these offerings is that they almost always rely on false science - bits and pieces of real science which ignore anything that might contradict the point they are trying to make. This is often called confirmation bias in the real world. What is confirmation bias? According to Psychology Today, "Once we have formed a view, we embrace information that confirms that view while ignoring, or rejecting, information that casts doubt on it. Confirmation bias suggests that we don’t perceive circumstances objectively. We pick out those bits of data that make us feel good because they confirm our prejudices. Thus, we may become prisoners of our assumptions."
This phenomenon is closely related to the concept of willful ignorance. In defining the term, Urban Dictionary tells us: "The practice or act of intentional and blatant avoidance, disregard or disagreement with facts, empirical evidence and well-founded arguments because they oppose or contradict your own existing personal beliefs. This practice is most commonly found in the political or religious ideologies of 'conservative' Americans. Many times it is practiced due to laziness--people not wanting to have to do the work to rethink their opinions, the fear of the unknown, the fear of being wrong, or sometimes simply close-mindedness." In this connection, it is interesting to note that the author of the Second Epistle of Peter denigrated those who are "willingly" ignorant (see II Peter 3:5).
However, this kind of ignorance is not the exclusive property of Armstrongites or Christians in general. Unfortunately, it also very often afflicts the atheists and intellectuals who are fond of pointing out the cognitive dissonance and outright hypocrisy of their religious counterparts! Very often, these folks ridicule or dismiss the concept of FAITH (which should be the real basis of the true Christian's belief in things Divine).
And most students of the Bible know that the best definition of faith is found in the eleventh chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews. As with many things biblical, however, the flowery old King James English sometimes gets in the way of comprehending the real import of what is being said. Please allow me to paraphrase those critical first three verses of the chapter: "Faith demonstrates the reality which underscores our hope - it is our EVIDENCE for the things that we cannot perceive or evaluate by the exercising of our human senses. Our forbearers shined through the expression of their faith (and we should not devalue their contributions to our understanding of these things). Faith is our tool for understanding that God created everything out of things which are also not readily perceived through our five human senses - it allows us to conclude that God is the source of all things without having all of the physical evidence at our disposal to reach that conclusion based entirely on our own observations." (see Hebrews 11:1-3)
It makes me sad when folks attempt to negate or dismiss things which they don't understand (and don't demonstrate any inclination/desire/willingness to understand). Unfortunately, most of us reach conclusions about things based on varying degrees of research and consideration (often little to none), and then we are finished with it. We have proven our belief(s) to our satisfaction, and everyone else be damned! The problem with this should be obvious to everyone. When we are no longer willing to explore and learn, when we close ourselves off to the possibility that others may be right (and we may be wrong), we have taken the path of willful ignorance. Is it really so terrifying to admit that we don't know something? Is God finite or infinite? Is God contained? Is God finished? What is the origin of our ability to learn? Can God learn? Can God grow? Is ignorance bliss? What do you think?
Lonnie Hendrix/Miller Jones
47 comments:
I believe there are some people that even Christ himself could not reach. I think I live with one such person.
If a person values truth, over time, they will grow in this regard. But many people, especially bully types, withdraw noticeably into a world of make believe. The "speak smooth things to us" thingy. Many times church members complained to the minister because I refused to confirm some pet belief of theirs. Feeling warm and comfortable takes precedence over truth.
Nietzsche was correct in his comment.
Confirmation bias and wilful ignorance are rampant in society today and I do believe to our deference, for it most correctly describes our MSM today.
A frightening development in a free society where we see and have a press/media not as a defender of freedoms but as one who can shape and indeed distort what they believe "society " needs to know to suit an idea or agenda that a free society may find highly objectionable.
And to "get" a predetermined result.
My observation of the 2016 and resent US election and it's coverage I believe points to the above.
Overwhelming biased in one direction. Impartiality and evenhandedness were sadly lacking.
We all have agendas, but to practice true Christian love to our fellows is the most frustratingly difficult think to do especially when they
hold opinions in contrast to our own cherished "world view".
