When the structural elements are riddled with dry rot, I don't waste my time plastering the walls. — Vera Mont

Future generations will prevent such dry rot getting hold in the first place, at least better than your or my generations where able to. But I think we did, and continue to do ok, all things considered.

Future generations will prevent such dry rot getting hold in the first place, at least better than your or my generations where able to. But I think we did, and continue to do ok, all things considered. — universeness

*sigh*

I think when Trump was our president, we experienced the division that was felt during the Civil War. The way he handled Covid and went about other things, divided all of us and we turned our backs on our neighbors and friends who were no longer our friends because it was unbearable to associate with those we opposed. I have never experienced anything like that in my life. It was such a strong emotional thing it was closer to insanity than sanity, and I think that happens when people go to war.

Some of the best words ever written were written by

Here Thucydides, in one of his greatest passages [3:82; translation by Rex Warner from the Penguin Classics edition], describes the political and psychological consequences of this breakdown of civil society:

"To fit with the change of events, words, too, had to change their usual meanings. What used to be described as a thoughtless act of aggression was now regarded as the courage one would expect to find in a party member; to think of the future and wait was merely another way of saying one was a coward; any idea of moderation was just an attempt to disguise one’s unmanly character; ability to understand a question from all sides meant that one was totally unfitted for action. Fanatical enthusiasm was the mark of a real man, and to plot against the enemy behind his back was perfectly legitimate self-defence. Anyone who held violent opinions could always be trusted, and anyone who objected to them became a suspect. To plot successfully was a sign of intelligence, but it was still cleverer to see that a plot was hatching …

Family relations were a weaker tie than party membership, since party members were more ready to go to any extreme for any reason whatever. These parties were not formed to enjoy the benefits of established laws, but to acquire power by overthrowing the existing regime; and the members of these parties felt confidence in each other not because of any fellowship in a religious communion, but because they were partners in crime. If an opponent made a reasonable speech, the party in power, so far from giving it a generous reception, took every precaution to see that it had no practical effect." — Steven Pressfield

The words of the video could come from Thucydides and we know of Thucydides because he comes from classical literature, the source of our culture that is still with us even though we are no longer literate in the classics.

Be convinced that to be happy means to be free and that to be free means to be brave. Therefore do not take lightly the perils of war. Thucydides
Read more at https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/thucydides-quotes — Thucydides

The Peace Core was begun during the Kennedy administration. It has attracted millions of people willing to take risks to help people around the world. Soon after the Peace Core we got America Core, our domestic Peace Core also helping people but they do so within the US. Many churches send missionaries around the world and there are many organizations for helping people and millions more who support those doing the work by making donations. We evolved to cooperate and help others. This is what kept us alive since we first came down from the trees.

HOWEVER, all that good depends on having an abundance. If we have to fight for resources we will. In villages that are so poor children must fend for themselves by age 3. You will not find loving families where life is that severe. The Christian God was a God to fear for centuries before our bellies were full and He became a loving God.

Universeness, I think would like this book...

Abundance Book by Peter Diamandis

Peter Diamandis
https://www.diamandis.com › abundance
"This brilliant must-read book provides the key to the coming era of abundance replacing eons of scarcity. Abundance is a powerful antidote to today's malaise ...

What is the importance of abundance?
Why is having the abundance mindset important? Having an abundance mindset practically shifts our perspective of things. It builds healthy ways of thinking and allows us to attract the things we want in our life by taking action based on motivation rather than fear. — Peter Diamandis

You have mainly talked about the whole nation - as if it were one country, rather than four or six. — Vera Mont

I speak of democracy. I am not a nationalist and I am troubled when speak as though the world would not know democracy without the US. Despite all the human faults of Athens, it was the beginning of science and democracy, rule by reason. It is the concept of logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe, and our ability to discover logos, universal laws, and figure out how to live with those laws and improve our lives. For the first time in history, most of us are enjoying abundance and we dare to dream big dreams. We are not living with the fear of people we know starving to death in the long winter months. As in my reply to universeness, our abundance increases our potential. The thoughts that occurred in Athens got us here.

Next to full bellies, we need education, a liberal education that draws on the classics.

