BLM F&*#kery

[rainerann]

@justjess
It's heartwarming to read those words (naturalized citizens).I'm all for that! 1000%! Those same folk are also likely hardworking, religious and family oriented individuals.
Yes, other nations are entitled to their pov, of course. Understandable.
I will say though that most unpatriotic bunch I've observed are those with special interests.
I am not concerned about "winning" this thread, lol, for me, its all just sharing thoughts/civil discourse.
I value all ideas even if I don't personally agree.

ETA: If you don't mind me asking how do you feel as an American?

i think what you are saying about the special interests and the subject of assimilation is interesting.

in some respects, there seems to be an invisible voting process that takes place so that we assume that when you go to a different country, you should adopt their culture.

in reality, if I were to move to China, my POV towards culture would be more or less outvoted by the majority of people who were more comfortable and familiar with the existing culture.

In the modern world, we seem to be struggling with the former way a culture would change without requiring a majority, which would have been by force usually through some sort of military endeavor.

there are ethical to converting a culture by force that I think bring up the root of immigration issues today. Can a special interest change culture by force or should there be a more democratic process to creating cultural changes.

I favor the democratic process, which I don’t think is the same thing as saying that culture is better when it is static either. so assimilation is somewhat relative to the state of the existing culture that remains the majority. What do you think?

 

[Artful Revealer]

This is satire, right?

Mayors back reparations that could cost $6.2 quadrillion, or $151M per descendant

The nation’s mayors on Monday backed a national call for reparations to 41 million black people, a program that could cost taxpayers $6.2 quadrillion.

www.washingtonexaminer.com

 

[threepwood]

Hi,

In the modern world, we seem to be struggling with the former way a culture would change without requiring a majority, which would have been by force usually through some sort of military endeavor.

I would argue, that culture cant be forced unto someone. Instead, this force would create a culture, which would be very different from that which was intended. And technically, democratic changes have to be forced. A majority decides, and the minority has to oblige. But thats not how culture works. Its a passive product of the sum of all underlying decisions. If you try to change this culture.. you will just produce something you havent intended.
And usually, immigrants admire the culture of their new homeland. Why else would they immigrate?

The problems that arise by immigrating to another county, are different values. In Germany we have more cases of child marriage and other foreign practices. But since these immigrants didnt immigrate because they like the "german way of life" so much, our jurisdiction faces unprecedented problems. And they demand, that their way of life has to be respected. And this is really difficult, because you want to be a good host. How should such problems be solved?

I very much like the libertarian approach, and would argue that this is what made the US so successful, and recently so distressed.
If you make regulations and laws for every private decision, you will have to meet everyones expectations. But how could you possibly make detailed regulations for every culture on this earth? Its impossible. The only solution would be, to guarantee every community its own legal process. So they can govern themselfes, without disturbing other communities, who hold different values.

Funny enough, this would have been the case, if everyone stayed, where there are born. I can see, that this isnt satisfying.. and denying entry seems inhuman. But you can only have one of these: Either you grant everyone to govern themselfs or you have to stay homogeneous. You cant have it both ways.

Kind regards
Threepwood

 

[Frank Badfinger]

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/hqrj90

 

[rainerann]

Because you said this:
From this I would infer that the solution is that people should not hang on to traditions of the past.

Nowhere did I suggest culture was static. It's not that changing cultures is the problem, it's that the culture is not changing organically and democratically by a people united through language, history and religion. Open borders allow and enforce different, sometimes incompatible cultures to live together in harmony. This is idealism not rooted in reality. People are social beings which means their own identity is composed of common references that can be found in the larger group they belong to. A common culture is a glue that stabilizes a society. Mixing cultures is a means to divide.

You say music and food are cornerstones of culture? I disagree. Religion and the philosophy of life are the cornerstone of culture, of every culture throughout history. Culture is a collective expression of a people that is rooted in a common cultural identity and music is expression of that culture. Cuisine stems more from a people's geographical location, climate, biodiversity and agricultural customs.

And this isn't about an individual of culture A interacting with an individual of culture B exchanging information, goods, or stories. This is about how you let groups live together and maintain social order.

okay I see what you are saying, and that our different perspectives seem to be rooted in how we are defining culture differently.