Lonnie/Miller Jones fakers writing about truth is a big joke on anyone who thinks their sincere.
But thanks for putting in print that you read Psycology Today. I've heard that mentioned a few times about you reading that... the real you ..behind the fake names.... Oops..
“.... The problem with these offerings is that they almost always rely on false science - bits and pieces of real science which ignore anything that might contradict the point they are trying to make...”
Replace the word ‘science’ for ‘Bible verses’ and you have Dave Pack violating the scriptures and the RCG members.
And the trouble is, that RCG members don’t read the Bible anymore. They chew on the verses that Dave dictates. And (of course) ONLY Dave knows what these verses really mean..
Every time when I had a conversation about certain verses with RCG members, their end statement would be “No! It means ... (fill in the blank), because Mr. Pack has explained it to us!”
RCG members are actively discouraged to read the Bible alone. Even during the so called Bible Studies they only read the verses dictated to them. And they’re told beforehand what these verses are about.
Dave Pack gives a whole new meaning to the word ‘Bias’.
@Anon 9:02
I lived with a person like that also. My ex husband was, and still is, completely under Dave’s spell. He doesn’t follow Christ. He follows Dave.
It not only costed our relationship but we also payed for it financially and we lost our house. My ex is now living in poverty because he still hands everything over to the RCG to ‘do the work’.
Even if JC himself would stand in front of him, he would still look at Dave Pack for permission to speak to Christ.
All the points stated also apply to others that believe in the myth of something can be generated/manifest out of nothing, without the hand of Yahweh being involved. We witness this also in the political world where people have allowed their hatred of Trump for no logical evidence of why they think/feel the way they do.
Trump has been a blessing not only for the USA but the entire world. When and if this president leaves office, hell will come forth and people would have only themselves to blame.
The is a lot of "make believe" going on with this blog.
Not everyone is how they present themselves.
December 22, 2020 at 9:49 PM
Correct. Few people are capable of free thought. Took me better than a decade to figure out this. Conformation bias is in everyone. Its a beast that must be fought with daily.
Miller, you wrote: "Is God finite or infinite?"
Your point here is that we don't really know. I agree with you on this. I am not sure that the ancient Hebrews toyed with the idea of infinity. That might be a later Greek notion. Psalm 145:3 is about as close as you will come.
We have a quantitative notion of infinity. In a mathematical context, we designate the set of all integers as infinite. But how we transfer that meaning to the idea of a being with infinite creative powers is challenging - probably unknowable. The quantitative notion, by comparison, becomes a degenerate case.
Even such unbounded terms as "omnipresent" are problematical descriptors. Thomas Aquinas pointed out that we speak of god in analogical language - we know nothing else. We have taken the idea that humans are locational and simply removed its boundaries. And we come up with the idea that the omnipresent god is anywhere and everywhere. But what if he is not locational at all? What if spacetime is a created artifact that does not limit him in any way? What if He is not a where-being?
Armstrongists have no documented and cohesive Doctrine of God that I know of. They have statements about god scattered throughout their booklets. What I gathered from sitting in WCG congregations for about 30 years is that they believe in a God who is a contingent being who lives inside spacetime and, therefore, is limited and not infinite. Who created this spacetime container for their immanent god and his activities is not addressed in Armstrongist "theology." Hence, their god is unlike the transcendent god of Christianity.
I believe it is better to say, rather than god is "infinite", that he is transcendental and incomprehensible. Our simplistic mathematical notion of infinity, though it sounds ironic, is a limitation that god transcends.
Sweetblood777:
Are you trolling? Maybe not.
If there is no logical evidence for hating Trump, why would he then be hated? I would like to see your response to the following questions:
1. What do you personally think about the filth concerning women that comes out of his mouth?
2. What do you think about his incessant and verifiable lying?
3. What do you think about his bullying other people?
4. How does any of this fit in the Christian model of behavior?
"When he leaves office?" Er, he left office on November 4th. We have no discernable president at the moment. We do have a golfer.