A liberal arts education will also help you develop a strong sense of social responsibility as well as strong and transferable intellectual and practical skills, such as communication, analytical, and problem-solving abilities, and a demonstrated ability to apply knowledge and skills in real-world settings.Nov 20, 2022

The Benefits of a Liberal Arts Education - Coalition for College

Coalition

for College
https://www.coalitionforcollegeaccess.org › the-benefits-...

Do you have anything to say about how military technology changed education and how bureaucratic technology increases the power of government to control our lives or what abundance and security has done to how we think?

Critical thought is what is needed, but can critical thought even be learned? — Tzeentch

That is what a liberal education is about and many colleges are proud of their liberal education programs. My problem with this is not everyone goes to college and those who do may not get a liberal education. Education for democracy which is a liberal education, must begin with the first day of school.

"I think by far the most important bill in our whole code is that for the diffusion of knowledge among the people. no other sure foundation can be devised for the preservation of freedom, and happiness."
(Thomas Jefferson to George Wythe, August 13, 1786) — Jefferson

Why should anyone make common cause for someone who feels contempt for them? — T Clark

Because it is the right thing to do.

What strikes me is that all of the responses so far except Joshs show contempt for our fellow citizens. Certainly this is not a sign of reason. We're all in this together, for better or worse. As I see it, the main requirement for democracy is a sense of common purpose, not "critical thinking." — T Clark

I totally agree and that gives us immortality because it is not about each of us as mortal individuals, but all of us creating a future.

I speak of democracy. — Athena

Yes, often. But not regions, as a rule.

Despite all the human faults of Athens, it was the beginning of science and democracy, rule by reason. — Athena

What makes you think that?

It is the concept of logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe, and our ability to discover logos, universal laws, and figure out how to live with those laws and improve our lives. — Athena

Yes, you often speak of that, too. But I don't think it sits on an American board of education or the electoral college.

We are not living with the fear of people we know starving to death in the long winter months. — Athena

Not you and I, maybe, but according to the UN many are.

Each day, 25,000 people, including more than 10,000 children, die from hunger and related causes. Some 854 million people worldwide are estimated to be undernourished, and high food prices may drive another 100 million into poverty and hunger. The risks are particularly acute among those who must spend at least 60 per cent of their income on food: the urban poor and displaced populations, the rural landless, pastoralists and the majority of smallholder farmers.

Yes, in America, too.
And it's all about money, not democracy.

Do you have anything to say about how military technology changed education and how bureaucratic technology increases the power of government to control our lives or what abundance and security has done to how we think? — Athena

Nope. America was always aggressive; never in its whole history at peace for more than 15 years. The military technology advanced right along with the industrial might, and education was always aimed at what kind of work-force was required by industry and what kind of mindset was required for war. The landowners and bosses have always controlled people's lives as they also controlled government. That the bureaucracy and education were upgraded to fit into the post-war world order led by the US is a natural byproduct of geopolitical change.

Abundance and security, in the pockets where it existed, while it lasted, did affect how people think: it tends to make them more open-minded, tolerant and liberal. But one good scare - just throw a couple of planes at a financial institution's urban monolith - can undo a whole lot of progress.

The words of the video could come from Thucydides — Athena

I accept that such quotes from Thucydides, demonstrate that the mistakes or deliberate nefarious acts made by many humans then, are still happening now. But many many more people are now far more aware of such behaviours, and there is far more organised resistance and rational arguments, against the stupid positions Thucydides was highlighting. The far more organised and growing (mostly, currently, in the West) atheist movement is bigger, more successful and has more reach, than it has ever had in the past. Those in the disability and LGBTQ+ movements and those who support such, have made gains in the past 50 years that have been quite spectacular imo. These are just a couple of the examples of the progressions made by the current generations of people, who are willing do battle with the shortfalls of the status quo.

