TURNING ‘comments’ OFF
(u-tube) tells us a lot.
Of course there’d be all the usual foul-mouthed barf-brained boofwits … but if we can be a bit biblical here: “By their deeds, shalt thou know them”; so can we not welcome such (comments) as revealing themselves to all and sundry?
I’ve just suffered a UT episode which (like too many) doesn’t dare debate. A pity; good points will defend themselves (robustly too, if needed) and Truth always welcomes debate—
- debate is good
- censorship ain’t.
—and if I could make a comment it would be this small sentence only—
FOR GOD’S BLOODY SAKE, MAN
LET THE LADY SAY HER PIECE~!
—regardless of who’s blasted side she’s on …
PS — I think as well as AGW the episode may be about double standards, but don’t quote me on that.
PPS — At about minute 6:40 she’s in the perfect position to suggest that everybody should paint their roofs white, or better, cover ’em with reflective silvery foil … but she doesn’t; is the idea too damned obvious?— even for Alarmists?
PPPS — few people seem to want to face what they are themselves suggesting … but what a wonderful opportunity for a religion based on the concept of reincarnation~!
above, between, below.
IF clever enough a person might ‘guide’ polarisations into movements—and thereby garner great wealth and power.
Or at least get the smug satisfaction: I alone have Truth.
So: how may we discern Truth? How may we separate sheep from goats, gullibles from their moolah?
OR IS IT BETTER TO
just pick a flow and go with it? Better then to flow with a religious fervour—which means: shut your mind to the outside possibility that other folks might just be ‘right’.
And once polarised our average punter stays polarised. Now just you try prising open such a mind:
“Hey, Christian … can I interest you in Allah?”
“Hello, little ‘Anthropogenic Heat-death Global Warming’ person … can I interest you in natural—”
… so how can we get ’em before they are polarised? Ouch. All anyone can do is offer a tool—
—a tool for thinking.
But: try to get a convinced believer (in anything) to actually use that tool. Going with the flow is ipso facto easier than any inconvenient truths.
Yes, we polarise.
We pick a label, right or wrong, and fight for it if need be. Hence great wealth (and power) changes hands and too often We Gullibles die while serving the ungrateful unscrupulous … when just a little independent thought could mean stepping away from polarisation and thus change the course of history.
Now consider the Law of Contradiction* .
(And then try using it …)
* Contradictions cannot exist—in any apparent contradiction there’s always a false premise.
For this scary stuff.
and eeek, too …
Guy might have had me worried if I hadn’t previously seen this—
—which I uplifted en passant from this:
—and so …
the beat goes onnnnnn …
gals (oops …)
Pay attention now, read on to be alerted—
“In 2016, Peterson released a series of YouTube videos criticizing political correctness and the Canadian government’s Bill C-16, “An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code”. The act added “gender identity and expression” as a prohibited ground of discrimination,[a] which Peterson characterised as an introduction of compelled speech into law, although legal experts have disagreed. He subsequently received significant media coverage, attracting both support and criticism. Several writers have associated Peterson with an “”Intellectual Dark Web“”…
“Compelled speech” — I like that. Idea. Call it how you see it, no? No … call it how ‘they’ allow you to. Russia tried that and it only worked for a while, but as the late great Santayana said (was it him? I get confused so easily these days) words to the effect that “Those dolts who don’t learn the lessons of history are compelled to repeat them” — and we shall leave it at that and thereby stay friends. Hee hoo time—
hee hoo controls expression of ideas,
and thereby Thought itself
So to avoid the attentions of the Thought Police I suggest you keep your thoughts to yourself and try to avoid antagonising self-serving pricks with guns. Not easy, but hey … you can do it.
The term is a misnomer which serves a purpose for folks who do very well out of it. ‘Free speech’ theoretically means that within unspoken limits (good manners?) one may say anything one likes. Sure …
Politicians = people who sway the common people to vote them into office.
Common People = folks who dutifully vote. For politicians.
Democracy = the ill defined systems wherein the power-hungry persuade the unthinking to vote. For them.
UNDER THE ACCEPTED NOTIONS
of Free Speech anyone may say anything to convince others of the correctness of his/her cause. Open discussion, theoretically, is king.
BUT IS IT ‘FREE SPEECH’
when (say) a university professor risks losing his job for stating what he knows to be truth, but which runs afoul of the university’s official ‘party line’?
were once places both of learning and active research. But what if research leads to conflict between beliefs?
I HAVE OFTEN STATED
that no-one who has put in years of hard graft and money to become an ‘expert’ is going to idly watch someone demolish the commercial value of his investments.
Regardless of any ‘truths’:
“Truth be damned — that’s MY bread and butter!”
And so the beat goes on:
SEMPER TAURUS EXCRETA
makes interesting points
take them for all in all; you may not see their like again. (Not if the unthinking dupes get their way, which takes us back via ‘root-cause analysis’ to Mother’s knee.) So—
—are you willing to look, learn, analyse and otherwise think for yourself—you know, make rational decisions by evaluating evidence? Or do you simply go with the flow? Hey‚ don’t ask me, I’m with this guy—
—and lang may his lum (and yours~!) reek.
In Invercargill recently the City Fathers shut down a functioning city block and forced many innocents out of business—they want to build a new shopping mall, a CBD ‘plaza’ that will attract visitors from all over the universe and revitalise a moribund bund. Free Enterprise be damned, so despite the failure of Communism this is ‘Progress’ and full ahead all engines (or else!).
SO … WHILST
hoofing past the now closed-and-clipped gates of the sole gem in the eyesore that is Invercargill’s so-called CBD (Central Business District) I noticed activities therein and poked my lens through a gap to score this
—and with an eye to juxtaposition thanked the Gods of Guileless Snapshots for the blue sign above and to the left of that flamboyant butt— serendipity comes no better, I assure you!
“On behalf of the gods, Argus … you’re very welcome!”