There must be something mystical about The Donald - something that people cannot see and understand just relying on rationality. You have some atypical secret process going on in your mind that causes you to see a different Trump than people who are just relying on evidence (the most convincing form of logic). Maybe you can clue us in?
******* Click on my icon to view my Disclaimer
Non Eclipitc- I agree with you.
In simpler terms, if the entire universe, all thoughts, dimensions, ideas, information, physical things, et al, was contained, within the letter "O" then how does one even begin to describe an omnipotent being that exists outside of that "O".
Even David in the Bible pondered this wonderment....Psalms 8:4 NLT "what are mere mortals that you should think about them, human beings that you should care for them?"
NEO, I like the notion of a God unfettered by our limitations. Moreover, when we think in mathematical terms, the idea of a Master Mathematician really stretches the imagination!
Psychologist Jonathan Haidt studies the five moral values that form the basis of our political choices, whether we're left, right or center. In this eye-opening talk, he pinpoints the moral values that liberals and conservatives tend to honor most:
https://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_the_moral_roots_of_liberals_and_conservatives?language=en
DJT has been demonized by the same method the Jews were demonized in Germany before WW2. Propaganda. This is coming from someone who hated Trump before it was popular to do so. I've changed my mind within the last 4 and a half years. Facts.
Today, on my daily walk, I was thinking about how much "higher" God is, than us.
My summary was: It would take a "yardstick" the length of the distance between God and mankind to measure the distance. And that is just a repetition of what has already been said. Because it is something that you can't even get your mind around.
I recommend a book titled "Messages from Old Earth" by Frank H. Strohschein. It relates science to the Scripture in a way that I have not seen before.
Well stated. I’ve often seen this in the COGs, still do. I think they do not grasp “I AM”.
Non_Ecliptic_Orbit
We all as young men said things that we later regretted. How can you be so hypocritical? I'm sure that you also said and did things as a young person that you regret today.
What lying? What about all the lies that the demonics did for the past 4 years in their attempt to demonize this president? What about the MSM which lies on a daily basis concerning Trump with no evidence to show. How about their lies concerning Covit 19? Have you as yet seen through their lies and that it is one big SCAM?
Finally, Trump has done more for the USA than any of the past presidents over the past decades. Its no wonder why people appreciate him.
Neo,
Firstly if anyone is voting for a President with the reason being to reward that person, that person should not be voting. Of course, the presidency is a benefit for most, but for the voter that must be neither here nor there. The primary reason must be which candidate will execute the policies that are best for the citizens of the country. One can evaluate a candidate’s character and truthfulness in determining how that person would function as President but this analysis is only for the purpose of determining the greater question of what is better for the country.
I like many of your non-political posts so i will extend to you the benefit of the doubt as to the genuineness of the concerns you enumerated.
Regarding comments about women, you will be hard pressed to find these “vile comments” sbout women DURING his Presidency. If you have some examples please post them for me.
He is assuredly an exaggerator but his actual meaningful lies are limited. The systematic lying of the left regarding Russian involvement makes any falsehoods pale in comparison; not a justification as much as acquiescing to the truth that truth is often a casualty of politics and the great truths are far more damaged by the Left. Abortion as women’s rights, male/female is not determined by dna, socialism after 42 failures the last two centuries will prove to work now, Christians claim beliefs only for the purpose to hurt others, etc. These are the lies of the Left and they are soul killing. I can produce a purposeful lie of Biden for each you state for Trump...moreso actually. Tell me the Trump lies that are soul killing as those of the Left.
Bullying as President is an extremely minor issue unless it leads to something much more. All Presidents outside of George w bush and maybe ford and carter used overt bullying tactics. Politics is not for the faint of heart.
Trumps policies opened up Christian rights in the country so I won’t get into a tit for tat wherein Biden was an adulterer, bully and bribee. That’s just using the first two letters of the alphabet.
The economy for all opened up under Trump. And no, Trump is not responsible for Covid or excess deaths though i can point to north east democrat governors that are.