HOWEVER, all that good depends on having an abundance. — Athena

I totally agree that you can better help others, when you yourself can take the basic means of survival for granted. That's why I fight for food, water, shelter etc as basic human rights, and not something anyone should have to 'work for.' I was merely pointing out that sooooooo many people are willing to, and are in fact compelled to, help make things better for everyone. As long as it is true, that good people will not just stand by and watch horror and terror happen to others, then we do earn the right to continue to exist imo. Many still do nothing, and they do merely watch as evil grows and thrives but, as Gandhi pointed out, we always, eventually, bring such evils down, we destroy them. The nefarious rise again or hide and come out again, and the fight continues. But general progress on behalf of more and more 'have nots' is made. As I said before, most people have more ability to affect the nefarious than they have ever had before. A billionaire can be brought down almost overnight today, as can a government, if the people decide to act en-masse.

I think when Trump was our president, we experienced the division that was felt during the Civil War. The way he handled Covid and went about other things, divided all of us and we turned our backs on our neighbors and friends who were no longer our friends because it was unbearable to associate with those we opposed. I have never experienced anything like that in my life. It was such a strong emotional thing it was closer to insanity than sanity, and I think that happens when people go to war. — Athena

I get this unsettling feeling that many people (10 thousand? 100 thousand?) in the USA are actively chomping at the bit to start another US civil war… or some bloody battles anyway.
They are pumped up with automatic weapons, anger, and enough ‘theory’ to be actual loose cannons… and they are proud of this.

Trump not only uses these people for votes and cash, but I seriously wonder if one of Trump’s multiple personalities actually wants to start a civil war.
Especially now that he probably feels persecuted; I fear he wants a bloodbath.

I dislike DeSantis and his stupid bigotry very much, but he is not the nuclear timebomb and stuff of nightmares that Trump is. I hope neither gets the nomination.
The status quo sucks, but some of the ‘alternatives’ are hell on earth.

Trump not only uses these people for votes and cash, but I seriously wonder if one of Trump’s multiple personalities actually wants to start a civil war.
Especially now that he probably feels persecuted; I fear he wants a bloodbath. — 0 thru 9

The Trump anomaly is a symptom, not the disease or the cause. All he, as a deeply disturbed individual, wants is attention - all of it, all the time, by any means - and he's getting it whether he succeeds or fails in his aspirations, whether he steals from a city or a charity, whether he keeps a promise to his allies or throws them under buses, whether he gets legislation passed or vetoes it, whether he supports or opposes the constitution, whether he commits misdemeanors, of felonies or treason, whether he faces prosecution or evades it.
Whether he wants a war - class, civil or foreign - is immaterial. It's going to happen, because that's the inevitable devolution of events from 1963 to the present.
Trump could never have been able to get the first nomination, had the GOP not reached that level of jingoism, corruption and craven conformity. He could not have stirred up the yahoos at his rallies, had they not already been mustered and enraged by a long line of his predecessors. He could not have squeaked through that election, had the voting procedures not already been fatally compromised by state level tampering.
Everything, at least from the Kennedy assassination, through the Civil Rights movement and opposition to the Viet Nam war has been leading up to a Trump or something like him. If he drops dead tomorrow, or is incarcerated (as any other citizen with his record would have been, years ago) or withdraws from politics, it will make no difference to the march of events.

The Trump anomaly is a symptom, not the disease or the cause. All he, as a deeply disturbed individual, wants is attention - all of it, all the time, by any means - and he's getting it whether he succeeds or fails in his aspirations, whether he steals from a city or a charity, whether he keeps a promise to his allies or throws them under buses, whether he gets legislation passed or vetoes it, whether he supports or opposes the constitution, whether he commits misdemeanors, of felonies or treason, whether he faces prosecution or evades it.
Whether he wants a war - class, civil or foreign - is immaterial. It's going to happen, because that's the inevitable devolution of events from 1963 to the present.
Trump could never have been able to get the first nomination, had the GOP not reached that level of jingoism, corruption and craven conformity. He could not have stirred up the yahoos at his rallies, had they not already been mustered and enraged by a long line of his predecessors. He could not have squeaked through that election, had the voting procedures not already been fatally compromised by state level tampering.
Everything, at least from the Kennedy assassination, through the Civil Rights movement and opposition to the Viet Nam war has been leading up to a Trump or something like him. If he drops dead tomorrow, or is incarcerated (as any other citizen with his record would have been, years ago) or withdraws from politics, it will make no difference to the march of events. — Vera Mont

:100: :fire:

For decades now, I suppose, north of the US border must feel like living above a freaking noisy meth lab. :mask:

For decades now, I suppose, north of the US border must feel like living above a freaking noisy meth lab — 180 Proof

We have our home-grown malcontents, wingnuts and tearers-down. But the splash-over doesn't help. (At least we got some pretty good new citizens through northward drift - though you got a lot more of our drifters, for good or ill.)

