Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

An alternate home for the community from the legacy Fourth Turning Forum
Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Cool Breeze wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 9:15 pm
Regardless of whether the manlet is a troll, effectively look at what has happened: The response is a back and forth that is identical to what a troll does on forum threads, so FullMoon is correct at least in part.

Higgie's post of John's questions to the man prove easily that he is incapable of logic, insight, or defense. I pointed all of this out and then distraction happens, claims that you don't answer anything with real answers or good faith, etc. It's maddening because of course like all lefties these days, they claim the exact opposite of the truth, or tell you the truth of their shenanigans to your face and act like it's not sinister: this is known as gas lighting.

Don't feed him/her/it. Let's move on and leave it under the bridge for good.

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

Guest wrote:
Thu Dec 01, 2022 2:11 am
Tom Mazanec wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:42 am
spottybrowncow wrote:
Tue Nov 29, 2022 7:28 pm
I asked John if this site incorporated functionality to hide certain user's posts, but he said to his knowledge it did not, and to just ignore them, if possible. There are so many intelligent, carefully-reasoned, soul-searching, learned posts from people all over the world on this site to potentially learn from, but the voluminous garbage from one source raises the noise floor here to levels that are ..... unfortunate. Really a shame.
My bugaboo is aeden.
Thanks for telling me about foes. He is my first.
While I disagree with BB about Right To Life, he is not a troll. I am considered a troll by many on the Artic Sea Ice Forum because of my pro-life views, for example.
I like Aeden--even if he leaves many of his insights so heavily veiled that I am unable to understand him.

Clarkmod
Posts: 184
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2021 10:15 am

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Clarkmod »

John wrote:
Thu Aug 04, 2022 4:55 pm
Great moderating job, Clark mod!
Bob Butler wrote:
Tue Aug 09, 2022 1:06 am
What passes for “great moderating” is that no one can disagree with conservative opinion without censorship, but anyone can disagree with progressive opinion on the token progressive area. That labels this as a propaganda site.
Back in August, you complained about me moving some of your posts from the Generational Dynamics News thread to this thread. All of the original content of those posts was preserved. Quoted above, you made the claim that progressives are treated differently than conservatives on this forum.

That is patently false.

First, one of the conservative posters who you asked not to respond to you yesterday (I won't say which), had at least 2 posts deleted by me around that time.

Second, some of this same person's posts were moved to another thread.

Third, this same poster was banned for several weeks.

Meanwhile, at the same time this was occurring, only a few posts were moved to your own thread that you created and you complained about it. Despite having posts deleted and being banned for some time, the conservative poster never complained.

Higgenbotham
Posts: 7425
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 11:28 pm

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Higgenbotham »

Higgenbotham wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 4:05 pm
I agree. In fact, most everyone's recent posts (large numbers and small) have been in response to Bob's attempt to dominate this thread.

It might be noted that the most frequently used word in my last few posts has been "attempt". Since we have been parsing words like "sentient", "attempt" is parsed by Webster's as:

ATTEMPT, TRY, ENDEAVOR, ESSAY, STRIVE mean to make an effort to accomplish an end.

ATTEMPT stresses the initiation or beginning of an effort.
Higgenbotham wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 12:12 pm
From my perspective, Bob has deliberately calibrated the volume to keep it a little bit lower than the threshold I called him on several months ago, posted below. It's my belief that this is an attempt to keep his posts in this thread because he is aware that his Polyticks thread doesn't get read very much.
Higgenbotham wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 12:12 pm
It's also my belief that Bob felt himself very clever in his ridiculous discussion of "sentience" and trying to use that to justify moving the line on abortion from one year after birth to minus 3 months in an attempt to fool people into thinking that he was being "conservative" and "reasonable".
Bob Butler wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:37 pm
On the main stream media in general and MSNBC in particular, they have been making a big deal of recent seditious conspiracy cases. One major issue is how hard it is to prove such a case, to prove a motive, to convey to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt what the defendants were attempting to do.