NEO,
Unfortunately, we have some die-hard Trump supporters here, and they will not accept ANY evidence which you or I could supply that proves that their hero is a lying, cheating, corrupt, narcistic, misogynistic bully who is skilled at pulling the wool over the eyes of millions of "sheeple" just like them. Trump has a well-established record - He's been president for four years! If they haven't seen it by now, chances are pretty good that they NEVER will! They are prime examples of what this post was all about.
Miller,
You aren't listening, again. I think someone said the same about you earlier. This is far more telling about you. Apparently, it does not matter to you that your hero Biden committed adultery, sexually assaulted a campaign worker, bullied people asking him legitimate questions and called them ugly names even stating he would fight them (he even claimed he'd fight Trump), peddled his influence and quietly accepted bribes on his own behalf in the Hunter(and Joe) Biden scandal(s). You seemingly ignore Biden's many racist statements, and the cad-like condescendingly crude behavior toward a gold star family (multiple incidents of cad-like behavior). Biden has a corrupt history too. But, you don't care. I can include my theories on why you embrace biden but I won't. Yet, you believe you know why others support Trump and reduce that support to the basest of reasons.
I listen and understand what you and Neo have said (Trump was not my first choice in 2016), but you don't listen. As someone (me) that recognizes the soul killing principles of the Dem party, it is fully apparent to me that you either do not care about those issues I listed above, that you have your own private agenda/issues that matter more than anything to you, that you are unaware of the gravity of these issues, etc.
Nothing will get through to you. Which other things matter to you from a Christian vantage? War? Violence? You don't care that Trump is the first Prez in 40 years that did not encumber us in another war and pulled troops back... That he has been involved with 4 MidEast Peace Treaties that would be blared across the media if Obama had done it. How about the FACT that the murder rate in the U.S. continued to drop all 3 years for which we have complete data under Trump after peaking with Obama? "Who cares", you must be saying. "Trump is a narcissist and a bully!" you say.
Can you yet not hear that we aren't voting in a popularity contest? Will you listen? Can you not yet see that much of America is happy that Trump saved us from the lies and narcissism of a Hillary who also carries with her the evil beliefs of the Dem party I listed earlier. Do you believe in cancel culture or freedom of speech? And yes, we are losing that freedom from being persecuted by the government for our beliefs. But, you do not care? Why? Trump said mean words some years ago?
Even if you ignored everything I've said,would it have made a difference if Ted Cruz had won in 2016 and done every policy Trump had done? Would it? Cruz has a history of Christianity without the Biden bullying and bribery and demeaning misogynist and racist words; would your Christianity demand your voting for Cruz when Biden is so corrupted? Would it? Are you being truthful about your concerns about narcissism and and such? What did you think of Clinton (either of them)? Heroes to you?
I have liked many of your postings, but your turn into politics is very questionable to me. You have demeaned all who voted for Trump, so, I feel fine in my directness toward you. Will you listen?
Earl wrote: "Regarding comments about women, you will be hard pressed to find these “vile comments” sbout women DURING his Presidency. If you have some examples please post them for me."
The tape excerpt ran on air and he heard it. DURING his presidency. He could have apologized. He did not. Lack of regret before the nation is the same as committing the crime anew. Then later he had the gall to suggest the voice wasn't his and maybe the tape had been faked. The artful dodger. The reason why he resorted to this obvious ploy was that he knows that his cultic base will worshipfully believe everything he says. They will make the necessary excuses for him.
The mystery is why such obvious and repeated departures from good behavior have no effect on the people in his base. Where is he disconnect? They apparently support him for reasons they don't want to talk about. I could guess.
******* Click on my icon to view my Disclaimer
Disheartening, isn't it, Miller?