I get this unsettling feeling that many people (10 thousand? 100 thousand?) in the USA are actively chomping at the bit to start another US civil war… or some bloody battles anyway. — 0 thru 9

There's a lot of commentary on the idea that much of the insurrectionist and white-supremacy rage is driven by the shrinking demographic of white males as a proportion of the electorate. The nation is becoming visibly more diverse ethnographically, culturally and socially and there are those who see this as a mortal threat to their identity and way of life. That's one of the drivers of the Republican efforts at vote suppression and electoral gerrymandering as a desparate way to hang on to the seats of power. Plus there's that streak of anti-authority violence in that milieu, and of course diehard commitment to the right to carry assault weapons - ironic considering they are the nearest to authoritarian on the political spectrum. The only silver lining is that the MAGA movement seems to have thoroughly alienated the FBI and the Military, all of whom view Trump with contempt.

The Trump anomaly is a symptom, not the disease or the cause. — Vera Mont

I agree that the rot in the Republican establishment allowed this demagogue to take over, but he's more than a symptom. He's now a driver of a great deal of it, having been elected President it allowed the rot to set in at the highest levels, which might never have happened without a central figure who was able to capitalise on the politics of grievance so successfully (if accidentally - there remain many credible accounts that Trump never seriously set out to win the White House but had treated his bid as a publicity stunt until he won. You can see the surprise on his face in that first fateful post-election CNN broadcast, where he kept repeating 'I won' with this kind of child-like wonder. The irony being in 2016 he never thought he would win, and did, and in 2020, he never thought he would loose, and did. One of the many, many things that DJT has been wrong about.)

Whether he wants a war - class, civil or foreign - is immaterial. It's going to happen, because that's the inevitable devolution of events from 1963 to the present. — Vera Mont

The rise of progressive liberalism? I think it would take more than a contrived ‘culture war’ to instigate an actual civil war.

The funny thing economically is that Bidenomics has been more successful in reviving the industrial sector than Trump was, so in a practical (rather than cultural) sense a large portion of Trump’s base should be supporting Biden.

The rise of progressive liberalism? — praxis

I don't know what that means. I can look up the definition of each word, but that doesn't help to decipher the sentence.

I think it would take more than a contrived ‘culture war’ to instigate an actual civil war. — praxis

Would all those guns and death-threats bring it any closer? How about the assassination of judges and senators? Tearing up the constitution? Dismantling the federal government? A better organized attack on the Capitol?

The funny thing economically is that Bidenomics has been more successful in reviving the industrial sector than Trump was, so in a practical (rather than cultural) sense a large portion of Trump’s base should be supporting Biden. — praxis

The rank-and-file are not interested in economics. Are not informed about economics. They're it it for the slogan. The overweight undereducated white men are terrified of losing their ascendancy; many white people are afraid of becoming submerged in a population of darker hues; many urban people are afraid of replacement by automated modern industry; many rural people are afraid of becoming outmoded, irrelevant. Any far-right figurehead who assures them that they are important, valued, worthy of ruling the world the way they imagine they used to, will be followed. Trump had a particularly strong effect on them because of the frequent noisy rallies, his vulgar familiarity and his howling, spitting anger he expressed toward all the icons he himself had embodied: rich east coast frat boys. All he had to do is promise to bring back industry and mining and American superiority - he didn't need to do anything about it.

