Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

The democrats will never let us fight the Chinese, they desperately need the Chinese to guide them in subjugating the U.S. population and stifling all dissent. The U.S. has only just started to attack Christianity, China is far more advanced, as Christianity gives people hope and discourages blind allegiance to the state. Of course this will not happen quietly, there will be a huge civil war, but no matter what anyone says no one knows what it will be like and how it will play out. One thing is for sure, many democrats will second-guess their decisions as it unfolds, but it will be too late to take corrective action. Once the present order has been destroyed and people crave restoration of order, we can be sure that the values which have served humanity well for thousands of years will guide the restoration.

spottybrowncow wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 13, 2024 9:49 pm

Cool Breeze wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 13, 2024 9:22 pm

Not now, so your sentiment is generally correct. Here's the thing, there's obviously only so much Mr. Trump can control (they did kick him out after all). I think he gets back in and then they sabotage him again - in 2026. That's my current prediction.

Trump has been burned once, but I don't think he's anyone's fool. I think he's prepared to go scorched earth on entrenched deep state bureaucrats when he gets back in. There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth, but that's a good thing. If there is to be a civil war, this will be the ideal time for it. We will have maximum control of the federal government, and can minimize the federal response as much as possible.

Trump is everyone's fool. He practiced white collar crime under the assumption that nobody paid it attention, then did the one thing that guaranteed the most attention. I doubt he will get back in. Biden has decently done the job while the Republicans have shown no interest in governing. He will easily draw the votes of his cult, but has made no effort to pick up new votes over 2020. He is behind on funds and diverting what he has to legal defenses.

I am wondering about the Republican convention. He has locked up enough candidates to win, but will they really nominate a felon? How would they try to avoid it? Would Trump help? Is it possible to combine an insanity defense with running for president?

Again, after the peak of every crisis the conservative faction has collapsed. In the Revolution, colonial imperialism and noble privilege led to a value of independence. The Civil War led to an end to slavery and the industrial revolution. In FDR's time we got government regulation of the economy and containment. This time, with the abortion question giving the votes to the Democrats, I don't see how the dramatic improvement with the crisis won't happen.

The third Monday of April is traditionally celebrated in Massachusetts as Patriot's Day, commemorating the battles of Lexington and Concord which opened the Revolutionary War.

This year? Trump goes on trial in New York? Tax day?

Not sure it is in the right spirit. The Revolution was a fine crisis. Independence is a fine value. Well. Perhaps convicting Trump is a patriotic thing too.

Guest wrote: ↑

Fri Mar 29, 2024 4:39 am

For a more detailed analysis of what Bob and the other leftist elites are really saying--->

I wouldn’t say Republicans in general are criminal. The Nixon and Trump administrations had their moments, sure, but not in general.

We do have Republican efforts to promote European religious doctrines and prejudices. They are fighting equality and the will of the people. It is not the big college elites that are responsible. In the recent college controversies mentioned in the Zerohedge article, the universities were backing affirmative action, the Republicans were advancing the cause of racism.

It is possible from a blue perspective to see the universities to be trying to remove flaws while the Republicans are trying to emphasize them. European religious beliefs and bigotry were not initiated by the universities. The schools are trying to fight the effects. The flaws are left over from the Agricultural Age, and the Republicans would prefer that white supremacy not be impeded by affirmative action.

I ran into an analysis of the bridge collapse the other day. Don't know if it will hold up but got me thinking. It turns out that the turning of propellers induce the ship to turn. A normal clockwise turn causes a ship to veer left, while going in reverse causes it to go right. When the power went out, they tried to slow the ship by ordering full reverse. This worked, but caused the course to shift right into the bridge pylon. One possibility in the investigation is that they will determine they should have just drifted at speed, cut power to the engines. The ship would have gone straight without hitting the pylon.

Another twist is that there were no obstructing huge cement barriers in front of the pylon. Some bridges protect supports from being hit by ships. The Francis Key bridge lacked this protection, allowing the collision unhindered. The news people showed images of the Betsy Ross bridge, similar to the Francis Key bridge, which does have the protective barriers. Not cheap by the look of it, but neither will replacing the bridge be.