Earl,
Since you have addressed me directly, I will respond to your post. You have accused me of not listening. Let's try this - this is what I'm hearing from you (paraphrased in my own words, so that you know that these are my perceptions of what you're saying):
You believe that Biden is guilty of many of the same behaviors that Trump has been accused of. You believe that Trump's flaws are superficial/cosmetic and are inconsequential compared to the great things he's accomplished as president. You believe that I'm indifferent to these things and have not accepted the fact that a great many Americans are pleased with Trump's performance.
You may not be aware of the fact that I was once a registered Republican and still hold many political views that would be considered conservative by most liberals. To be fair and transparent, I also hold many views that would be characterized as liberal by folks on the right. I'm now an independent voter (I'm not a Democrat) and vote for the candidates whom I believe have the best interests of this republic at heart.
I have always believed that personal character and demeanor is important in a president and that fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law is a minimum requirement of anyone who aspires to hold that office. I have written extensively about why I don't support Trump on my political blog, but I will give a brief summary for your benefit (and that of anyone who may be following this thread) here:
Donald Trump was ill-suited to be the president of a democratic republic because he was accustomed as the CEO of many business interests to issuing orders and firing individuals who failed to execute those orders. In other words, his experience as a businessman made it difficult for him to deal with the give and take inherent within the divided authority which is fundamental to our system. And, as I feared, these authoritarian impulses have manifested themselves on numerous occasions throughout his presidency (in the same kind of executive actions which he criticized the previous administration for promulgating, in using his powers to punish critics, foes and anyone else who dares to disagree with him and in terminating anyone who failed to display loyalty to him personally or who sought to uphold standards or rules of decorum that might get in the way of something he wanted to accomplish). If you're interested in a more comprehensive accounting of my views on the subject, feel free to visit my political blog: "The View from the Teacher's Roost at White Cedars."
As for the other politicians you referenced, I believed that Bill Clinton dishonored the office of president and committed perjury (though I did think that it was a bit disingenuous of Republicans to play gotcha with a personal marital indiscretion). Hilary Clinton had a lot of baggage going into 2016, and it obviously prevented her from becoming president (although, even with all of her flaws, I believed her to be the lesser of the two evils the two parties presented to us). Likewise, Biden carries a lot of baggage (a long record) into the office, but I do believe that he will follow the traditional conception of the Office of President as underscored by the Constitution and the conduct of his predecessors. I also believe that Joe Biden understands loss and knows how to empathize with other folks.
I understand why you and 74.2 million Americans wanted to keep this guy. Can you understand why I and almost 81.3 million Americans wanted to get rid of him? I hear you - can you hear me? And, getting back to the original post, what do you think of confirmation bias and willful ignorance as they relate to Armstrongism?
Again, lack of listening. So, the grievance you state is a President not apologizing for an ugly comment? And you want me to reject this President because he did not do so, and presumably believe I should then have voted for Hillary who has beliefs I abhor and has a corrupted past. Who demeaned and further abused the women her husband abused in order to maintain her political prospects.
Then you demean those that don’t support that candidate (Hillary)? Has Hillary apologized for that? Normal people think covering up and further abusing the abused is worse than an ugly comment to another man. There’s more to why you think the way you think. You need to figure that out I think.
Retired Prof,
Yes, it's disheartening!
Obviously my 7:27 post was responding to Neo and I do appreciate your 7:16 post Miller.
I suspect that those that voted for Biden were generally more heavily influenced by a very biased media and do not have the partly conservative beliefs you do. I am glad you have listened and simply come down on a different side (though perhaps more concerned with personalities than the Dem political platform that I believe is profoundly corrupt). I consistently look at confirmation bias and willful ignorance and am thankful to have come to see the terrible cog teachings. However, because the media has been shown to be very biased against conservatives (which is a fact), I suspect confirmation bias is more likely among dems who hear and report issues than conservatives.
I will note that i am not using terms like corrupt and evil in some unhinged way. I am intentionally using those terms because i want to accurately express the serious problems extant in the Dem party.
I appreciate your taking the time to respond, Miller.
Thank you, Earl, I appreciate your comments.