I don't know what that means. — Vera Mont

I asked my personal assistant to help explain…

Progressive liberalism and conservative liberalism are two different ideological perspectives within the broader spectrum of liberal political thought. While they share some common principles, they also have distinct differences. Here's a comparison and contrast of the two:

Progressive Liberalism:

• Role of Government: Progressive liberals generally believe in a more active and interventionist role for the government in addressing social and economic issues. They support government programs and regulations aimed at reducing income inequality, ensuring access to healthcare and education, and protecting the environment.
• Social Issues: Progressives tend to be more open to social change and social justice. They often advocate for civil rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and women's rights, and they are generally more accepting of multiculturalism and diversity.
• Economic Policy: Progressive liberals favor policies that address wealth inequality, such as progressive taxation, a higher minimum wage, and stronger labor protections. They may also support government ownership or control of certain industries, especially in healthcare and education.
• Environmental Policy: Progressive liberals tend to be strong advocates for environmental protection and may support regulations to combat climate change, promote renewable energy, and protect natural resources.
• Foreign Policy: Their foreign policy views can vary, but many progressives lean towards diplomacy, international cooperation, and humanitarian interventions rather than military force.

Conservative Liberalism:

• Role of Government: Conservative liberals, often referred to as classical liberals, believe in limited government intervention in the economy and individual freedoms. They generally advocate for a smaller government with a focus on protecting individual rights and liberties.
• Social Issues: Conservatives tend to be more cautious about social change and may be resistant to significant shifts in cultural norms or values. They often uphold traditional family values and may oppose policies like same-sex marriage or drug legalization.
• Economic Policy: Conservative liberals support free-market capitalism, deregulation, and lower taxes. They argue that a laissez-faire approach to the economy leads to greater prosperity and innovation.
• Environmental Policy: While conservative liberals may recognize the importance of environmental conservation, they are often skeptical of government regulations and prefer market-based solutions to environmental problems.
• Foreign Policy: Conservative liberals often advocate for a more restrained foreign policy, favoring non-interventionism and a focus on national sovereignty. They may be skeptical of international organizations and military interventions.

In summary, progressive liberalism tends to favor a more active government role in addressing social and economic issues, while conservative liberalism emphasizes limited government intervention, individual liberties, and free-market principles. These differences in ideology can lead to significant policy variations on issues such as healthcare, taxation, environmental protection, and social justice. It's important to note that within each of these broad categories, there is room for variation, and individuals may hold nuanced positions on different issues.

The rank-and-file are not interested in economics. Are not informed about economics. They're it it for the slogan. — Vera Mont

I guess what I’m thinking is that substantial economic pain can lead to civil war but a mere slogan only gets a guy wearing a pair of horns to force his way into the chambers of congress for a few hours.

Any far-right figurehead who assures them that they are important, valued, worthy of ruling the world the way they imagine they used to, will be followed. — Vera Mont

I read DeSantis’s book and in it he seems to paint a picture where pretty much everyone left of center is the elite, if only in attitude. Nonsensical populism that I doubt anyone actually buys.

Remember: over seventy million dittoheads & "deplorables" voted for Criminal Defendant-1 (aka "Putin's Bitch" "Agent Orange" "Grifter-in-Chief" "The Biggest Loser" etc) in 2020. IMO, "political Ideology" on both sides had little to nothing to do with that election. :mask:

The overweight undereducated white men are terrified of losing their ascendancy; many white people are afraid of becoming submerged in a population of darker hues; many urban people are afraid of replacement by automated modern industry; many rural people are afraid of becoming outmoded, irrelevant. Any far-right figurehead who assures them that they are important, valued, worthy of ruling the world the way they imagine they used to, will be followed. — Vera Mont

No doubt, they'd rather burn down the American Republic than share it with the descendants of those whom their ancestors had once murderously stole it from and savagely enslaved in order to build it. A reckoning – it's only a matter of time. I vividly recall driving past a billboard on a rural Tennessee stretch of US Interstate in the summer of 2016 that read: "Make America White Again". Chilling, not surprising. And the trend lines since, according to (e.g.) the FBI's hate crimes / domestic terrorism statistics and exploding gun-ammunition sales, have not been encouraging ...

