Opinion "They detect the right enemies"

[VivaRevolution]

So, I'm reading this TAC article on Andrew Jackson, interesting read.......

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/andrew-jackson-our-first-populist-president/

.......and it uses the phrase, "the right kind of enemies".

"Both are known for their populist rhetoric and anti-establishment appeal. In speaking about the seamy side of political life, both have spoken with frankness, at times to a fault. Both can be rightly criticized for excesses of temperament, including self-righteousness and anger, and both have faced unprecedented vitriolic opposition. Hatred directed at each has made their admirers even more loyal because they detect the right enemies. Finally, we can see parallels in the sheer force of will that has driven the careers of both men."

This phrase was striking to me. Whether right or wrong, I must admit that a significant amount of my political opinions is driven by this.

If the banks don't like you, I do.

If the corporate media doesn't like you, I do.

The establishment of either party doesn't like you, I do.

If the Israeli government doesn't like you, I do.

If Saudi Arabia doesn't like you, I do.

I am thinking that this is true of everyone, but your villain is different. If your are on the right, you have your own boogeyman, if on the left, even a different set of boogeyman.

Do we basically have 3 factions of people in this country all forming their opinions based on whether Soros, commies/big oil, NRA/or banks and MIC are secretly working against our interests, and only by reading the tea leaves can you see what is going on?

Are we a nation of conspiracy theorists, with different conspiracies?

Discuss........

 

[Fawlty]

It's regular old "enemy of my enemy" crap. Plain old fallacious reasoning, bias, and dumbfuckery. Possibly a genetic relic of tribal warfare, which dominated our species until very recently.

 

[Happy Man]

If fawlty doesn't like you, I do.


I kid i kid lol

 

[Cuauhtemoc]

It's regular old "enemy of my enemy" crap. Plain old fallacious reasoning, bias, and dumbfuckery. Possibly a genetic relic of tribal warfare, which dominated our species until very recently.

I think there is some game theory about that. Not that it works in all situations but it's decent strategy sometimes. Band together to take down the bigger threat first and then fight each other.

About the thread, the problem is that Trump supports both Israel and Saudi Arabia and he also seems like a douche personally. Andrew Jackson seemed more like of a man's man, while Trump seems like that annoying rich kid from school that thinks he is better than you because his father has a lot of money.

 

[abiG]

Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out!
--Jackson

If Congress has the right under the constitution to issue paper money, it was given them to be used by themselves, not to be delegated to individuals or corporations.
--Jackson (paraphrased)

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

We have more than 3 factions. Third party/independent voters are growing and the amount of people who dont even bother to vote is as large as any one faction. Then there are those who cling to a party for representing more of their beliefs than the other yet dont believe in key things like "Corporations good or bad always"

Soros sure as fuck isnt either liked or disliked universally. Just remember that even if you total up all viewers and readers of the useless mainstream media it wont even total half of Democrat voters and the percentage of conservatives that watch Fox News is extremely low compared to the total amount.

Party members are not a hive mind no matter how much both sides of the media try to portray them...or how Shertards say it is.

 

[Happy Man]

Jackson knew how treat the banker rats.

It's funny they purposely gave him a huge insult to his memory by putting him on the $20

 

[Fawlty]

I think there is some game theory about that. Not that it works in all situations but it's decent strategy sometimes. Band together to take down the bigger threat first and then fight each other.

Sure but as an axiom it's rot, reflexive and reductive and foolish. It requires too many special conditions and comes with a ready bias. It's something that mathematicians struggle to justify even when the variables are fairly simple. Your average Internet human has no chance of consistently applying it well.

 

[VivaRevolution]

I think there is some game theory about that. Not that it works in all situations but it's decent strategy sometimes. Band together to take down the bigger threat first and then fight each other.

About the thread, the problem is that Trump supports both Israel and Saudi Arabia and he also seems like a douche personally. Andrew Jackson seemed more like of a man's man, while Trump seems like that annoying rich kid from school that thinks he is better than you because his father has a lot of money.

Yeah, I think they actually did a fairly good job in the article explaining that Jackson was a orphan at 14, Without a highly-credentialed education.

I think the analogy was OK, because what the author was really saying is that both had tramendous failings, and yet also have some similiar appeal.