I don’t think religion is a cornerstone of culture and when it does become a cornerstone, this is when different groups of people have difficulty living together when the idea of religion is forced as a criteria for assimilation. This is what I meant when I said that some cultures may be more resistant because I agree that it is common for people to assume religion is fused with the continuation of a culture.

However, from my experience living with many different cultures, food has a much higher standing than religion in most every case. People are all about their food even when they leave other beliefs or philosophies behind. They do not leave behind their recipes and you can see this in the history of the practice of religion by how food is integrated into religious practices like Passover, fasting, etc.

food is the most basic and important aspect of culture and living together with different groups requires simplicity that is not always found in religions from a historical perspective. Many of these elaborate religious systems are not required for the presence of a culture to still exist even while the practice of the religion changes.

this is also something America has experimented with in the process of being a multinational entity. The history of the church is fluid from an American perspective. Whereas, the history of the Catholic Church and the culture it creates is very static, rigid, and unable to integrate itself with other systems.

still, the Catholic Church also has a large presence in the us alongside a more fluid history of the church without major conflict outside of moments where people may believe that some degree of force can be applied when they are convinced they are right about something.

so I think the reality of this coexistence is relative towards providing the opportunity to see that failure is not a guarantee when we do not draw lines that establish nationalist separations.

What do you think about the application of force in order to change a culture? Is there a time when you think force is a justifiable way of changing a culture?

 

[rainerann]

Hi,

I would argue, that culture cant be forced unto someone. Instead, this force would create a culture, which would be very different from that which was intended. And technically, democratic changes have to be forced. A majority decides, and the minority has to oblige. But thats not how culture works. Its a passive product of the sum of all underlying decisions. If you try to change this culture.. you will just produce something you havent intended.
And usually, immigrants admire the culture of their new homeland. Why else would they immigrate?

The problems that arise by immigrating to another county, are different values. In Germany we have more cases of child marriage and other foreign practices. But since these immigrants didnt immigrate because they like the "german way of life" so much, our jurisdiction faces unprecedented problems. And they demand, that their way of life has to be respected. And this is really difficult, because you want to be a good host. How should such problems be solved?

I very much like the libertarian approach, and would argue that this is what made the US so successful, and recently so distressed.
If you make regulations and laws for every private decision, you will have to meet everyones expectations. But how could you possibly make detailed regulations for every culture on this earth? Its impossible. The only solution would be, to guarantee every community its own legal process. So they can govern themselfes, without disturbing other communities, who hold different values.

Funny enough, this would have been the case, if everyone stayed, where there are born. I can see, that this isnt satisfying.. and denying entry seems inhuman. But you can only have one of these: Either you grant everyone to govern themselfs or you have to stay homogeneous. You cant have it both ways.

Kind regards
Threepwood

very interesting. I would agree and I am thinking that finding ways to change culture that don’t include force, is a challenge to the modern world.

maybe with so much information, it is possible to see a sort of social physics where we could say that an action creates harm regardless of how long it has existed within a culture. Then a certain degree of force is justified to change it.

The problem is that it is hard to let go of many of the idols that people have. Maybe the idol of culture itself where we continue to think that retaining something causing harm is important for the prospect of retaining a cultural identity.

Creating a more literal approach towards cultural practices might help people get along better too. It is interesting that if you study the history of mathematicians, many of them were never involved in politics or religion. Mathematics is very literal and I think culture should progress to being something equally literal.

 

[Maes17]

very interesting. I would agree and I am thinking that finding ways to change culture that don’t include force, is a challenge to the modern world.

maybe with so much information, it is possible to see a sort of social physics where we could say that an action creates harm regardless of how long it has existed within a culture. Then a certain degree of force is justified to change it.

The problem is that it is hard to let go of many of the idols that people have. Maybe the idol of culture itself where we continue to think that retaining something causing harm is important for the prospect of retaining a cultural identity.

Creating a more literal approach towards cultural practices might help people get along better too. It is interesting that if you study the history of mathematicians, many of them were never involved in politics or religion. Mathematics is very literal and I think culture should progress to being something equally literal.

There’s a lot to ask to change.
People are either hateful or they know how to get along.