Me thinks Earl negates how big Sanders is/was as an ideological leader. Too big to confine to media bias. Perhaps because young Americans understand more about the USA's real place in the world due to overall better education than the previous generation and travel available to youngsters.
It's the previous generation that is stuck, like the idiots who voted the UK out of the EU for ww2 sentiments and misplaced jingoism relative to its influence in the world.
Nck
Bit out of touch with Brit's Nck.
Nck,
I don’t think media bias accounted for all the popularity of Sanders himself, but media bias (90% left leaning) and a corrupted higher education system that is filled with similar percentages of leftist thought certainly have paved the way for Sanders’s ideology. Me thinks you may be conflating liberal saturation in these environments (as well as entertainment) with becoming educated. Do you really believe that these environments with their confirmation bias and willful ignorance will generally produce minds that can genuinely consider contrary teachings such as the principles that created the founding documents of the US? These founding principles were contrary to the big controlling governments of the past of which are monarchies, dictatorships, socialism, communism (socialism when challenged: ussr- union of soviet Socialist republics), Nazi- national Socialist, etc.
You state your disapproval of brexit, but as our privacy and autonomy as individuals is being challenged and as the youth are becoming ever more focused on their physical safety (fear as opposed to faith/confidence), the focus need to have a greater local focus rather than more centralized focus to prevent their inner souls’ dying. We see too much and compare too much and the “digital age” is dreadfully harming our youth (not suggesting being a luddite). Our founding principles provided for a more localized government of the people, of course sans the temporary accommodation of slavery.
Decision making is a complex human feat, and confirmation bias is only one of many biases and factors in decision making.
The term "a lot of baggage" is trivializing evil. It's intellectually dishonest.
Earl (7:27)
I recited back to you the well known evidence about D. Trump in my response. I cited and example of his character. This is not the only evidence on which you must base a decision. I did not mention Hilary Clinton at all. Who you support and vote for is your dilemma.
So we have you responding in this way:
1. You had no defense of D. Trump.
2. You tried to characterize my critique as a pro-Hillary statement when it is not.
3. Illogically, you criticized H. Clinton without citing any evidence - just general palaver. (When it comes to Hilary, it is canonical for Trump devotees to cite all kinds of unproven and lurid conspiracy theories.)
4. You chant your chorus of "not listening" when you yourself are politically and quite obviously tone deaf.
5. I conjecture that your real reasons for supporting D. Trump are inapparent - probably purposely. Certainly your overt reasoning does not make sense so there must be something covert that does.
But I have to admit, you are an archetype of the people who support D. Trump.
Bye.
******* Click on my icon to view my Disclaimer
Earl
Thank you for your interesting and insightful comment at 6:01.
2 facts will not change.
A) technology provides an ever expanding span of control. From the local police department, distance learning or real time management information for global companies or governments.
The process toward central command systems of controlwill not stop,rather increase. New governance systems will replace old models.
B) The Chinese (economic) challenge cannot be answered by a drive toward local autonomies. Why do you believe the USA created the European Union in the first place? To answer the Soviets of course. The EU is an economic powerhouse and Britain will need to rejoin because all current processes lead to a point where they will be left with no choice.
Democracies that go it alone will have their weaknesses exposed since "other States" need to have their back.
This is why I think Trump is the most destructive president ever in the history of the USA since he set in motion a process that led States like Texas to challenge other States within the Union. A horrifying box of Pandorra scenario has opened that may well extend its damage well beyond this election or the next.
So opposite from the ridiculous people who predicted that the EU would break apart over the Greek problem or the real one in Italy.
NEVER.
Centralisation is the norm and Russia, China and most of all,.... Silicon Valley are the drivers of that motion.
The days of the city states are over. Pisa fighting Florence at war is history.
Nck
Neo,
It’s not my desire to offend, maybe it wasn’t your intention when you demeaned Trump voters. I mentioned Hillary abusing her husband’s accusers, calling them names, etc. and yet I’ve never heard an apology. I am not tone deaf to the strong reaction people have toward Trump or that people condemn Trump for saying something in private to a man and not to the women themselves.
