#serious-discussion (Discord ID: 604691976314421249) in Blue Politics, page 1

First

😦

<:xd:562563637781463046>

!

@!?_Quantum_Physics

Sup

Anyone want to talk about some famous artworks that are controversial? <:catcri:571314792208531486>

The United States Military can defeat the Russian & Chinese Militaries in Conventional Warfare. | Change My Mind.

Lol

Would this be just the US alone vs China and Russia?

Yes Sir.

No Nukes, Economies not Effected;

Just the current Power of all 3 Militaries.

@Kangis Khan

The biggest issue with the us would be being able to effectively get a bridgehead in those countries with the effectiveness of their anti air and ship systems.

The U.S. invading Russia/China would be time consuming, but, over time, we could do it if we played our cards right.

ESPECIALLY Russia.

China isn't even that worthy, honestly.

I really doubt the US can grind russians in siberia

Why's that?

BeCaUsE HiTlEr fAiLeD?

The main issues would be the USA doctrines relying on air superiority and satcom availability. That’s something we wouldn’t have

Holy Shit.

Sorry. @Kangis Khan.

I was debating the same topic in another Server.

No problem man

US couldn't handle Vietnam let alone full scale war with Russia

also Russian military tech is no joke

The Russian military tech is no joke but Russia’s industry and economy is a house of cards.

Look what’s going to happen is that the US will sink both the Russian and Chinese navies. Maybe bomb the hell out of Russia’s Siberian oil and then stalemate.

Oh ignoring economies

Well if we assume both sides cannot spend money to build anything new while at the same spending no money for supplying armies the USA probably fares worse against Russia but better against China.

All that’s going to happen in this scenario is that the US will send their Atlantic fleet in to gain numerical superiority and blockade china’s coastline but other than that it’s a stalemate.

yall up

if so, why are yall far-left

__Blue__ politics

yes

Uk cannot handle a war

https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/595056129801977876/603020927269076993/unknown.png

might makes right but that's just me

@finestrathats not just you

Its every pragmatic leader out there too

ok that is cool of u to say

Every action could literally be justified with some old fashioned sophistry

idk it's ur choice

@Harveyi think its because the royal navy is too small?

@Harveyits not my position anyways, fin cited this
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/595056129801977876/603020927269076993/unknown.png

kek kek kek

Kek indeed

@Seeker Of Knowledge kek kek kek kek

Slowmode testing

Already wrong

Read it

With an open mind

And take your time

I read the first paragraph with an open mind, it doesn't add up.

If you're proposing a multiverse, then the transcendental causality effect is due to take place

Read all of it

<:agony:456514423855775744>

Or you will fail to understand

The first paragraph is already contradictory.

Why should I read on?

atheism is based on science...
you got your own feel of how things are,
but I rated your effort

Thanks, Albert

I don't know what this way of thinking is. It isn't Atheism, but it's something.

read it

What albert said kinda continues on the "religion is used to explain things for that moment due to the fact that we don't know about that particular subject"

Which would be why I think you would say something like

christianity overtook pagan religions

then empirical science overtook christianity

right? @Edessa "Jarael" • Thy Protector

But then at that point you're treating science like a religion

which many bugmen do today

I'd say this is true to some extent, not so much in science but in metaphysics.

@Edessa "Jarael" • Thy Protector This is in reference to part 1. Your general theory on universes is something I disagree with and I believe can be somewhat demonstrated to be false. I also believe in a higher power/god but that's not really relevant.

I somewhat/mostly agree with part 2, although I think we can reach some conclusions about our god through observing the universe.

On part 2.5 it's an interesting theory, one i've heard before, but not much to comment on

Your thoughts below part 2.5 (in the same screenshot) are pretty much exactly what is written in 'The Tibetan Book of the Dead', which is a part of "Profound Dharma of Self-Liberation through the Intention of the Peaceful and Wrathful Ones".