My thing is, especially today is people feel the need to be right. You disagree with them then all of a sudden you’re there enemy. Idk. I’ve always taken criticism and differences as a learning experience more than an insult. Idk

 

[Toulouse]

I thought this might be a good place to show videos of black people speaking out about the perverse nature of BLM.

My heart is truly aching for these innocent people who are being taken advantage of on such a wide scale in the name of BLM. I just happened to come across these and wanted to share.

https://t.co/pltUCpPsqB

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1268062728054177793

I had to share this because to me, he is spot on! You should be able to view if you have fb. Copy url

Facebook - log in or sign up

Create an account or log into Facebook. Connect with friends, family and other people you know. Share photos and videos, send messages and get updates.

m.facebook.com

I am a white male. I was raised and educated (conditioned) in the "Liberal" northeast. I became a teacher and took my first teaching job in the Deep South. My high school graduating class in the late 70s had 500+ students and I think there were five blacks, all of whom I knew fairly well. My exposure to blacks, then, was limited. I was raised to treat everyone equally. Upon taking my first teaching job in the deep south I couldn't get over how many black people there were in the town where I lived - it didn't bother me, but it was certainly different. I soon became very comfortable around blacks and, due to conditioning (brainwashing?) in the north, I thought that all white people were in the Klan. I was also condition by the system - television, radio, college culture, etc., - to say "African American" when referring to blacks. I never liked using it, but out of respect I did - it just doesn't roll of the tongue easily.
My department chair was a black woman and one day I explained what I just wrote above. Not wanting to offend anyone - conditioning - I asked her what term should I use "African American" or "black people" in my class and in general. She simply, and very kindly, said "we're black, call us 'black.'" Good enough for me. Several years later I was visiting one of the larger cities in the South and happened upon a Native American Convention. After walking around I approached an older gentlemen who was part of the convention and had some sort of display. I asked him the same the question: "Do you guys prefer to be called "Native American" or "Indians"? He said in almost the exact same words as my former Chair, "We're Indians, call us 'Indians.'" Again, good enough for me. Did these two people speak for all people of their culture? Not necessarily. However...
My wife (a white woman) and I have chosen to live in one of the poorer parts of our city as part of a Christian group. When we go out to the store or to a restaurant we see mostly...black people. Most of the people working the stores and restaurants are...black people. People are people, folks. In my observations, almost to the person, the blacks we meet, just like we have for 20-years, are just as friendly as before. In fact, I can almost sense an air of more friendliness (no guile or phoniness) on their part - a sense of embarrassment that so much attention has been drawn to them. It's not talked about, but it's as if we all are saying to one another - without saying it - we're cool with each other, we know there are problems, but to heck with this Antifa/BLM garbage. People, for the most part, know when they're being hoodwinked. Most blacks, I suspect, know they are being used to push an agenda - just like the Radical Republicans did after the Civil War. I'm sure that many blacks, just like many whites, don't realize who is using them and for what purposes.
One more anecdote: I used to teach my kids (the school was 60/40 black) that the real problems in this country were not black v. white, etc., rather the problem is rich v. poor. I went on to say that I would never be the president of EXXON or Citibank, even if I wanted to be, because I'm not from the right families. Several years ago I was invited as the guest of honor for the reunion of one of the classes. One former black-male student told me that he remembered that I had said what I just shared and had kept it with him all those years. For what it's worth, folks...

 

[Frank Badfinger]

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/hq4uc8

 

[threepwood]

very interesting. I would agree and I am thinking that finding ways to change culture that don’t include force, is a challenge to the modern world.

Yeah.. I dont know. I mean, the necessity for "managing" culture like that, doesnt come from nowhere. Of course, migration caused by war may be one thing. Europes migrations crisis deals with two kinds of migrants. There are migrants who flee from war. This type of migrants rarely are bound to stay, and it would surprise me, if such migrants made any demands. Or would want to stay forever.
Migrants from farther away than Syria (which already is pretty far away) have usually been migrating through Africa for some time. The UN is directing them from one outpost to another and separates children and woman (and sends them back!). Thats most likely the type of migrant, who makes demands and will barely assimilate.
I have no words for the hypocrisy of the UN and EU especially in this regard. They were watching every conflict in the middle east, didnt speak up regarding Syria oder Lybia (the fall of these nations caused the whole migration-crisis; Syria gave them moral indulgence and Lybia cleared the route - and the last (North)African figure, who worked for change) and are now literally happy(sic!) about the rejuvenation which comes with these migrants. Chancelor Merkel got the "Coudenhoven-Kalergi"-Price, who was a "Pioneer of European Integration".. His plan gives you the chills, and you would expect more to come.