People say what they think I am attempting, but am I? Could my alleged motive be proven?

...

Yah. 'Attempt' almost fits. Guilty as charged? Even if a dedicated conservative will try to wiggle around it? Even if you half expect the wiggle to succeed, at least in the other’s mind and heart?
Besides your usual attempts to create perceptions, most of them false I would add, you have tried to create a perception that your attempt to hijack John's thread and fool people on abortion needs to be proven, but it doesn't. All that's necessary is that people believe based on the preponderance of evidence that that's what you were attempting to do. Most people know enough not to put themselves in positions of creating perceptions that would be best to avoid.
While the periphery breaks down rather slowly at first, the capital cities of the hegemon should collapse suddenly and violently.

Higgenbotham
Posts: 7425
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 11:28 pm

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by Higgenbotham »

John wrote:
Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:19 pm
** 18-Jan-2021 World View: Why are you here?

...

Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?
Why are you here?

Bob Butler,

If you are looking for a news agglomeration site to hang out at that would suit your fancy and give you the daily and even hourly shot of rabid anti-conservative bias that you so crave, I would highly recommend schwartzreport.net

Just today, Stephan posted the following hate-filled political diatribe and delusional nonsense as the lead-in for his news articles:
Stephan: The American obsessive gun psychosis plus the frenzied, hysterical racism and hate in the White MAGAt community has made the U.S. an unsafe nation. And, as a society, we are not dealing with this properly. Here is a brief article that lays out some of the issues. It will be interesting to see whether once the Republicans take the majority in the House they do anything about this. My prediction is they will not, since the cohort that make America a dangerous country in which to live also constitutes the base of the Republican Party.
Stephan: We saw some excellent good news with the passage of the Respect for Marriage Act. For the first time in American history, driven by the change in the culture this article describes, we are making wellbeing and love the principal definer of marriage. We have crossed a threshold. That said, I find it very interesting that 36 Republican members of the Senate voted against the act. They did that because that is what their base of voters wanted. And their vote memorializes that their position is as a minority.
Stephan is a brilliant man and I think the defining issues he emphasizes such as putting well-being ahead of profit are extremely important, but his rabid political biases are irrelevant in the big picture and diminish him considerably.

He even allows comments on his articles! Few comment! I'm sure Stephan would appreciate your long-winded leftist biased comments and you and Stephan could bask in the glory of the mirages you can both create and reflect back and forth to each other in his far left echo chamber.

https://www.schwartzreport.net/
While the periphery breaks down rather slowly at first, the capital cities of the hegemon should collapse suddenly and violently.

John
Posts: 11475
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

Post by John »

thursday, December 1, 2022

I would actually like to thank Bob Butler for the contributions that he has made to this forum.

first off, I have to mention how happy I am that he no longer insults all the other members of this form. he used to accuse them all of tribal thinking and such. I wouldn't be surprised if he's still believes all that stuff but I'm very grateful to him for no longer saying it.

when Bob is at his best, his posts are excellent analyses of issues, often supported by history. people who say they never read this posts should do what I do -skim through them and see what there is of interest.

Bob also post things that can only be described as highly biased and totally loony. these posts are also valuable, because they give us a window into the Democratic party. the Democrats extensively believe that there are 85 genders, and that the southern border is secure. such beliefs are totally loony. even worse, the boyden administration has been a disaster for the country. the administration is responsible for hundreds of young blacks being massacred in cities every week, and the administration is responsible for hundreds of people being poisoned by fentanyl. Bob occasionally attempts to justify these disasters, and his attempts to do so make us better understand what the Democrats are doing.

everyone who contributes to this forum has a unique set of beliefs and a unique worldview, and we've all learned a great deal from each other including from Bob.

User avatar
Tom Mazanec
Posts: 4180
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:13 pm

Re: The 2100 crisis?