(found it)

In his defense Tyler wrote (in part):

For those who are posturing in a high and mighty stance of ostensible moral superiority, I would caution you against falling into the trap of modernism and the liberal watering down of truth. Your fathers, grandfathers and great grandfathers would have been entirely sympathetic and supportive of the preservation of a white super majority in America. They would have been utterly hostile to the concept of the mass nonwhite immigration that has ensued over the past half century. They would have never acquiesced to the schemes of forced racial integration foisted upon the states by a usurpatious federal government. By capitulating on these and other related issues, you are dishonoring your fathers and mothers of old in a flagrant and treacherous violation of the 4th Commandment.In the fulness of time, God will surely hold you accountable for this violation of his sacred law. As Isaiah 5:20 states, “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”

Wow, what a nutjob.

God don’t take kindly to the gays neither…

In summary, progressive liberalism tends to favor a more active government role in addressing social and economic issues, — praxis

Yes, that's what I used to think liberalism was. It did rise for a little while, c. 1960-1980. But what's that got to do with the conservatives' downhill slide from Gerald Ford to Donald Trump?

Conservatives tend to be more cautious about social change and may be resistant to significant shifts in cultural norms or values. They often uphold traditional family values and may oppose policies like same-sex marriage or drug legalization. — praxis

Yes, that's what it means - in principle, anyway. But conservative liberals is an oxymoron.

Conservative liberals often advocate for a more restrained foreign policy, favoring non-interventionism and a focus on national sovereignty. They may be skeptical of international organizations and military interventions. — praxis

Like the Bushes?

I guess what I’m thinking is that substantial economic pain can lead to civil war but a mere slogan only gets a guy wearing a pair of horns to force his way into the chambers of congress for a few hours. — praxis

There was no substantial economic pain before the last civil war, just fear. Lots of economic pain afterward, though - the Confederacy dug itself into a huge financial hole.
And there was more going on that day than the one guy wearing horns in that incident.
The death threats against judges and senators don't seem to have thinned out, either.

Nonsensical populism that I doubt anyone actually buys. — praxis

If nobody buys it, how does it qualify as populism? Plus, he got a lot of pretty grotesque legislation passed.

Yes, that's what I used to think liberalism was. It did rise for a little while, c. 1960-1980. But what's that got to do with the conservatives' downhill slide from Gerald Ford to Donald Trump? — Vera Mont

We started with me asking about "the inevitable devolution of events from 1963 to the present". I'm still curious about that.

conservative liberals is an oxymoron — Vera Mont

From Wikipedia:

Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, right to private property and equality before the law. Liberals espouse various views depending on their understanding of these principles but generally support private property, market economies, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion, constitutional government and privacy rights. Liberalism is frequently cited as the dominant ideology of modern history.

Liberalism became a distinct movement in the Age of Enlightenment, gaining popularity among Western philosophers and economists. Liberalism sought to replace the norms of hereditary privilege, state religion, absolute monarchy, the divine right of kings and traditional conservatism with representative democracy, rule of law, and equality under the law.

individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion, constitutional government and privacy rights. — praxis

Therefore, no relation to the GOP since Nixon.

We started with me asking about "the inevitable devolution of events from 1963 to the present". I'm still curious about that. — praxis

The rise of progressive liberalism? — praxis

That's what confused me. Now I see. The response of the conservatives to Johnson's reforms prompted the intentional divisiveness of the Nixon campaign, and then Carter's progressivism prompted the Reagan/Bush backlash, and Clinton caused Bush II and the progressive shock of Obama opened the sluice to the Trump disaster....
Yes, I see that. But I really can't envision what calamity can possibly trump that, short of civil war... unless, of course, the global edifice of ego-cards blows away before it can get started.

IMO, the (macro) ideological spectrum in the US from "1960" to "1990" ...

• Progressive/Reform liberalism (center-left/right)

• Laissez-faire liberalism (conservatives)

• Illiberalism (reactionaries)

Since "1990" ...

• Progressive liberalism (center-left)

Since "2010" ...

• Laissez-faire liberalism (conservatives)

Ergo: today (Weimar-like), center-right knife fighters are pinned-down in a reactionary gunfight.

This sounds like a good step forwards to me. Is this an example of an EU initiative that considers what is a fairer system for all the entire human race? Is this a small attempt at economic global legislation?