Wikipedia mentions Oswald Spengler in his article, who wrote "Decline Of The West", which basically tells us, that every culture is doomed to end. But he studied history and pointed out distinct phases of every cultural development. When I remember correctly, he found that the end begins, when a civilization starts to questions its own cultural achievements. (The book was a pain in the ass and I barely read it). But Henry Kissinger mentioned something similar. He said, for a world power it is necessary, to be (culturally) attractive to its satellites (i.e. conquered regions or with high influence).
Am I imagining this, or do you also feel like the west has lost its (cultural) persuasiveness? I really dont know how to feel about this.

The problem is that it is hard to let go of many of the idols that people have. Maybe the idol of culture itself where we continue to think that retaining something causing harm is important for the prospect of retaining a cultural identity.

Clearly. But why exactly would you want someone to "let go"? If we want to be free citizens, we would want everyone to choose his own idols (and ideals). No one said, we would have to agree to anything, our neighbor feels like. Isnt that the idea of individualism? The question is (like always), who gets to make the decision? If we would ask the majority of all the people on the planet.. we might very well end up in a communist dystopia.

Creating a more literal approach towards cultural practices might help people get along better too. It is interesting that if you study the history of mathematicians, many of them were never involved in politics or religion. Mathematics is very literal and I think culture should progress to being something equally literal.

Thats sounds to me like a platonian approach. Didnt he suggest the rule of the wisest? Sounds good so far.. but i think that will escalate pretty quickly. At least Platos ideas wasnt really "nice".

Best regards,
Threepwood

 

[lightseeker]

BLACK LIVES MATTER
National Museum of African American History & Culture Says Hard Work, Nuclear Family & Christianity are Negative Aspects of “Whiteness”

Objective thinking, being polite, sticking to time schedules, property rights all listed as forms of ‘oppression

National Museum of African American History & Culture Says Hard Work, Nuclear Family & Christianity are Negative Aspects of “Whiteness”

Objective thinking, being polite, sticking to time schedules, property rights all listed as forms of 'oppression'.

summit.news

 

[Lisa]

Hi,

I would argue, that culture cant be forced unto someone. Instead, this force would create a culture, which would be very different from that which was intended. And technically, democratic changes have to be forced. A majority decides, and the minority has to oblige. But thats not how culture works. Its a passive product of the sum of all underlying decisions. If you try to change this culture.. you will just produce something you havent intended.
And usually, immigrants admire the culture of their new homeland. Why else would they immigrate?

The problems that arise by immigrating to another county, are different values. In Germany we have more cases of child marriage and other foreign practices. But since these immigrants didnt immigrate because they like the "german way of life" so much, our jurisdiction faces unprecedented problems. And they demand, that their way of life has to be respected. And this is really difficult, because you want to be a good host. How should such problems be solved?

I very much like the libertarian approach, and would argue that this is what made the US so successful, and recently so distressed.
If you make regulations and laws for every private decision, you will have to meet everyones expectations. But how could you possibly make detailed regulations for every culture on this earth? Its impossible. The only solution would be, to guarantee every community its own legal process. So they can govern themselfes, without disturbing other communities, who hold different values.

Funny enough, this would have been the case, if everyone stayed, where there are born. I can see, that this isnt satisfying.. and denying entry seems inhuman. But you can only have one of these: Either you grant everyone to govern themselfs or you have to stay homogeneous. You cant have it both ways.

Kind regards
Threepwood

Dear threepwood, I enjoy your reading you posts starting with hi and ending with kind regards.

I think you’ve made some good points, however in answer to the question what would a good host do when people come to a country not to belong to that country..I think the answer would be to ship then back to where they came from and practice their own ways back in the land they came from. Work on their own lands to be a place they want to stay rather than leave.

Edit: maybe even help them with that..but you’d probably see that they don’t want your help with that but to help themselves to what you have.