Post by Tom Mazanec »

Bob Butler wrote:
Wed Nov 30, 2022 11:46 am
Tom Mazanec wrote:
Tue Nov 29, 2022 2:03 pm
BB, what issues do you think will define the Crisis of 2100?
I think a combination of environmental problems - global warming, pollution, resource management and population - will rise to a head. What do we intend the Earth to be like steady state? By that time you will have to be absurdly willfully blind to ignore the threat of rising sea levels, hurricanes, fires, shifting crop areas and the rest. We have taken significant action this time around, but I expect this will be the central focus. Some tipping points will have been reached. We will take it seriously too late.

Autocracy, conquest, prejudice and imbalance of wealth are perpetual. While all should take a big hit this time, I find it hard to believe we will achieve any sort of ultimate victory over all of them. Sure, Russia’s war and China’s economic woes will end badly for the current autocracies. It is not clear exactly what shape such countries will be left in. People are so tied up in the aftermath of January 6 that one forgets a lot of the bad actors were originally concerned with prejudice and were motivated to keep a bigot in charge. Yes, I expect ’never again’ corrections to be implemented, but some people don’t learn. At least some of these issues will manifest again.

Any other suggestions?
In a Future History I created the issue involves AI in the form of bioengineered human-animal hybrids. Perhaps more likely would be inorganic AIs, I don't know (we are at too primitive a level of tech in both fields to be dogmatic) but I would not be surprised to see such an issue (from Heaven, of course...I would be 142 that year).
The Club of Rome World3 models indicate that, is we haven't solved your issues by 2100 they will have done us in.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, Those Who Remain

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 1458
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Friends...

Post by Bob Butler »

Tom Mazanec wrote:
Fri Dec 02, 2022 6:54 am
In a Future History I created the issue involves AI in the form of bioengineered human-animal hybrids. Perhaps more likely would be inorganic AIs, I don't know (we are at too primitive a level of tech in both fields to be dogmatic) but I would not be surprised to see such an issue (from Heaven, of course...I would be 142 that year).
My current future history involves a pair of more-than-human friends. One is a genie, a genetically advanced human, feared and resented by humans, and modified to keep her from taking over, of existing to serve mankind, not replace it. There are many who believe genies should not exist, who argue against them, who are biased against them.

Her friend is sentient computer program. The friendship started with advice from the genie on what sentience is and how to become more so. Given knowledge of hacking, the software entity is pretty formidable. Imagine the internet as sentient. She for decades would insert hints to selected individuals quietly, so they wouldn’t know she existed while giving away credit for solving large problems. This included the NSA, who got addicted to her hints.

The two met as they both were set on the same problems, which related to global warming, rising sea levels, adverse weather, rising human populations, pollution, greedy corporations, conflict oriented autocratic nations, etc…. How do you save the world while not letting the humans know you are doing it?

So I can see your future history.

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 1458
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Connecting Buzzwords

Post by Bob Butler »

Like Navigator back in the main thread, I have been working a system to patch together the major ideals. Here goes…

The Christian perspective contributes ‘Love thy neighbor’, with the ideas that everyone is your neighbor and the love should be near absolute. This is more than acceptable, but in reality you tone it down some. You love your family first, friends to varying degrees less, with strangers receiving politeness, respect and indifference. People don’t treat each other badly unless treated badly in return. ‘Do as thy will, but harm none’ is the more practical but less extreme variation of the theme. These are religious expressions, but the concepts can be implemented in a secular way.

Rule of Law kicks in when people treat each other badly enough. It is generally not the individual doing the punishment, but the government. Thing is, it extends on the lesser forms of ‘Love thy neighbor’. You get the sequence of family, friends, strangers and criminals. Rule of Law wishes to treat those who willingly hurt others poorly.

