What I’ve seen of you, repeatedly, is that you have a strong tendency to grab on to black-and-white interpretations and views of the world and the events and people in it. Of course, you’re not alone. It’s a common weakness, which we all succumb to now and again. But I see your tendency for this type of thought mode as quite away down the spectrum toward complete totality.Silver wrote: ↑August 24th, 2017, 11:27 amWhatever. You've got nothing.larsenb wrote: ↑August 24th, 2017, 11:22 amLet me help you out. The majority in the 'government' have nothing to do with the manipulation of government by elements within it . . . or without it, even though they may be taken in by the manipulation. It's the either/or thing again with you.Silver wrote: ↑August 23rd, 2017, 8:03 pmOh, larsen, I can only laugh at you now. The government "believes the false narratives?!?!" Dude, they are creating the false narratives. They are plotting the narratives. Operation Gladio comes to mind. False narrative is the government's middle name. Can't you see how resolutely you refuse to surrender on Trump's wickedness? You know the 9/11 government hoax, but somehow that all went away and the Virgin Trump was bestowed upon us, whiter than white, shinier than shiny, ready to save the world.larsenb wrote: ↑August 23rd, 2017, 7:56 pm
You miss my point, Ag.
The government is warmongering because they believe in the false narratives floating around. Same thing with the soldiers who join the military. The whole process feeds on itself. It circular . . . and has even ramped up Muslim 'terrorism' and illegal Muslim immigration into Europe and the UK.
Same with your view of Trump, etc.
Here’s what you don’t understand about my approach. I look at someone like Trump and actually listen to the good things he does and talks about, and assign probabilities to darker scenarios one may weave about the man. I’m not ignoring these darker possibilities; but I give him the benefit of the doubt based on the good things he does and talks about.
If he crosses certain lines and does so in what might be regarded as an irretrievable manner, I re-assign a higher probability to the darker scenarios. I.e., I see the same dark possibilities about Trump that you do, but I also recognize the good he has done and is doing, and hope he doesn’t move even more to the dark side.
I’m not caught up in emotional investment in any one way of looking at him. If he does well, good. If he goes off track, bad on him. I’ll then look elsewhere for someone to support in the public forum.
This is the attitude, I would say, of most of those in the populist/anti-globalist group that made up Trump’s main support.
Using this kind of methodology allows you to be much more flexible in the use of your intelligence . . . . . i.e., you don’t trap or hamstring yourself into keeping a death grip on a particular model, ignoring all other possibilities.
Do you understand?