 

[threepwood]

Hi Lisa,

you are right.. I, too, think that this would have been the best thing to do. But Europe already changed. And the majority still seems fine with it. And ff we want this to turn out alright.. there are not many options.

If you read about Coudenhove-Kalergi, you will find, that they really are trying to create the "Übermensch", a mixed-race, non-traditional character, who is no more bound to any family units, but to society itself.
Thats the reason, why germany wants to change its constitution, to allow discrimination against white people. They are still pushing for equal quoats for woman in parlaments (i guess, because they are more agreeable). It doesnt seem like there are any reasonable characters left in the governments.

You already witness a polarization in the US (and in Europe too). But if we dont pay attention, this will end up in radicalization. And that will usher in the endgame even more quickly.

If this isn't the endtimes, our best chance is a libertarian way.

Kind regards,
Threepwood

 

[Lisa]

Hi Lisa,

you are right.. I, too, think that this would have been the best thing to do. But Europe already changed. And the majority still seems fine with it. And ff we want this to turn out alright.. there are not many options.

If you read about Coudenhove-Kalergi, you will find, that they really are trying to create the "Übermensch", a mixed-race, non-traditional character, who is no more bound to any family units, but to society itself.
Thats the reason, why germany wants to change its constitution, to allow discrimination against white people. They are still pushing for equal quoats for woman in parlaments (i guess, because they are more agreeable). It doesnt seem like there are any reasonable characters left in the governments.

You already witness a polarization in the US (and in Europe too). But if we dont pay attention, this will end up in radicalization. And that will usher in the endgame even more quickly.

If this isn't the endtimes, our best chance is a libertarian way.

Kind regards,
Threepwood

Guten Tag Threepwood! That and a few phrases like Wie geht’s es ihnen..actually that might be the only one I remember from a couple of years of German class and counting to 100. I had a nice German teacher and I could actually understand German better than French.

It really is a sad state of affairs with government officials seeming to have gone over the deep end into insanity and almost daring people to tell them they’re crazy....not that they’d listen anyway.

Do you know about the end times then?

 

[irrationalNinja]

im doing nothing of the sort. You are making gross partisan accusations. Are you even in the us?

Why do you ask? Will my statement have more meaning, or will it legitimize my statement if I, as an anonymous forum user, share a personal anecdote about living as a US citizen, describing my experience as if it should be taken as fact? (as if I should expect other forum members to take my anecdotes as sacrosanct because I give a personal story and claim to be somewhere in the US...)

Changing definitions is exactly what America has done many times. Where did the constitution come from to begin with?

People combining established definitions of words into a written document in order to make it very clear what human rights are protected. Not from changing the definitions of words.

What do you think?

Similar to the SJWs in this forum, cults will change the meanings of words and make up definitions for words, in order to sound legitimate and avoid criticism. I think an examination of the words “culture” and “cult” would reveal that social justice is an inorganic (manufactured) phenomenon with overtones of a religious cult, rather than an organic cultural phenomenon arising from shared values connecting humans to each other.

 

[The Zone]

Hmmmm.... social justice warriors are indeed very cult-like with their behavior. They seem to be victims of indoctrination where they see a reality that is not at all accurate. When you think 2 + 2 = 5 or that you can change reality to fit your desires there is a serious loss of objectivity.

 

[Artful Revealer]

okay I see what you are saying, and that our different perspectives seem to be rooted in how we are defining culture differently.

I don’t think religion is a cornerstone of culture and when it does become a cornerstone, this is when different groups of people have difficulty living together when the idea of religion is forced as a criteria for assimilation. This is what I meant when I said that some cultures may be more resistant because I agree that it is common for people to assume religion is fused with the continuation of a culture.

However, from my experience living with many different cultures, food has a much higher standing than religion in most every case. People are all about their food even when they leave other beliefs or philosophies behind. They do not leave behind their recipes and you can see this in the history of the practice of religion by how food is integrated into religious practices like Passover, fasting, etc.

food is the most basic and important aspect of culture and living together with different groups requires simplicity that is not always found in religions from a historical perspective. Many of these elaborate religious systems are not required for the presence of a culture to still exist even while the practice of the religion changes.

this is also something America has experimented with in the process of being a multinational entity. The history of the church is fluid from an American perspective. Whereas, the history of the Catholic Church and the culture it creates is very static, rigid, and unable to integrate itself with other systems.

still, the Catholic Church also has a large presence in the us alongside a more fluid history of the church without major conflict outside of moments where people may believe that some degree of force can be applied when they are convinced they are right about something.

so I think the reality of this coexistence is relative towards providing the opportunity to see that failure is not a guarantee when we do not draw lines that establish nationalist separations.