EU funded report:
PARIS, Oct 23 (Reuters) - Governments should open a new front in the international clampdown on tax evasion with a global minimum tax on billionaires, which could raise $250 billion annually, the EU Tax Observatory said on Monday.

If levied, the sum would be equivalent to only 2% of the nearly $13 trillion in wealth owned by the 2,700 billionaires globally, the research group hosted at the Paris School of Economics said.

Currently billionaires' effective personal tax is often far less than what other taxpayers of more modest means pay because they can park wealth in shell companies sheltering them from income tax, the group said in its 2024 Global Tax Evasion Report.

individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion, constitutional government and privacy rights.
— praxis

Therefore, no relation to the GOP since Nixon. — Vera Mont

MAGA morons may publicly bemoan the separation of church and state but that's because they want the influential power of an ultimate authority in their pocket. See the Rick Tyler quote a few posts above. They may also seem to want Trump to be a king rather than a representative. But their libertarian-like obsession with "FREEDOM" glaringly shows their liberalism. Trump couldn't make them want to take the Fauci ouchi, for instance, even though he took credit for its development. And when Pope Francis preached for good stewardship of the world and the climate they turned their backs on him.

And when Pope Francis preached for good stewardship of the world and the climate they turned their backs on him. — praxis

A foreign Catholic in a dress? I should think so! Anyway, there's only one Religion and that's not it.

But their libertarian-like obsession with "FREEDOM" glaringly shows their liberalism. — praxis

Well then, that's another word we can throw away. Pretty soon, we'll have a vocabulary the size of Trump's genius IQ.

Despite all the human faults of Athens, it was the beginning of science and democracy, rule by reason. — Athena

What strikes me is that all of the responses so far except Joshs show contempt for our fellow citizens. Certainly this is not a sign of reason. We're all in this together, for better or worse. As I see it, the main requirement for democracy is a sense of common purpose, not "critical thinking." — T Clark

Much better-informed people than myself have debated why Athens was an intellectual leader. For sure part of that was their notion of gods, but Egypt and other civilizations also had many gods. Athens's break from the rest seems to come with the notion of logos, reason, the controlling force of the universe. That definitely tipped Athens toward science and away from supernatural beings.

I suspect Pythagoras did not discover the theorem he is credited with because it seems more logical to me that that discovery came from China and its use of metal bowls. This also points to another reason for Athens leaping ahead of the rest intellectually, its contact with people from around the world, especially after the Persian war and building the new temple for Athena and a university to attract people from around the world. The Persian war did for Athens what the world wars did for the US regarding economic and technological growth. Athens's navy turning into merchant ships put the growth of Athens on steroids and the intensional use of Athena's temple and a university was genius. However, problems came with these changes as well.

Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle were focused on what made a human good, not the technologies, especially not the technology of making a good speech (rhetoric) which should bring to mind Jefferson and his concern for education for good moral judgment being essential to democracy. Liberal education being literate in the ancient philosophers who gave us the reasoning for democracy. Democracy does not begin with the story of Adam and Eve and our need to be saved from a curse we carry because of what Adam and Eve ate. No, Socrates demonstrated how the right questioning can result in a completely uneducated boy to correctly answering mathematical questions proving humans are capable of reasoning, of discovering logos. No one is born to be a king or a slave as Christians believed. Jews and the Greeks fought a war because Greeks did merit hiring and did not respect the Jewish system of our jobs depending on a person's inherited position in life. I am saying the belief system for democracy is not the same as the one Christianity gives us. Specifically the importance of universal, secular education for good moral judgment.

Bottom line The learned belief system for democracy with liberty is- democracy is rule by reason and all citizens need education for good reasoning.

get this unsettling feeling that many people (10 thousand? 100 thousand?) in the USA are actively chomping at the bit to start another US civil war… or some bloody battles anyway.
They are pumped up with automatic weapons, anger, and enough ‘theory’ to be actual loose cannons… and they are proud of this.

Trump not only uses these people for votes and cash, but I seriously wonder if one of Trump’s multiple personalities actually wants to start a civil war.
Especially now that he probably feels persecuted; I fear he wants a bloodbath.