Another twist is more political. There is a move about by some Republicans for the federal government not to provide funding. It turns out Baltimore is a blue city with a Democratic state governor. The US transportation secretary is minority, and thus the minority affirmative action policies are being held responsible for the loss of the bridge. This is being presented as a change, making disaster relief a partisan issue. A few years ago Milwaukee similarly lost a bridge and the federal government stepped in. Katrina hit New Orleans. Other hurricanes hit elsewhere: Florida, New York, Texas. Maui in Hawaii got hit by a fire. It has been normal for the federal government to significantly help in a disaster regardless of politics. Apparently there is an effort for this to change now, that if a disaster happens in a blue state in an election year it becomes a partisan racist issue. We shall have to see if the old 'disasters are non partisan issues' habit holds.

Bob Butler wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 28, 2024 3:01 pm

Guest wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 28, 2024 9:48 am

Imagine a world without this excuse for bad behavior:

"He should be free to commit crimes because he (or his kind) suffered injustice."

Could we even have Leftism without this argument?

From my position, yes. Leftism removes flaws from cultures. Things like colonial imperialism, slavery and containment were from progressive pushes to remove flaws. This time around it is bigots, criminals in high office and religious fanatics forcing doctrine on others. In each, the conservative faction wanted to continue to exploit the flaws.

Leftists advocate rule of law rather the crimes. Hey, Trump is accuse of 91 felonies? If you aren't for criminality you may loose your position as a conservative.

For a more detailed analysis of what Bob and the other leftist elites are really saying--->

What's Wrong With America's 'Elites'?

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/wha ... cas-elites

Not only does this group think it’s acceptable to cheat to win an election, but 70 percent believe there is too much individual freedom in the United States, and an equal number trusts the government—which, of course, they control. “They really believe,” Rasmussen says, “that if they could just make the decisions and get us out of the way, we would be a lot better off.”

What’s going on at our most prestigious and exclusive universities? How have they produced generations of amoral, condescending authoritarians? And how do we put a stop to it?

Those are questions Americans need answers to.

Guest wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 28, 2024 8:43 pm

Bob Butler wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:45 pm

Provide reproductive health care.

Killing innocent babies in the womb is not "reproductive health care." It has nothing at all to do with health care. We can argue about whether killing innocent babies should be allowed, but we should use accurate terminology. I.E, respect the science.

Define sentient. I can agree killing sentients is wrong, and repeatedly asked the religious fanatics for a definition of sentience that would allow us to avoid that wrong. The closest I have come to such a definition is that beings which can use language are sentient. As we are the only species that uses language and the only species considered sentient, this seems to make sense. We seem otherwise to consider killing OK.

A fetus cannot use language. Provide an alternate definition of sentient which applies in the first two trimesters. Quoting a cultural religious prejudice is not science. Forcing others to abide by ones own religious practices is the establishment of an official government religion, and not allowed.

John wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 28, 2024 3:55 pm

So are you pro-Hamas?

No. Neither am I for the Israeli attempt to expel the Palestinians from Gaza. Neither side is covering itself in glory. Both are using racial / religious prejudices to justify genocide, murdering the innocent and bombing hospitals.

The basic idea from Generational Dynamics is hating, oppressing and killing the different. Both Hamas and Israel are indulging in the instinct. As I have often said, one should expect other cultures to wallow in the instinct, but discourage it in your own. The old world is more blatant in their racism than we are. We may have had slaves, stolen native lands, denied the Irish jobs, etc, but we did not have Hitler's gas chambers, the Armenian genocide or the current Gaza fiasco. We have racially motivated spree killers and racist murdering cops, but not government organized genocide. I recognize that the instinct to hate, kill and oppress the different, but I would reject it where it is found and practiced, Including both Isriel's right wing government and Hamas.

I have been avoiding taking a position on the Gaza conflict for some time. It has taken some time for it to become clear. We'll see if it holds up.

Bob Butler wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 28, 2024 1:45 pm

Provide reproductive health care.

Killing innocent babies in the womb is not "reproductive health care." It has nothing at all to do with health care.
We can argue about whether killing innocent babies should be allowed, but we should use accurate terminology.
I.E, respect the science.

So are you pro-Hamas?