What do you think about the application of force in order to change a culture? Is there a time when you think force is a justifiable way of changing a culture?

Regarding food and culture, I think we can divide culture into two main categories, material and immaterial. The latter would relate to how we order society, what is expected of us in our respective social roles as a citizen, a husband or wife, a father or mother, a neighbour, and so on, how we collectively interpret morality, what is good, what is evil, what our norms are, how we behave in the public sphere, how we congregate, how we pray. Alot of these things, if not all, is largely influenced by the religion or philosophy of life society associates with.

Material culture would then refer to food, music, arts, movies, industry, everything that is tangible or perceived by the senses. But even here religion / philosophy of life plays a role at least to some extent because often music has a strong religious influence, food too (consider fasting like you said, bread and wine in Europe, even more primitive traditions where people eat the hearts of animals it gives them strength, vegetarianism, veganism, etc).

That said, I wouldn't suggest force to change a culture, but I wouldn't oppose force to defend a culture.

 

[Artful Revealer]

Similar to the SJWs in this forum, cults will change the meanings of words and make up definitions for words, in order to sound legitimate and avoid criticism.

And since language is what defines us and how we define things, changing the language or disjoining words from their true meanings, is the ultimate means by which to control reality or truth, and thus society.

It's also a means to validate chaos, since the disjoining of the word from its concept disrupts the order on which our definitions, and thus our understanding or reality, are built.

 

[threepwood]

Guten Tag Threepwood! That and a few phrases like Wie geht’s es ihnen..actually that might be the only one I remember from a couple of years of German class and counting to 100. I had a nice German teacher and I could actually understand German better than French.

It really is a sad state of affairs with government officials seeming to have gone over the deep end into insanity and almost daring people to tell them they’re crazy....not that they’d listen anyway.

Do you know about the end times then?

Guten Abend, Lisa!

Yeah.. it really is frustrating. And I also tend to call this crazy.. But, thats just an excuse for something we dont understand, i believe. Did they just discover their love for the victims of their past mistakes? Do they really believe, they have been racist for the past decades? How comes, not a single media-outlet calls out this screaming hypocrisy?
There is no other explanation than them believing in something, we dont know of. Thats how I found these pages.

And yes, I do know about the end of times, as the bible predicted them. But its hard to tell, if this applies to these days. And I dont know, which would be worse.

Kind regards,
Threepwood

 

[Lisa]

Guten Abend, Lisa!

Yeah.. it really is frustrating. And I also tend to call this crazy.. But, thats just an excuse for something we dont understand, i believe. Did they just discover their love for the victims of their past mistakes? Do they really believe, they have been racist for the past decades? How comes, not a single media-outlet calls out this screaming hypocrisy?
There is no other explanation than them believing in something, we dont know of. Thats how I found these pages.

And yes, I do know about the end of times, as the bible predicted them. But its hard to tell, if this applies to these days. And I dont know, which would be worse.

Kind regards,
Threepwood

Guten Morgen! What’s good evening..as I think Guten Abend is good afternoon? Haha..maybe you could teach me some German? Wie geht’s Threepwood?

I think its actually crazy, crazy. Its lawlessness and its wrong. And its wrong to have a media excusing wrong and promoting wrong..instead of promoting right..however I do understand who the ruler of this world is..and he would like nothing more than to have an evil world to rule.

I keep trying to think if this is the last days..which I do think we are closer to the last days..but I don’t believe that this is the last days per se. I think the last days would have to include the Jewish temple being built and the Jews sacrificing on it. I think these are the days prior..the days that have to happen before..like wars and rumors of wars..lawlessness increasing because the love of many growing cold. And we can see the love of many growing cold with murders seeming to be out of control especially when 40 million unborn babies are killed annually worldwide!

I used to think the seals were opened..now I’m not quite sure. What do you think about that?