Your following thoughts in part 3 aren't really relevant to me because they're mostly opinions about the nature of a god that I don't hold

I don't take science as a religion, but I acknowledge how old our species is and how many religions have exist even past our ability to understand

why you need shit ton of gods, if you can have just one
and make up to date story, to cover questions people have

I agree with Manus' analysis, especially on part 3 because that's a personal take on the Problem of Evil, subtly arguing for Deism

like MrBatman once said Adam was mulato or something, that is why black exist, in his opinion
fun fact: never heard of it

<:agony:603601848330354732>

Yeah people fighting in the name of God, or God not protecting people from evil isn't an argument against god

especially if you believe god is evil <:cheekyfrog:458813445564006401>

Having many gods doesn't make sense metaphysically though

DER DEMIURGE

I'm not saying I believe in many gods

I meant paganism

These are my own personal beliefs

I wouldn't say this is the purpose of religion, but moreso the purpose of uh the metaphysics behind said religion

think of a religion like a computer, and the metaphysics as the operating system of said computer

@Deleted User Hello /tv/ I'm here to inform you that True Detective Season 2 Is actually in reference to 'The tibetan book of the dead' and that all the main characters experience the three bardos. Oh, you haven't read this obscure esoteric text? Huh, guess you won't *get* it then

<:whirr:603601848057724939>

I mean, yeah

I dnn't get it

<:whirr:603601848057724939>

But yeah, quite an interesting read @Edessa "Jarael" • Thy Protector

I disagree with some parts obviously, but there are parts I can sort of understand, and I think could explain some stuff

😃

😄

Was it? I thought it was pretty standard stuff you hear from people who haven't explored theology

<:Shrug:332384762457227274>

Uhhh, I mean, if I were to sum it up in my own view, it was a mix of Deism, Atheism and Egoism, but that'd be extremely reductionist, still, that's what would usually be the case, as you said, for people who haven't explored theology seriously. @Manus

idk I'm just rambling haha

😺

@Deleted User I didn't really see the egoism, but definitely hints of Deism and Atheism, a lot of Atheistic explanations coupled with some agnosticism on the surface which I found odd

I picked up the egoism from this part:

Ah right, well even that is a bit wicky wacky, existentialists say the same thing, I always found egoism to moreso be a tool of philosophy than an actual philosophy, egoism is a radical form of deconstructing abstracts

Problem was that stirner left egoism as is, and later existentialists would be the ones to pick it up for it's purpose as a tool, and then build on it, see Nietzsche

Perhaps you're right, I've never fully grasped the distinction between existentialism and egoism.

Existentialists believe that the meaning of life is something that we create and requires a strong will to do so, at least some believe that, you have people like Kierkegaard who believe that existence and essence (essence being purpose for life) are coupled together, so even existing requires a strong will

Kierkegaard would say that most 'NPCs' don't exist, and may even be in favor of killing them

<:whirr:603601848057724939>

<:whirr:603601848057724939>

Yeah I was thinking the conclusion to that would be mass suicide.

Well we're already observing mass suicide at rates never seen before as people come to grips with the fact that materialism isn't fulfilling enough to base your life around, these are the metaphysically abandoned

I imagine you can draw a very strong pattern between suicide and how religious someone is, i'm not talking 'American' version of being religious which seems to be dragging your feet in to church on sunday to make Mom happy

So what I believe in has no definitive name

It's a mix of a few things @Edessa "Jarael" • Thy Protector

I mean, it's an amalgamation of ideas from already existing schools of thought, but I don't think I have your full stance on the issue

Hm

So I haven't read all of it - sorry, not normally a serious discussion type. But the one that jumped out to me is the bit on religion. We have varied religions in the world - but there is an almost base human desire to turn to a higher power. That's why every society, even separated or closed off, has created religion.

This is a weak argument, but I find that natural, nearly universal desire to be on some level proof of the things existence. There is nothing else that we naturally desire that you could say isn't real. Religion would have to be an anomaly.

@Probably Tim I do want you to read the rest of it please moo

http://25.media.tumblr.com/03768ba29defae8ad0de851cb07da012/tumblr_mw9jq0PK6L1sgvgllo1_250.gif

1/3 is pretty much it's own thing

@ADHD you read it?

yeah I did

I don't necessarily agree with all your viewpoints but itwas very interesting to raed

read*

I thought is was gay and cringe

kind of rude.

