Would you rather fight 100 coordinated cats (think collective hive mind; ant-colony) or 1 bear? (I'm just going cat-themed questions from here on out in hopes of establishing an identity. Catmando what catmando.
Wow! Now that is an excellent question. I think they should be able to do that. I'm picturing like a Voltron-like scenario, but with many more parts. And it's terrifying.
When will US Americans realise that their laws only apply to their nation, not any other?
With all the talk of the threat to the 1st Amendment posed by Julian Assange's persecution, it's only a select few non-Americans I ever hear bring up the jurisdiction issue (for instance former National Party of Australia leader Barnaby Joyce). Is this how we slide further into a default of global governance by the US empire? The UK government doesn't seem to mind being a vassal state, and neither does the Australian one, now headed by the Labor Party, or New Zealand for that matter.
Too true, Cody. Which brings me to another question: what's the relationship between mass corporate surveillance by big tech (ie Google, Facebook/Meta, Twitter) - which is symbiotic with the US national security apparatus - and the current state of journalism in the Western sphere? Also why is anyone ok with using this tech, isn't it like using a road with 1000 roadblocks where at each point you have to sell a part of your soul, when there are road-block free, perhaps less-known roads right there for people to use?
I think an exploration into how the two political parties have turned into religion for so many. Criticism of a political party gets a response similar to drawing a picture of Mohammed or so you'd think based on the vehement responses.
The issue that NO ONE discusses is where does the basis for our ideas, opinions come from? What is the seed in each of us that wants to question our society, institutions etc,,. Is is our neurotic, unresolved personal issues? Hardly or one must posit a universally sick social maladjustment. Thisl latter is to me the most likely factor. If the society is sick, doesn't it imply the individuals that create it are sick? Isn't this where the change must come? Not in group actions from the outside in, eg communism, fascism, religious dogma, etc.,. but some personal internal change is perhaps needed. Unfortunately the serious enquiry here is precluded by the many religious fantasy beliefs and dogma or the dogma of pseudo science et.c. Isn't the real issue how to we face the personal deep self deceptions, selfishnesses, delusions that collectively make the madness of our world? Is it possible that we need to question whether this very 'self/ego/me' might be an erroneous distortion arising from the process of thinking itself, ie the logically false yet accepted idea that thinker (self) is separate from its other thoughts? This deep, personal challenge away from group think toward personal awareness and responsibility appears to be too frightening in its move away from the 'herd' that we do not even ask it honestly. Isn't it time to ask it without prior foreclosure?
The difficulty is finding folks OPEN to discussing possibilities. Psychologists have their schtick to sell and so do most philosophers. Maybe an open Buddhist/vedantic monk, an open minded Christian theologian like Cornell, and a open minded research psychologist (Dr. Mate?) and some one like Marian Williamson on a panel. The point is questioning not giving or forcing answers. Forcing answers is what is so destructive about organized religion and has turned any thoughtful person away from such discussions.
What do you guys make of Scott Ritter? I've started to have my doubts about him for some time now. On his recent YTshow "Ask the inspector" he talked about whats happening in Iran. What came out was basically the gov line. The girls death was a result of pre-existing conditions and so forth. He can't possibly know the truth so why would he say something like that? Is he a paid russian shill after all?
We live with a level of propaganda is not merely elevated, it is mirror universe level. If you were to try to draw a Venn diagram of the opposed positions on the Ukraine war, the second circle would complain and refuse to be drawn on the same piece of paper as the first one, and the drawer would find themselves ostracised as some sort of fascist circle supporter.
Narratives are important. They give us a way of framing the world, that lets us legitimise some form of action. In the Ukraine war, the narratives are a barrier to peace, and deliberately so.
I've been trying to think of ways we can frame a call for peace that is both difficult for propagandists to counter and also keeps largely to narrative territory where there is still agreement.
The best approach I could think of is to push for recognition of the right of the people of Donbass to self determination. As the primary victims of the conflict since 2014 and this year, they should decide for themselves if they wish to remain in Ukraine or Russia.
