Polyticks: Bob Butler's Perspective

[Bob Butler]

You can believe that the usual collapse of conservative thought at the end of a crisis will not occur. You can enjoy your last days believing it won’t happen again. It's probably better than imagining all the ways it's going be worse.

Doubling down is par for the course. Gaslighting is a term brought to life through the Leftists. Living to regret mistakes also par for the course historically. For those of us not in retirement with a posh position, the future is not taken so easily and with apparent disregard.

Actually, 'gaslighting' originated with a 1938 play "Gaslight" in which a husband convinces his wife she is going insane. Nothing to do with modern Democrats. More to do with Trump and his habit of telling lies.

This forum nominally has something to do with theories of patterns in history, about certain patterns repeating and continuing. We're about due for a high according to S&H, which seems to mesh with the pattern of this election. Feel free to ignore it. Still, imagining baseless problems occurring outside the theories isn't exactly wise. Expecting a collapse when a new birth of freedom and a refocus on economics is due is just absurd. At the end of a crisis, conservative stay the same patterns of thought give way to the progressive ideas intended to address problems with the culture. If the old problems involve bigotry, superstition and elites, you recognize it, accept the rejection, and move on.

If you would rather spend time and effort creating imaginary problems, be my guest.

[FullMoon]

Realistically speaking, Howe has said many times this year that we're in the middle of the crisis and it won't be resolved without conflict. You're gaslighting again. You're ignoring the reality that many people now see. Enjoy your last days of ignorance.

[FullMoon]

With each passing day, as the forces that control our nation and the world get more surreal and foreboding, the “unthinkable” suddenly morphs into the “inevitable.” At least for me.

As someone who pays close attention to the politics and the media in the United Kingdom and Europe, I began to notice a shocking narrative emanating from a growing number on the left there calling for the arrest of Elon Musk as well as the cancellation of X, the social media site he owns.

Surely, I thought, these people can’t be serious. But they were — and are — deadly serious. For them, Musk and X have become public enemy number one.

Before outlining the reasons for this, I have a serious question: Why have so many on the left and in the media seemingly fallen in love with censoring free speech or “canceling” those who hold different opinions from themselves? I am old enough to remember when Democrats, liberals and the media were all about free and protected speech.

This has become a chilling and dangerous trend. I am also old enough to remember when Democrats, liberals and the media raged against “totalitarian” regimes silencing the voices of the opposition and the calls for their arrest. Now, they seemingly choose to weaponize censorship and “lawfare” for their own means.

https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration ... cancelled/

[Guest]

I can't believe it has come to this, but I think Musk is currently the greatest force for good in the entire world.
Next in line is Trump, but Musk in ways has far more power than Trump.
I hope they are coordinating their efforts, but I can't imagine otherwise.

[FullMoon]

I can't believe it has come to this, but I think Musk is currently the greatest force for good in the entire world.
Next in line is Trump, but Musk in ways has far more power than Trump.
I hope they are coordinating their efforts, but I can't imagine otherwise.

They might be fighting a trend that's equally or more powerful than they are. If we consider the amount of money and power that's contributing to the trend.

[Bob Butler]

In digging into what gaslighting means, what I came up with was deliberately lying to change someone’s beliefs about reality. That I am certainly not doing. We have had a shift in mood as representatives of one generation are leaving power. The violent conflicts of the Trump years are about gone. The culture wars are over, giving way to kitchen table issues. This genuinely looks to me a transition to a high.

Now Trump is against alliances and containment. That would be for "losers and suckers". Russia should "do whatever it wants". He does not seem to understand that autocratic military dictators need to be kept in their place, perhaps because he would prefer to be an autocratic military dictator himself.

I have a theory about Putin. He has been hanging on in Ukraine as he saw a real hope of a Trump victory in November and an end to US support of NATO. That is now looking unlikely. He will have to deal with a US backed NATO, sanctions, and the recent counter invasion, He is pretty much stuck turning in the wind.

Netanyahu knows that he will stay in power only as long as the war in Gaza continues. Thus, he has motive to continue the war. And yet, there seems to be resistance against a wider Middle East war. Iran was given every opportunity to expand the conflict, but didn’t. I suspect some of Israel's recent Israeli operations are intended to provoke Iran. I suspect the Democrats will have to make it a policy that they will only help defend Israel if they stop committing atrocities against Gaza civilians and stop trying to provoke a wider war. This is one place I have been disappointed in Biden.

Xi talks like he is on the verge of making war with everyone, but never takes action. He needs the oil. He needs western markets. He does nothing. Still, he makes enough noise to unite the rest of Asia against him. I suspect he will continue to speak loudly and carry a small stick.

The feeling I get is that containment is working, and that a continued US policy of supporting it is wise and likely to be successful.

I also did a rundown on world population. As far as I can gather it increased steadily, including during WW I and its associated pandemic, WW II, and during Covid. While Germany and Russia lost population during WW II, the idea of a worldwide collapse is kinda silly. The wars and pandemics are just not big enough to overcome the improved medical science.