I dislike DeSantis and his stupid bigotry very much, but he is not the nuclear timebomb and stuff of nightmares that Trump is. I hope neither gets the nomination.
The status quo sucks, but some of the ‘alternatives’ are hell on earth. — 0 thru 9

:grin: Socrates would love your argument. That is the problem with learning the technology of rhetoric instead of being prepared for good moral judgment. That rhetoric can get people into wars they should avoid. Our sense of self-importance has gone crazy. We are as paranoid as Germany, suffering an extreme need to be superior and in control. That comes with education for technology. This is a culture change that came with the change in education.

Bottom line The learned belief system for democracy with liberty is- democracy is rule by reason and all citizens need education for good reasoning. — Athena

:roll:

I totally agree that you can better help others, when you yourself can take the basic means of survival for granted. That's why I fight for food, water, shelter etc as basic human rights, and not something anyone should have to 'work for.' I was merely pointing out that sooooooo many people are willing to, and are in fact compelled to, help make things better for everyone. As long as it is true, that good people will not just stand by and watch horror and terror happen to others, then we do earn the right to continue to exist imo. Many still do nothing, and they do merely watch as evil grows and thrives but, as Gandhi pointed out, we always, eventually, bring such evils down, we destroy them. The nefarious rise again or hide and come out again, and the fight continues. But general progress on behalf of more and more 'have nots' is made. As I said before, most people have more ability to affect the nefarious than they have ever had before. A billionaire can be brought down almost overnight today, as can a government, if the people decide to act en-masse. — universeness

Please, I am stretched so thin right now I want to pick up the argument in favor of minding our own business and not trying to save the rest of the world. Note, I am skipping the pool this morning so I can join you in the effort to save the world. The fellow I take shopping on Saturday is in the hospital again and that leaves me to care for his dog. I had to ignore you all for another day or give up swimming for the day. My point is, that our lives can get very busy and just getting ourselves through the day can seem like a huge feat, so how do things work for us to do more?

At the mandatory meeting yesterday we were given CDs and DVDs regarding our physical and mental health. It is a wonderful gift but who paid for it? I asked the question but did not get a good answer. My point is, how do we organize to meet the many, many needs of people and how does this get paid for? Right now it all is potluck!

Someone where you live may be providing what you need and maybe not. We are also at that time of year when insurance companies are vying to be our medical insurer. I hate this process because if we do not get well informed or have an unexpected medical problem, we could end up with insurance that does not meet our needs. From my position in life, it is horrifying to be aware of the huge difference in what homeless people get, compared to what housed people get. Homeless people do not qualify for so much because services depend on having a home. A crippled person with a home can get a lot of assistance that makes his/her life comfortable, but not an old crippled person without a home. You might qualify for a home nurse when you are released from the hospital, but if you don't have a home, you don't get a home nurse. If you are insulin-dependent and don't have a home, you can not refrigerate the insulin. Like we can't even figure out how to shelter vulnerable people, who should get housing, let alone provide for young healthy people who may become like feral cats if left on the streets too long.

Before I mentioned my concern of people being so dependent they are not motivated to be contributing members of society. I am afraid just providing for everyone will make the problems much worse. Unless a person is mentally or physically disabled, this person needs a way of feeling like a useful and valued member of society, and all of us need things in our lives that schedule our lives even the handicapped can do much better, be happier people, with a job to do. I am speaking from my experience with foster homes and the social/work-related opportunities for them. I love to see their pride when they can report what they did during the day. It makes them one of us.

Oh my love, how do we organize that perfect world? Should we rely on thousands of individual efforts as we do in the US or should government be the organizing force? And if government, how do we avoid this being authoritarian and too controlling and too impersonal? Thanks to HIPAA I don't know where the homeless man I help is. I assume he was moved back to the long-term care facility after being in the hospital again. I need to know by Friday so I can visit him. Everyone I deal with sympathizes with my frustration of him being moved and no one being able to tell me where he was taken, and all these people are intensely afraid of what will happen if they dare violate HIPAA policy. Do you hear me? Our government can create a nightmare with an insane need to control.