I feel that only a vote by them, internationally recognised, would be be sufficient to smash through the layers of propaganda. If they chose Russia, it would immediately reframe the war as Russian liberation of Donbass, delegitimising Ukraines attempts to retake the land, and completely destroy their fundraising model. It would also provide very strong pressure for a negotiated peace along those borders. Even if the war were to continue, it would be with drastically reduced western support, having lost its purity of purpose. Can't be a crusader for a broken religion.
On the other hand if they chose Ukraine, it would be a devastating blow to Russias own justifications, leaving it with no hope of legitimacy.
This has a large number of benefits. Firstly, we avoid having to take a position on where they should be - they decide for themselves, and it is the highest form of legitimacy. Self determination is thankfully still a commonly held value not quite destroyed by propaganda. It also moves the focus away from a conflict over all of Ukraine, to a conflict over these specific areas. This matches well with Russias public story so undercuts any further objectives they might seek to continue the war.
The reality is that Russia would claim the vote had already happened and that's that, and the West (USA/UK primarily) would dismiss it viciously as Russian Propaganda. This kind of recognition would be completely unacceptable to the US/UK as they clearly know what the result would be, but I get the sense the wider community would be grateful for an escape route with ironclad legitimacy.
The important thing is that simply reframing the conflict in this way puts those arguing for more war in the very awkward position of arguing against self determination. They would have to start talking about the 2014-22 civil war, about the rights of the people of the Donbass. Just to be discussing those things would be useful to turning public pressure.
Looking at the narratives both sides are employing, the only other potential path to peace I see is the eventual destruction of Ukraine or nuclear armageddon, neither of which hold a great deal of attraction for me.
With overwhelming propaganda already in place and internalised, even well executed this has a tiny chance of actually working, but it pushes the right buttons to maximise its effectiveness.
What do Aaron and Katie think? Is there another path that can produce peace?
Great question. Useful Idiots has definitely been accused of being a fascist circle supporter. Anyone have ideas of another path that can produce peace?
Thank you very much. It is never explained WHY such pathological hate of democratic capitalist Russia and total support of Nazi-dominated Ukraine government !!
Roots for this propaganda predate the Russia-gate FBI-DNC hoax and FBI 2020 election theft.
Stand with Russia – it fights for all of us against bipartisan fascist US/UK warmongering clique.
Jacob Dreizin – Oct. 13 – Racism and anti-Semitism in Ukraine
I follow you both because you are smart, honest, well thought through presentation and dialog.
- Censoring is getting much worse and it is damn difficult find 'closer to truth'.
- There is NO complete truth. Why? Because its moving and doesn't really exists.
- Unfortunately, you and everything in. USA will NEVER talk about Religious Power over USA.
Military USA brass are, at least 60% or higher, are hard core Evangelicals and love to kill
Our "Supreme Court" is controlled by Evangelical/Catholic ...ALL of them
100% of Congress-Senate are firmly controlled by ...ok, National Christian Fascists
Joe Biden has always controlled by ALL 3- Military, Visa Corporama, and 'his' Catholic dogma
In my mind, I meet thousands of people and love our country and 80% I meet have no connection to Religions. As far as I understand, the "PEW" studies are telling and owns our narrative about percentages of religious vs non-religious.
Would you rather fight 100 coordinated cats (think collective hive mind; ant-colony) or 1 bear? (I'm just going cat-themed questions from here on out in hopes of establishing an identity. Catmando what catmando.
Can the cats build themselves into the shape of a giant bear?
Wow! Now that is an excellent question. I think they should be able to do that. I'm picturing like a Voltron-like scenario, but with many more parts. And it's terrifying.
When will US Americans realise that their laws only apply to their nation, not any other?
With all the talk of the threat to the 1st Amendment posed by Julian Assange's persecution, it's only a select few non-Americans I ever hear bring up the jurisdiction issue (for instance former National Party of Australia leader Barnaby Joyce). Is this how we slide further into a default of global governance by the US empire? The UK government doesn't seem to mind being a vassal state, and neither does the Australian one, now headed by the Labor Party, or New Zealand for that matter.
It's even worse than you think. The USA exports its censorship throughout the world through its media properties in Facebook/Twitter/etc.