The next element to fold in in ‘small government’. It has the government acting rather than individuals. As such, it is dealing with larger difficulties than individuals can effect, set up large programs which individuals can’t. Here we have a break between left and right. To liberal advocates of big government, it is an extension of loving thy neighbor on a larger scale. To rightest advocates of small government, it is a way of saving money at the expense of not helping some.

Next there is containment. Here we are dealing not with individuals having difficulties perhaps involving other individuals. Containment deals with nations and armies on the defensive side. Peace through strength is another way to describe it. The left with FDR was a strong advocate, and in earlier times conservative often supported it.

The opposite of containment is autocratic conquest and colonial imperialism. This is the offensive side of conflict, and opposes containment. You are using force to take from another nation or culture. This is the International equivalent of individual criminals. It is a bug, not feature. It is easy to say a nation is as wrong in launching a conquest by force as it is for a criminal individual stealing property by force.

Putting this all together, one gets one one side loving one’s neighbor, on the other side using force from take from your neighbor. You get variations from helping or hurting your neighbor as an individual, or doing so through one’s government. For most people, loving ones neighbor is not extreme and absolute, but far more moderated. Will you pay more taxes to aid the poor or help minorities? Do you hate rather than love, or wish to invade other countries for profit?

So where do you fit? If you help out a friend hit by Covid or vote for a sanctuary city you are favoring a different set of buzz words than if you go into a minority bar with an assault rifle or support your nation in invading another.

User avatar
Bob Butler
Posts: 1458
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:48 am
Location: East of the moon, west of the sun
Contact:

Describing Ideals

Post by Bob Butler »

Navigator and I have both created systems, but Navigator advocated the conservative position as the more ethical. Who lies more? Who is good as opposed to evil? Who is greedy as opposed to generous? Who yields choice rather than tyranny? I would contend it is a little more complex than Navigator proposes.

I would content the Christian ‘love thy neighbor’ position is more generous, but extreme enough to be rare unless you are really into it. The Neo Wiccan position of ‘do as though will, but harm none’ with or without the religious overtones is more typical, both on the generosity and freedom scales. Conservatives, with their ‘small government’ philosophy generally are behind liberals on the generosity scale. Liberals are more likely to support sanctuary cities, help for the poor, and generally helping those that need it. Conservatives, not so much.

Who lies more? Who created the Big Lie? I would nominate Trump and the MAGA crowd as champions. I would separate MAGA from the traditional conservatives on this one. The Big Lie and conspiracy theories of the MAGA crowd make that much of a difference.

Who has the winning position on abortion? Not clear at all. I believe I have done this one to death. This is a complex problem presenting many perspectives. Claiming the conservative position is the correct one is not clear.

I believe evil is a bit clearer than good. If you are enthused about hurting another, you are evil. You come back to the Ten Commandments as a good summary. Do not steal, murder or lie. Honor your family. I would add do not be prejudiced and do not as a nation invade or steal resources from another nation. Again, the Christian ‘love they neighbor’ underlines the unlikely extreme. Racist groups, invading autocracies and the like would claim the opposite.

John, with his advocacy of rape and emphasis on being fit seems to fall into the evil camp. A central point of Generational Dynamics is that hatred makes your army more effective. This puts him opposite of the ‘love thy neighbor’ camp. There is truth in it. That is undeniable. Many culture hate other culture and would steal from, oppress or invade them when possible. But are you be enthusiastic about hate for your own culture? Does hate make your culture better? Prejudice? Minimizing domestic spending? Refusing containment and establishing colonies and satellite nations?

This is not just name calling, attributing to the conservatives unfavorable behavior. It is a basic difference between the two approaches. It is possible to be so much into containment as to dominate other cultures. It is possible to be so generous as to be bankrupt. It is possible to be so much for law and order as to establish a tyrannic police state. I for one believe we have not gone that far yet, but can understand some concern.

But terminating the Constitution? This is not really a MAGA site. I can’t claim most here will support that. But I have a lot more respect for the traditional conservative position than the MAGA.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests