There were very few people at his farewell speech btw: mostly media, his family and the military he requested. — Kenosha Kid

Fake news, the crowed was HUGE. No ones ever seen a farewell crowd so massive.

Other animals are just as rational as humans. — Harry Hindu

Like Dr. Dolittle bizarro.

Reasoning with a rhinoceros is really quite preposterous.

Debating with a bird is as bizarre as it is absurd.

Conferring with a crane is doubly insane.

I had actually suspected plagiarism and had googled some of his comments to see if I could get a hit. I wasn't successful, but looks like others were

Same for me, just checking out of curiosity.

No way, he only pardons his loyal cronies.

Who taught you that tribalism is a human flaw?

Perhaps that which 'dark' has the ability to explore the subconscious and explore the unknown. — Jack Cummins

And express/reflect some aspect of culture. If a kid supposedly commits suicide from listening to too much Marilyn Manson doesn't that imply that everything was good in their life up until the exposure to MM, that the kid lived in some kind of utopian paradise rather than the culture that MM, and the kid, are both products of?

I'm shake'n in my little commi boots!

I’m still unclear about whether the New Left is better than the Old Left.

I am asking about the level on which art can play in addressing social and political issues. — Jack Cummins

Emotional or subconscious level.

How far should it be seen as an aesthetic quest or one which is part of a cultural statement? — Jack Cummins

It can be either or both.

How influential can art be in raising consciousness? — Jack Cummins

Very, I would say, but being so subject it’s notoriously difficult to quantify results.

To what extent is the artist just expressing personal feelings? — Jack Cummins

Even in commercial art creators are expressing themselves to some degree.

Is there any danger if art, music or fiction is too 'dark', such as metal music? — Jack Cummins

Anything that has the power to influence can be used for nefarious or selfish purposes, and that being the case, art that is too ‘light’ can be dangerous.

Does it matter what art we create? — Jack Cummins

If it didn’t then art wouldn’t matter.

I likes it. :clap: kinda sounds Latin and I danced salsa while listening. I don’t know anything about music but it did seem to be on an eight count.

I could really use some direction. — Satyesu

Read more Watts and stop reading Peterson.

Given that energy, capitalism will be sustainable — counterpunch

The cost of this energy is still unknown so how well it can sustain capitalism and increased human population is unknown.

Tell me specifically what it is that BLM want, that has been accepted by the Democrats, that is unacceptable to you? — Banno

Defunding law enforcement perhaps? or legislation that makes them more accountable, or some civil rights reforms?

I don’t understand, how did he publish that video? I thought the radical left muzzled the mad king.

I've heard that argument going around. It's kind of like saying that because Lenny Bruce could still do comedy shows he was never censored. — NOS4A2

It’s a little concerning to me that Trump has allowed his act to be censored, meaning that the threats must be so credible that even he fears (his legacy will be further stained by continued violence from his supporters) them.

Having just glanced through some of Brett’s discussions I would guess that his issues with the forum stemmed more from his apparent lack of appreciation of science than differences in political ideologies. Just a casual guess but maybe something to keep in mind when dealing with other likeminded folk.

I don’t understand, how did he publish that video? I thought the radical left muzzled the mad king.

No iron clad argument for voter fraud is complete without hearing from Alex Jones.

And likely you'll see it tomorrow how Trump behaves in Texas. — ssu

Alamo, Texas.

Could have been pride, his wife's boobys are sensational.

All kinds of people burnout or whatever and essentially ban themselves. Just indicates some lack of self-control, I guess.

What the media never showed was Trump’s explicit desire to do it legally and according to the constitution, which is his right, and which many have done before him. Perhaps if they did, there would be no such violence. — NOS4A2

Trump may be unique among American presidents in his flagrant propaganda based on lies, such as 'the election was stolen and everyone knows it'. He repeated the lie relentlessly for months until his weak minded followers believed it with a passion. All politicians use propaganda of course, but it takes a special kind of sociopath to so readily use propaganda techniques like the so called big lie. Having a strong penchant for propaganda yourself, even you won't stoop that low, and also seem to possess the moral conscious to brand yourself an evil bloodsucking parasite to help alleviate any cognitive dissonance caused by having a conscious.

he's a master brander — frank

Trump brand equity is shrinking by the minute so obviously not a master.

I suppose that a post I made in his ‘Suggestions’ topic yesterday may have had something to do with it.

I was considering starting a topic on it in the hope of putting it out of its misery and did some research, starting with a forum search for "nature of thought." Turns out that I appear to have discussed the topic with you more that I thought. You are Jake, right? a guy that was banned a couple of years ago for posting a picture of your wife's boobies. — praxis

It felt kinda shitty to out him like this but I couldn’t resist the temptation to see how he’d handle it. I bet he wouldn’t have been banned if he just ignored it. Anyway, ultimately his ‘Suggestions’ topic proved to be successful in improving the quality of the forum so he can put a feather in his cap for that.

And yes, Jake, I realize that banning me would improve the quality of the forum also.

Why am I me and not someone else?

I don't believe that you believe that none can understand your ideas about the nature of thought.
— praxis

Whether readers can understand is largely unknown here. It does seem true that this topic routinely fails to engage. That used to frustrate me, but lately I'm learning not to worry about it too much. — Hippyhead

I was considering starting a topic on it in the hope of putting it out of its misery and started a bit of research, starting with a forum search for "nature of thought." Turns out that I appear to have discussed the topic with you more that I thought. You are Jake, right? a guy that was banned a couple of years ago for posting a picture of your wife's boobies.

I looked at the comment section of Breitbart's story on the 'armed protests' and the amusing thing is that from the comments it appears that Breitbart is closely moderating the comments. Apparently so many terms trigger an automatic review before publishing that most if not practically all comments require a review. Don't want Trumpers to appear hungry for violence, I guess.

ANY change is typically unwelcome. — Hippyhead

Moving the shoutbox to the registered section was an unwelcome change for many. It does not seem to have had the intended result of raising the quality of the forum.

Moral of the story: be careful what you wish for.

I think I understand now why people move to the right. — Brett

No flair for drama?

Just condemn them. Go on. — Baden

He cannot because he is not worth the dust on the feet of those you have hanged!

Orwellian? It couldn't be more capitalistic for a publisher to not want to be associated with sedition. What a whinny bitch.

In my opinion, this is beyond the pale...

As for Trump, maybe banning him from twitter won't help to legitimize the 'radical left authoritarianism' fear that they've been promoting.

Isn’t it reasonable to think that if we can’t explain something that we don’t understand it well?
— praxis

It's also reasonable to consider that the audience may not be capable of understanding a particular topic and there's not really anything the author, perhaps any author, can do about that. The limitations can exist on all sides of the conversation. Sometimes such limitations must just be cheerfully accepted. — Hippyhead

I don't believe that you believe that none can understand your ideas about that nature of thought.

I’m interested in the subject and I think other views and understandings may help me understand it better.
— praxis

Yes, my point exactly, other views may help us understand the topic better. There are many people all over the world who write on such topics, and I'm sure many of them do so better than myself and others on the forum addressing such topics.

Without some organized effort to attract quality new members then all of us are basically stuck reading the same people saying pretty much the same things over and over again for years. It might be fun to take on the challenge of addressing this limitation of our experience here. Or, it might simply be too threatening a process of change to survive here. — Hippyhead

Having just read the OP, unless I've misunderstood it seems that all you're suggesting is to make the FORUM link on the top menu only visible to registered users and to publish rejected articles to the forum. Anyone can scout out and invite new members as it is.

My guess is that it would only decrease new membership because many would be put-off by having to register before seeing the forum. You may notice that there's only one article published to date and the forum has existed for something like six years.

Anti-Trump lackey’s would not be limited to the left-wing. There are plenty on the right as well. — NOS4A2

Who are they the lackey’s of?

All the anti-Trump lackeys are cheering it on. — NOS4A2

I was trying to think of left-wing anti-Trump lackeys (meaning Biden lackeys?) that were comparable to Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Judge Jeanine, Shapiro, Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones, etc. and came up with a video from The Young Turks.



They do indeed celebrate it and are unconcerned about a slippery slope.

I'll never doubt the slippery slope again. — NOS4A2

There you have it, all the Trumpian media lackeys are saying it.

I've already written on the nature of thought about a hundred times. At least the way I discuss it, the subject appears to not be of much interest. But that's ok. Perhaps I suck at explaining it, that could very well be the case. — Hippyhead

Isn’t it reasonable to think that if we can’t explain something that we don’t understand it well? Discussing it in a new topic may help you better understand it, and perhaps spare the forum from ‘the way you discuss it’ in the future.

I’m interested in the subject and I think other views and understandings may help me understand it better. If I were to start it I’d need to figure out a way to make it compelling enough to encourage engagement.

It's either that, or you can read me blab on about the "nature of thought" five thousand more times until you die of incurable boredom. — Hippyhead

Why not put an end to this and start a topic that explores your nature of thought, using the “magazine model” or whatever model you like.

Books that helped me understand the Trumpers at the beginning of his administration were works like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strangers_in_Their_Own_Land

Some of the mob were armed, there were vehicles found with bombs and high-powered rifles in them. There are recordings of people trying to hunt down the Vice President and Speaker of the house, presumably to assassinate them. It was a watershed event. I had thought Twitter would suspend Trump's account on Jan 21 but he forced their hand. They had no choice. — Wayfarer

The downside is that it kind of confirms the fears that Trump and his media lackeys have been stoking for months, and just when the Democrats are setting up shop. It confirms their fear of authoritarianism.