Just take a moment to feel the injustice of having your speech, as an Australian, subject to censorship by the USA.
Too true, Cody. Which brings me to another question: what's the relationship between mass corporate surveillance by big tech (ie Google, Facebook/Meta, Twitter) - which is symbiotic with the US national security apparatus - and the current state of journalism in the Western sphere? Also why is anyone ok with using this tech, isn't it like using a road with 1000 roadblocks where at each point you have to sell a part of your soul, when there are road-block free, perhaps less-known roads right there for people to use?
Katie is a known Bernie-Stan. Does she ever have inappropriate thoughts about "The Man from Vermont"?
You wanted absurd? I give you absurd.
Great first question, we'll see where it leads us
I think an exploration into how the two political parties have turned into religion for so many. Criticism of a political party gets a response similar to drawing a picture of Mohammed or so you'd think based on the vehement responses.
Plus is there any way to undo the religious two party system or are we in too deep?
The issue that NO ONE discusses is where does the basis for our ideas, opinions come from? What is the seed in each of us that wants to question our society, institutions etc,,. Is is our neurotic, unresolved personal issues? Hardly or one must posit a universally sick social maladjustment. Thisl latter is to me the most likely factor. If the society is sick, doesn't it imply the individuals that create it are sick? Isn't this where the change must come? Not in group actions from the outside in, eg communism, fascism, religious dogma, etc.,. but some personal internal change is perhaps needed. Unfortunately the serious enquiry here is precluded by the many religious fantasy beliefs and dogma or the dogma of pseudo science et.c. Isn't the real issue how to we face the personal deep self deceptions, selfishnesses, delusions that collectively make the madness of our world? Is it possible that we need to question whether this very 'self/ego/me' might be an erroneous distortion arising from the process of thinking itself, ie the logically false yet accepted idea that thinker (self) is separate from its other thoughts? This deep, personal challenge away from group think toward personal awareness and responsibility appears to be too frightening in its move away from the 'herd' that we do not even ask it honestly. Isn't it time to ask it without prior foreclosure?
Maybe a psychologist or philosopher would be a good Useful Idiots guest
The difficulty is finding folks OPEN to discussing possibilities. Psychologists have their schtick to sell and so do most philosophers. Maybe an open Buddhist/vedantic monk, an open minded Christian theologian like Cornell, and a open minded research psychologist (Dr. Mate?) and some one like Marian Williamson on a panel. The point is questioning not giving or forcing answers. Forcing answers is what is so destructive about organized religion and has turned any thoughtful person away from such discussions.
What do you guys make of Scott Ritter? I've started to have my doubts about him for some time now. On his recent YTshow "Ask the inspector" he talked about whats happening in Iran. What came out was basically the gov line. The girls death was a result of pre-existing conditions and so forth. He can't possibly know the truth so why would he say something like that? Is he a paid russian shill after all?
We live with a level of propaganda is not merely elevated, it is mirror universe level. If you were to try to draw a Venn diagram of the opposed positions on the Ukraine war, the second circle would complain and refuse to be drawn on the same piece of paper as the first one, and the drawer would find themselves ostracised as some sort of fascist circle supporter.
Narratives are important. They give us a way of framing the world, that lets us legitimise some form of action. In the Ukraine war, the narratives are a barrier to peace, and deliberately so.
I've been trying to think of ways we can frame a call for peace that is both difficult for propagandists to counter and also keeps largely to narrative territory where there is still agreement.
The best approach I could think of is to push for recognition of the right of the people of Donbass to self determination. As the primary victims of the conflict since 2014 and this year, they should decide for themselves if they wish to remain in Ukraine or Russia.
I feel that only a vote by them, internationally recognised, would be be sufficient to smash through the layers of propaganda. If they chose Russia, it would immediately reframe the war as Russian liberation of Donbass, delegitimising Ukraines attempts to retake the land, and completely destroy their fundraising model. It would also provide very strong pressure for a negotiated peace along those borders. Even if the war were to continue, it would be with drastically reduced western support, having lost its purity of purpose. Can't be a crusader for a broken religion.
