except maybe Stalin

the left has seen too many movies. there will be no violent revolution. trump is still getting set up. sessions isn't even in yet. i have faith he'll straighten things out and it will happen very quickly and easily. subconsciously they all need a spanking. we're gonna see things change very quickly i think.

It's the start of the healing process now that the band-aid is on.

@-A Healing process? Who needs healing?

by too many movies i mean they actually think they can take down evil governments by popular resistance. they're going through the same 60s script. well...they lost that battle physically too but won the culture war. now the culture is swinging back. they have no physical chance. they are not the reds of a century ago.

trump is the new reagan and thatcher

ready to end the leftist fun

@MRB The West needs healing. Trump is a good sign that will make a feedback loop of increasing rightism unless it is squandered and the people go back to sleep.

There's a part of my thinking, and I know this is a bit biased, that leftist thinking/belief needs to be coddled, developed and learned. Non-leftist (conservatism for example) is more a natural state. That being said, ending the left gives us what's natural.

Then again I am more tribal/anarchist than most. lol

@MRB I am pretty sure that at least most of the people here would agree with you. Do you read Brett's work on Amerika.org? That is the kind of thing he would say.

Been reading it for years 😋

Bias confirmed!!😝

I sort of split it in masculine/feminine though. Provider/provided for. Conqueror/conquered even

...and I definitely see the left as feminine.

Yes. As the saying goes, they are like shit-testing women. Especially the women.

LOL yup

Or as I say: only faggots and women vote democrat

That is the unabashed truth and one that needs a slogan.

I can see the high schoolers now: "I'm not gay...GO TRUMP!!"

@MRB How do you feel about the Organic Hierarchy and Monarchy/Aristocracy values that Brett believes in. I am partial to it myself but many of his readers think that it is outmoded terminology and means to OH and even that it is just plain undoable.

I agree with it to a certain extent. I think in many ways, though, we have that now to some extent too. The notion of "freedom" gets in the way of seeing that fully realized though. The terminology is irrelevant to me - I get the meaning more than the means.

Yep. What is important is that the best lead and we all do our part based on our own skills and natures.

The inherent problem (and I acknowledge I haven't fleshed the notion fully yet) is there is the problem of "who decides". Perhaps there is a free market sort of volunteerism that would get us there. Not sure how to get from current state to desired.

The "who decides" question is the same problem, in part, with egalitarianism.

I do, though, think we should be allowed to fully self segregate as a natural right of sorts.

I think that problem would solve itself as natural leaders take their newfound opportunities to lead their locales and their groups of peers. Eventually, the upper echelons of the nation would flesh out among these leaders and hence: Organic Hierarchy.

Agreed

And that's why I mentioned it's somewhat like we have now. We aren't happy with that though. Unfortunately we can't opt out - and for that matter never willfully entered in to the agreement as it was made at birth.

I also see the problem as the most skilled at selling empty promises and parasitism have risen using our "competitive" system.

They have moved in to fill the vacuum of our proper elite.

Then they used their popularity as external validation of their status.

"Then they used their popularity as external validation of their status." or their skill motivated/manipulated folks to see it that way.

The problem we have now, and back to something Brett says: lack of consequentialism. The results dont matter. Feeling good does to too many.

That goes back to my comment on opting out/volunteerism. We shouldn't have to replace the elites - we should be able to select them by what we follow.

I agree that they played the people with making themselves household names and being associated with popular ideas, basically: fabricating their actual popularity and approval. However, when left to the people choosing, there will always be this kind of corruption. Not the choosing itself but the democratic process. To choose to follow the natural leaders who extend themselves in your community is a natural thing but, to select from a catalogue of self professed leaders and politicians is unnatural and flawed.

More so than the older ways, that is.

They weren't perfect but, what is?

Agreed.

brb need a sando

k