@Yurt
https://media1.tenor.com/images/48a9b6ec4caefe0fde3e170895d64521/tenor.gif?itemid=13584722

Why would you say there such a push in the modern era in the United States to drift closer towards direct social democracy and away from the form of a representative republic

That’s interesting

Are you saying American society as a whole is pushing for social democracy or a small subsection is pushing for it

if by social democracy you mean globohomo then yes

@jayloヾ✧*。

BTFO

@Country HTFDGPS r u banned from general

Voluntarily

Cause I spend too much time on discord

<:ratdog:549062185368682497>

<a:twerk:602623730660802570>

aw, that is why I can't ping him in here

"White" this.
"White" that.


Normal person enters racist town that announces white presence

<:sadcat:602624989321101350>

<a:dance2:604851308339527715>

<a:dancedance:602816224853884928>

haha they in sync

@Wicked @Anthonys @Probably Tim vc nerds

Why

<:reeecat:585951747780902913>

@Country HTFDGPS

cause i wanna talk

<:ratdog:577646729302769664>

Oh well

Hah!

On the reservations here people put tribal needs b efore their own wealth

I guess whites really do have no convictions

@ADHD good to see you being quiet, sexist

@tinybabymouth Going hard on these boys i see

They only know urban life

@tinybabymouth What do you know?

I'm probably more a man than most the people here

When sexists talk

😬

https://i.gyazo.com/88c867c387cccfda302310ef75e41b94.png

I mean where do you come from? the city? urban? country? farmland? mountains?

Hmm why does it say europe should be north america

@Crazynomad I live on a reservation in canada

@Alert Fixed it 😗

@tinybabymouth Oh are you Native american then?

100%

<:froge:602624846169374749>

Interesting. I don't think i have ever talked to a full blood

@tinybabymouth I actually come from a mountain clan

Who are you again?

A mountain clan? Pathetic.

<:catcri:571314792208531486>

Haha

I dont associate with mountainite mongrels

Says the city girl

I live on a reservation good sir.

Didnt know muslim nations had native tribes

why yes I hate women, how did you notice

Lol? @tinybabymouth

Why would you think otherwise

Because native americans are from america..

<:pepoglasses:602624366169030676>

"Didnt know muslim nations had native tribes"
>"Because native americans are from america.."

<:thonk:602812791014948875>

Lol

Ah

You meant native american tribes in muslim nations

Silly me

I only was speaking about native americans

Silly "boy"

>calls me boy

Silly boy

Its ok if it u

Yay

you call yourself a discussion server?

what is the discussion topic here?

wtf is this bs

@troglodytes

Okay...

all there in the rules buddy @troglodytes <#604683097308659721>

jq

literally two subjects

I was responding to voice chat and nomad was semi discussing with me

two subjects we ask you not to talk about

out of hundreds of thousands of potential discursive options

@Bröther GRITS we were flexing our tribal heritage on each other

and you pick one of those two

And that

sad?

@Seeker Of Knowledge tribal heritage

tehe

Kek

No flexing I have no respect for his tribal heritage, mountain people are a pox on earth

like when you chased Syphax out of the Massaesyles

mountain people?

Aww

Thanks

@tinybabymouth

@Bröther GRITS yes my clan comes from the local mountains here

Seeker claims to be a part of a mountain tribe. As a plains indian, this offends me

Its spread out over the north african mountain ranges

<:thonk:602812791014948875>

you must be joking? @tinybabymouth

Shh

in which case it isn't a very good joke, and this is <#604691976314421249>

Why would I kid?

Plains indians are the supreme tribal people

How many people say they from native Americans are actually from a tribe.

because you'd think out of any option, native Americans on reservations ought to stick together

@natalie~(generally none)

Natives are viciously tribalistic

So were white people

We were pretty vicious

<:catcri:571314792208531486>

you'd think with the diminishing returns Natives see each year in population it would behove you to form some sort of a common identity @tinybabymouth

Landgrubbers cant compare to hardy mountain men anyways @tinybabymouth

do you think this is a weakness of Native American tribal identity?

There's a reason reservations are getting more and more irrelevent

Heh

Why would any native amercian aspects be associated with weakness?

We don't have a common identity.