On the other hand if they chose Ukraine, it would be a devastating blow to Russias own justifications, leaving it with no hope of legitimacy.
This has a large number of benefits. Firstly, we avoid having to take a position on where they should be - they decide for themselves, and it is the highest form of legitimacy. Self determination is thankfully still a commonly held value not quite destroyed by propaganda. It also moves the focus away from a conflict over all of Ukraine, to a conflict over these specific areas. This matches well with Russias public story so undercuts any further objectives they might seek to continue the war.
The reality is that Russia would claim the vote had already happened and that's that, and the West (USA/UK primarily) would dismiss it viciously as Russian Propaganda. This kind of recognition would be completely unacceptable to the US/UK as they clearly know what the result would be, but I get the sense the wider community would be grateful for an escape route with ironclad legitimacy.
The important thing is that simply reframing the conflict in this way puts those arguing for more war in the very awkward position of arguing against self determination. They would have to start talking about the 2014-22 civil war, about the rights of the people of the Donbass. Just to be discussing those things would be useful to turning public pressure.
Looking at the narratives both sides are employing, the only other potential path to peace I see is the eventual destruction of Ukraine or nuclear armageddon, neither of which hold a great deal of attraction for me.
With overwhelming propaganda already in place and internalised, even well executed this has a tiny chance of actually working, but it pushes the right buttons to maximise its effectiveness.
What do Aaron and Katie think? Is there another path that can produce peace?
Great question. Useful Idiots has definitely been accused of being a fascist circle supporter. Anyone have ideas of another path that can produce peace?
My suggestion around topics below:
WHY it is never explained WHY such pathological hate of democratic capitalist Russia and total support of Nazi-dominated Ukraine government ??!!
Are the roots for this propaganda predating the Russia-gate FBI-DNC hoax and FBI 2020 election theft??
Stand with Russia – it fights for all of us against bipartisan fascist US/UK warmongering clique.
Jacob Dreizin – Oct. 13 – Racism and anti-Semitism in Ukraine
https://thedreizinreport.com/2022/10/12/shut-up-dumb-surfer-girl/
https://thedreizinreport.com/2022/10/09/war-crimes-2/
Thank you very much. It is never explained WHY such pathological hate of democratic capitalist Russia and total support of Nazi-dominated Ukraine government !!
Roots for this propaganda predate the Russia-gate FBI-DNC hoax and FBI 2020 election theft.
Stand with Russia – it fights for all of us against bipartisan fascist US/UK warmongering clique.
Jacob Dreizin – Oct. 13 – Racism and anti-Semitism in Ukraine
https://thedreizinreport.com/2022/10/12/shut-up-dumb-surfer-girl/
https://thedreizinreport.com/2022/10/09/war-crimes-2/
Good question. Does it stem from the Cold War and the threat of communism? Or was the hatred there even before World War II?
About strange nude man attack on Pelosi: Paul Pelosi was most likely attacked by a male prostitute
An unavoidable conclusion about Paul Pelosi
1. Assailant in his underpants
2. Paul Pelosi knows his name and tells police he’s a “friend.”
3. Assailant asks “where’s Nancy?” to make sure she’s not home.
4. Pelosi takes bathroom break from spat and makes 911 call
Conclusion: This guy was a sex partner or male prostitute!
I follow you both because you are smart, honest, well thought through presentation and dialog.
- Censoring is getting much worse and it is damn difficult find 'closer to truth'.
- There is NO complete truth. Why? Because its moving and doesn't really exists.
- Unfortunately, you and everything in. USA will NEVER talk about Religious Power over USA.
Military USA brass are, at least 60% or higher, are hard core Evangelicals and love to kill
Our "Supreme Court" is controlled by Evangelical/Catholic ...ALL of them
100% of Congress-Senate are firmly controlled by ...ok, National Christian Fascists
Joe Biden has always controlled by ALL 3- Military, Visa Corporama, and 'his' Catholic dogma
In my mind, I meet thousands of people and love our country and 80% I meet have no connection to Religions. As far as I understand, the "PEW" studies are telling and owns our narrative about percentages of religious vs non-religious.
What are your thoughts?