What defense did you think i would give for Trump? He said a bad thing privately. You have too. I defend you similarly to how I would defend Trump: he is flawed but in this human state we are in, we say and do bad things sometimes. He is an adulterer; that is terrible. So was clinton and Kennedy. I don’t know that he has been an adulterer or physically abused any women as President as the aforementioned Presidents did. A common defense is comparison; this makes sense as if it is unfortunately common the punishment can’t be severe generally.
I don’t mean to tie you to Hillary, but that was the choice we had.
You wonder my reasons for support of Trump: previously i listed multiple reasons but formed them as a question. Again, more freedom of religion and conscience, more freedom to operate in business, improved economy, less war, more mideast peace, more legislative power and less non-legislative regulation by agencies, better Supreme Court justices that interpret by original intent of constitution, lowered murder rate each year, less racial condescension which is why black men became increasingly supportive of Trump, protection of the unborn, more power given to the states and counties. These are good things and I would have no reason to be covert about them.
You still may find these reasons to not make sense to you, but frankly they make a lot more sense than a particular off color comment determining how one may vote when it is not unlike the comments of many leaders.
The Trump derangement syndrome is another name for the Cain versus Abel reaction. Devout Christians experience it constantly, so have no difficulty in identifying it in the way that the left reacts to Trump. Which means that the lefts accusation of Trump being highly flawed isn't what they secretly believe about the man. Cain reacted to Abel on the basis of what Abel was at his core. He didn't respond to him on the basis of details. Or as the bible puts it, there is no person that doesn't sin. But Abel was overall righteous, as is Trump. Only a righteous person could have Trump's legislative record.
Trump is one of the rare politicans with a history of building things prior to being elected. Most politicans by contrast have never run a business, and only excel at passing around other people's wealth.
Nck
Are you aware that the American constitution is basically a restraint on government?
nck said: “Why do you believe the USA created the European Union in the first place? To answer the Soviets of course.”
To me the USA has been shortsighted as well as the UK over the last half century. In that time the US has built up Red China and the UK has built up the EU. Only in the last several years with Brexit and Trump has reality set in that both countries sowed the seeds of their own downfall decades ago.
Incidentally it was the CIA that created the EU. But, for the benefit of whom? Cui bono?
"Nck
Are you aware that the American constitution is basically a restraint on government"
I know the Constitution.
My point is that it was written in a time when a bullet reached 60 yards and a new patch of cauliflower caused a surge in the stockmarket, a stockmarket that was open from 2pm till 5pm for exchanges.
I speak about the technological reality of man's ability to increase its span of control on every subject, business, people, finance on a global scale.
Politics will follow.
Look what happened after 9/11, try and count the number of cctv in the UK.
Tech is tower if babel. It means centralisation of control. Why would Milan and Florence conduct war in the 1500's. Because their tech span of control was not able to control Italy.
The Constitution is just not efficient for the Singularity in 40 years. When machines know your feelings before you do.
I mean google knows I'm talking to you. My wife of decades doesn't even know this blog exists. Who has the information advantage here, big tech or love.
The Constitution just informes me that it can hardly contain a leader like Trump, who used every tech invention available to circumvent normal democratic procedure and establish a direct bond between 71 million americans and himself to prevent them from using the Constitution to talk to each other and solve differences.
Nck
8:44
Cui bono???
Really?
Judging by the US 19th century gunboat behavior in Japan and China, WW2 was a battle for international export markets.
And of course, those living under democratic rule benefitted aswell. Or do you believe policy makers in the USA were betting on striking a comprehensive trade deal with nazi occupied europe??
UK built EU.
You got to be kidding.
What did the UK contribute since joining in the seventies.
Do you know that in 1970 only half of british households had central heating. It was Thatcher who unleashed the market forces of the City of London Corporation on the world so its money would trickle down into the rest of Britain. The benefits of the City Corp will disintegrate since all corporations doing business with the EU should conform to its rules despite what the liar Johnson told the british voter.
