Aren't Americans concerned by the loss of trust? (No visible reaction from the public?)

[nanana]

2 hours ago, hntnhole said:

He has, however, given voice to a certain subset of Americans that feel - for some unimaginable reason - they they are "deserving' when others are not.  They blame "immigrants", they lay the blame for their lack of achievement at all kinds of places that have zero to do with their life-choices.  They blame religious folks, irreligious folks, they blame any/everyone they can point at, with the assumption that it couldn't possibly be themselves. 

huntnhole, thanks for sharing your views.  without wishing to imply that there is ever an either/or, I   don't (completely) relate to what you wrote.  I think what you wrote resonates with a part of the truth, but for me the real reason the empire consensus is collapsing is because America really can't afford it anymore.  we are living on the most imaginary credit, and the lower classes of america have seen their purchasing power destroyed.  I    think it is somewhat mean-spirited to make our deplorables wrong for feeling the pain of our empire-collapse first.  we have had faulty accounting for years; our military industrial complex has paid the lowest possible bribes for civilian benefits to ensure that we overspend on MICIMATT, and our lower classes are totally burnt out on subsidizing this.  (not saying that our "deplorables" aren't subject to propaganda that is going to encourage them to advocate for stupid non-universal policies).  while "progressive" values are not bad, most "progressives" don't know anything about accounting.  our overseas beneficiaries have gotten complacent letting the US be the bad guy and overspend on its military while Europe eats its beautiful farm-to-table food.  

I am not ENTIRELY happy about the empire crumbling.  It looks as if America (the T Admin)  is ready to exploit other countries for mineral rights and other semi-abusive relationships.  It looks as if a lot of new rackets are being spun up (not yet completely understandable, but certainly visible in their emergence).  

does anyone here really think US money is best spent on killing people in the Middle East?

I think that both Biden and Trump agreed that it may have been a good idea for US industry to build plants overseas, but I  think they also would agree its a BAD idea to have shut down local industry.  

Maybe Europe will wake up and reclaim its power to protect itself, energize itself, figure out how to be friends with US, Russia, China, India, Iran, etc., and stop voting for parties that wish to make it a Eunuch.  

Maybe the US will remember how to be self-sufficient and celebrate other countries who can do the same.  

IMHO

Best.   

[nanana]

2 hours ago, TT2025 said:

TWO CONCEPTS OF LIBERTY, Isaiah Berlin

Thanks for the lead TT2025. Here’s one of many links to the essay to make it a bit easier to find:  [think before following links] http://fs2.american.edu/dfagel/www/Philosophers/Berlin/Berlin_twoconceptsofliberty.pdf

[nanana]

P.S. the first Paragraph or two are such delicious writing that I don’t even CARE if I agree OR disagree with the author, who has given me such a brain erection that I want His cum. 

[Westhamsmoker]

Trump has abdicated the US leading role in World politics, so be it but someone will fill the void. He is no Statesman and deals with every issue as if he were negotiating Real Estate. 

In Europe he is considered a joke but a dangerous one. By his Real Estate rhetoric about annexing Canada, taking Greenland etc he is no different from Putin and his desire to annex Ukraine and after that the rest of the  old USSR countries.

He has demonstrated that he is a afraid of Putin who sadly has made Trump look like an idiot and now holds the upper hand. Trump frankly does not care about who controls Ukraine all he is interested in is protecting and enlarging US commercial interests.

Why should he care? Its Europe let them look after themselves. But this is very short sighted as it allows Putin and his cronies to become more dominant force in Europe both militarily and commercially.  Watch then who will control Trumps precious minerals.

It is such a sad demise of the US in Global affairs. I hope that he does not complain when China becomes the most powerful country in the World.

[tallslenderguy]

6 hours ago, nanana said:

While you raise an important distinction, I  am concerned about this line of reasoning though because it posits that there are only TWO types of people who should gravitate into CAMPS instead of promiscuously shifting alliances depending upon the issue.  This quality of being righteous that you distinguish in "fundamentalists" is a quality I have found on both the right and the left.  There is another critical distinction in this space: I may be a "fundamentalist" about the way I live but not believe it is my role to impose my views and ways of being on others.  (My sister is somewhat like this, her heart is loving, her conversations are very comfortable, AND for her the only way is the way of Jesus.)  Similarly, I  have found that "open-mindedness" sometimes manifests as lazy-mindedness when it comes to getting any deep insights about the pain points of different tribes we are doomed (or blessed) to coexist with.  

I run into both open-minded and close-minded people  on both the right and the left and share your preference for open-mindedness, though I have come to have a respect for people who hold fast to principles, and I see that it gives them some strengths as well as some weaknesses.  This may be a major simplification, but I personally have a hard time understanding why sodomites and fundamentalists cannot coexist if they are capable of minimizing aggression and respecting each other's spaces.  In reality it is way too messy since most of us are in multiple, sometimes contradictory tribes.

 

 i feel we are on the same page in the same book on this?  That i only failed to clearly state my thoughts and perspective in what i wrote. 

Where i try to simplify my qualification for "fundamentalist/fundamentism" approach to anything, is the distinction i make between "belief" and "knowledge."  To me, belief has elements of faith, but also has a dose of self doubt.  Not talking wishy, washy non principled self doubt, but the openness and understanding that "we know and see in part."  

i actually endeavor to follow what i see as principles of love as a guiding beacon, or anchor, in my life.  Some would be surprised that i take that from the bible from 1 Corinthians 13 (aka in some circles as: "the love chapter").  Perhaps this makes me an example of someone who can take something sincerely and seriously from the bible in a non-fundamentalist way.  my read is, the author sets up the rationale for "love" prior to defining love (a bit).  It's something i was never taught in church, but a place i arrived at after years of trying to understand love and how to pull it off? The (or maybe better "a")  "rationale" for love is that "we see through a glass darkly.... we know and see in part."  i love the King James translation of that because "glass" in KJ's time was dark and distorted, wavy stuff. It was used both as a mirror and a window, so my read is:  when we look in a mirror and self reflect, we see and know our self in part. When we look at another , we know and see in part.  To me, it's the foundational understanding that "we know and see in part" that  maintains the humility of self doubt. 

For instance, to me, you are not being "fundamentalist" because you wrote this exhibiting the ability to question your self and the humility to be open about it. 

To me, a person can believe something whole heartedly and adhere to that belief for life, and not be fundamentalist... for me to say otherwise, i think, would be me indulging in 'fundamentalist approach." 

It's not confidence or sincerity of belief that i think is divisive, but the absolutist attitude that "I am right and you are wrong" vs I believe I am right and this is why I believe it, and I believe you are wrong and this why I believe that, but I also understand that i know and see in part, and could be wrong, but this is what i believe right now and why. 

[tallslenderguy]

1 hour ago, Westhamsmoker said:

He is no Statesman and deals with every issue as if he were negotiating Real Estate. 

Before becoming a critical care nurse, i built and ran a pretty successful business that involved a great deal of marketing. On the side, i restored and flipped houses.  While Trump may be in the real estate business, to me he is comparable to those who would market the Brooklyn bridge. I.e., He repeatedly makes outrageous claims and doesn't deliver.