Is there a theory of why a collapse might come about? I know Neil Howe thinks that because crises in the Industrial Age featured conflicts to change civilizations and bring on new values, conflict will be inevitable in the Industrial Age as well. He is entitled to his opinion. He is the big turning guru, while I am into ages and civilizations as well. Nukes, computers and defensive alliances change things. It is not clear that the possible conflicts are heading in towards conflict. It is clear that the crisis issues of the violent Trump years have ended.

Is there a theory of collapse? When did they occur? When will they occur?

Musk? I am of very mixed mind. I approve of SpaceX, reusable rockets, Starship and the building of an efficient space infrastructure. I find making a self sustaining colony on Mars a not particularly worth while goal. Mining asteroids is far more likely to achieve profit in the near term. A self sustaining colony would be needed only if there were the type of collapse people here daydream about. In the meantime, shrug, he and / or Trump can float odd ideas. I don’t see that they will take.

[Bob Butler]

On YouTube I have been browsing lately collections of political cartoons. One in particular showed Musk's and Trump's pictures labeled simply as "Elon" and "Felon".

Another showed them in Batman and Robin costumes, with an 'E' instead of an 'R' on Elon's costume. It was intended to indicate not that they were weird, but they were batty. There is a distinction?

[Bob Butler]

I can't believe it has come to this, but I think Musk is currently the greatest force for good in the entire world.
Next in line is Trump, but Musk in ways has far more power than Trump.
I hope they are coordinating their efforts, but I can't imagine otherwise.

They might be fighting a trend that's equally or more powerful than they are. If we consider the amount of money and power that's contributing to the trend.

Not just money and power but values and votes. Do the people favor bigotry, superstition, elite privilege and criminality? Do they want the peaceful transfer of power and for everyone having the right to vote? Do they want insane spree killers wielding weapons of war? Do they value the kitchen table issues over continuing the culture wars? Oh, there is money and power enough involved, but it is the people who will decide things. Families making their own decisions may be the key issue, but it will give the Democrats enough power to decide the other questions.

[FullMoon]

In digging into what gaslighting means, what I came up with was deliberately lying to change someone’s beliefs about reality. That I am certainly not doing

I prefer to use definition as it's actually used and in this case it's correct. Higgen has given it accurately.
You're totally spreading falsehoods. Ridiculous and foolish falsehoods that are sadly believed by far too many.
You present them as though they're already established truths in contradistinction to the obvious logic conclusion to many of these social troubles. Gaslighting it is. Clearly.

[Bob Butler]

In digging into what gaslighting means, what I came up with was deliberately lying to change someone’s beliefs about reality. That I am certainly not doing

I prefer to use definition as it's actually used and in this case it's correct. Higgen has given it accurately.
You're totally spreading falsehoods. Ridiculous and foolish falsehoods that are sadly believed by far too many.
You present them as though they're already established truths in contradistinction to the obvious logic conclusion to many of these social troubles. Gaslighting it is. Clearly.

1 : psychological manipulation of a person usually over an extended period of time that causes the victim to question the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories and typically leads to confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, uncertainty of one's emotional or mental stability, and a dependency on the perpetrator

2 : the act or practice of grossly misleading someone especially for one's own advantage

The origin of the term is the 1938 British thriller play Gas Light by Patrick Hamilton, which provided the source material for the 1940 British film, Gaslight. The film was then remade in 1944 in America – also as Gaslight – and it is this film which has since become the primary reference point for the term. Set among London's elite during the Victorian era, it portrays a seemingly genteel husband using lies and manipulation to isolate his heiress wife and persuade her that she is mentally unwell so that he can steal from her.The term "gaslighting" itself is neither in the screenplay nor mentioned in either the films or the play in any context. In the story, the husband secretly dims and brightens the indoor gas-powered lighting but insists his wife is imagining it, making her think she is going insane.

I consider Merriam Webster and Wiki as far better sources than you and Higgenbothan.

Yes, many liberals started using the term due to Trump’s frequent lies, but he hardly originated the gaslighting trick. Overused it, sure, in creating the mistaken alternate reality of Earth Two out of his lies. Then again his followers are gullible, have a habit of believing his lies. They are dedicated, many of them, to bigotry, government influence and ancient supersticions. It is the standard conservative schtick, believing in old ideas rather than moving on with what progressives want to do to improve the culture.

I will note that my theory that we are entering a high is just that, a theory. It will be proved right or wrong in time. It matches the S&H definition of high with a generation aging out of power, the resolution of the recent crisis conflicts and an emphasis on economic issues. In proposing a theory coming true, is it possible to lie? At any rate, it is genuinely proposed. Can the boomers age out of power again? Are Biden, Trump, Pelosi and McConnell going to retire their positions again? Can the violence of the Trump years end again? Can there be a greater emphasis on kitchen table issues?

Perhaps if another set of events in history better meets the definition I would yield. So far no. Are you proposing that S&H are wrong? Are you certain that nothing better matching a high has or will develop?