A strong hand from someplace = free trade and market forces, the unseen hand
Nck
Nck 10:05,
Astute observations about the kind of world in which we live, and how Trump manipulated all of that to circumvent our Constitution. Thanks again for contributing to these forums.
Nck pondered the question: What did UK contribute to EU since joining in the seventies.
How about half a trillion pounds since 1973 Nck. Not to mention the billions from UK tourist travel and UK expats retiring to EU to sit in the european sun.
Holidaying is not politics.
Please.
As if Spain and Skt Moritz is less atractive with or without the EU umbrella.
You seem to believe EU citizens dislike British people as the british jingo press suggests the feeling is reciprocal.
The entire EU population and press feels sorry for the people led astray by the liars like Johnson and Farrage.
The only bad press given to the british was because of the stupendously stupid negotiating tactics waged by British diplomacy.
Never the British people who are regarded as victims.
Enjoy your fish.
Nck
I agree 10:16. As an expat living in the U.S., none of us care what France or Spain thinks. After Spain's humiliating defeat in May 1588 they are nothing but a pustule on Portugals ass.
I responded to the holidaymaker remark. Then the illeterates turn the discussion to politics. Idiots like Boris Johnson I guess.
Ok Spain is irrelevant I agree.
Last time USA begged Spain was 2nd Gulf War to ask permission for the Stealths to use Spains airspace which was denied first because 2nd gulf was barely legal.
Nck
Thought nck was supposed to be a brit.
Interesting comments Nck. I generally believe that to circumvent the Constitution you must do something contrary to the Constitution. I don’t think Trump going directly to the people circumvented the Constitution ( I think that’s what you were saying).
I agree that tech centralizes control. That’s a bad thing. Less centralization and more broad minded autonomy is needed now. I think we are approaching the tipping point and may well see some US balkanization in the near future.
Earl.
My reason for contributing here is not to bash cog or any system of belief, be controversial, alarmist or funny even if I try.
Perhaps you've seen those psychological experiments on tv where participants sit in a hotel room and stay put when smoke enters and the single "victim" decides to stay too because everyone does. Or the one where 50 onlookers see a person drown. Or people entering a family christmas party and notice 3 cousins look ill and are sneezing.
I am trying to create space for people do decide that if it smells like smoke it might be smoke, to decide to swim the 30 yards and save the lady in the water, to have the family decide to tell rest of the family they love them very much but that they will be leaving the party immediately and bring more presents next year.
I sm satisfied if people after my comments would not start banishing tech like the amish but rather start thinking how it could enhance democracy and improve the conversation at grassroots level to help your local autonomy.
I agree that superficially Trump did not seem to break democratic boundaries.
It's more that I believe that he damaged the precious fabric of a democracy. Like combatting red wine stains by pouring a bottle of white wine over it. Ask your dry cleaner how he feels about that. Indeed Trump did, in fact, not leave Nato, but his comments (and actions) damaged trust and US standing as a leader.
Even if you would not be able to find legal fault with Trump.
It's like your wife telling you she loves you and says you can watch Pamela on Baywatch as a gesture, while having posters and screensavers and mousemats of David Hasselhoff all over the place.
My point.
You seem to favor local autonomy as a democratic model. In what way did Trump encourage conversation between citizens on all levels of the republics platforms of engagement?
It's not twitter or Trump I am bashing. It's me asking the others in the room. Is that smoke people, should we sit here? Can you swim, I can swim, help me fetch the lady? I'm not judging you my loving family, but if it smells like Covid, I must take responsibility, by the way cousin Jake, before we go, let me know if I can be of assistance for shopping next week.
Usually after posting here, bloomberg news, the economist, wall street journal,or some universities offer articles on my social media adressing the exact topics some here hate me for answering. Little do those "haters" know they are in fact helping me to manipulate big tech to ask the right questions or rather have Ivy league send me their latest findings and research on what I feel in my gut.
Nck
Nck
Post a Comment