Despite Trump being a silver spooned billionaire, he is also a used car salesman, which is something we associate with a self made man. The reality is that if you are a billionaire used car salesman, that makes you disgusting, not self made. You choose to be dishonest, not out of necessity to eat, and put a roof over your head.

 

[JonesBones]

Jimmy Carter used William James' Moral Equivalent of War in a speech while President. There always needs to be war. Freud also touched on this. He called it the narcissism of petty differences and said people can only unite AGAINST something. Unity can only come through destruction.



“A permanently successful peace-economy cannot be a simple pleasure-economy,” James writes a hundred years ago, and yet it has.

James’s insightful approach is to take seriously the militaristic point of view, entering into it and seeing out of it. He writes approvingly, “Militarism is the great preserver of our ideals of hardihood, and human life with no use for hardihood would be contemptible.” War, he notes, makes men harder, tougher, and it makes a people more cohesive, the bonds uniting them stronger. What is more, so far in human history, the martial virtues and attitudes–courage, ambition, contempt of death, vitality, and intensity among them–have been manifested in war and nowhere else, and he writes that, for military apologists, “No ordeal is comparable to its winnowings.” War tests those involved, showing–and this is no cliche–what men are truly made of.

James’s philosophical problem can now be set forth:

1.) The martial virtues are worth affirming in their own right.

2.) Yet the arena in which the material virtues have historically been affirmed–that is, war–is ugly and horrible.

3.) Life without the martial virtues is “flat degeneration” or, as I would say, “softness.”


Thus, he seeks to answer the question he puts to himself by finding a moral equivalent to war so as to replace the arena of war with some other, peaceable venue and in order to avoid the fate spelled out in 3.).

I believe that the only way available to us today if we do not want to lose the heart, the fire of being a forceful human being is the one that Nietzsche discusses in The Genealogy of Morals. My moral equivalent of war is to have contests with myself, yours to have contests with yourself and not in a mean-spirited sort of way. In such a contest, what is brought home is how fear and pain can be transcended by means of courage. The figure I have in view is the beautiful, robust, vital, cheerful, and joyous martial artist/sage.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Jimmy Carter used William James' Moral Equivalent of War in a speech while President. There always needs to be war. Freud also touched on this. He called it the narcissism of petty differences and said people can only unite AGAINST something. Unity can only come through destruction.



“A permanently successful peace-economy cannot be a simple pleasure-economy,” James writes a hundred years ago, and yet it has.

James’s insightful approach is to take seriously the militaristic point of view, entering into it and seeing out of it. He writes approvingly, “Militarism is the great preserver of our ideals of hardihood, and human life with no use for hardihood would be contemptible.” War, he notes, makes men harder, tougher, and it makes a people more cohesive, the bonds uniting them stronger. What is more, so far in human history, the martial virtues and attitudes–courage, ambition, contempt of death, vitality, and intensity among them–have been manifested in war and nowhere else, and he writes that, for military apologists, “No ordeal is comparable to its winnowings.” War tests those involved, showing–and this is no cliche–what men are truly made of.

James’s philosophical problem can now be set forth:

1.) The martial virtues are worth affirming in their own right.

2.) Yet the arena in which the material virtues have historically been affirmed–that is, war–is ugly and horrible.

3.) Life without the martial virtues is “flat degeneration” or, as I would say, “softness.”


Thus, he seeks to answer the question he puts to himself by finding a moral equivalent to war so as to replace the arena of war with some other, peaceable venue and in order to avoid the fate spelled out in 3.).

I believe that the only way available to us today if we do not want to lose the heart, the fire of being a forceful human being is the one that Nietzsche discusses in The Genealogy of Morals. My moral equivalent of war is to have contests with myself, yours to have contests with yourself and not in a mean-spirited sort of way. In such a contest, what is brought home is how fear and pain can be transcended by means of courage. The figure I have in view is the beautiful, robust, vital, cheerful, and joyous martial artist/sage.

That's funny how you close that up, because i was thinking as I read it, that the Romans, and Greeks figured it out long ago. Olympics and gladiator games, AKA MMA.

 

[JonesBones]

Yeah, I think they actually did a fairly good job in the article explaining that Jackson was a orphan at 14, Without a highly-credentialed education.

I think the analogy was OK, because what the author was really saying is that both had tramendous failings, and yet also have some similiar appeal.

Despite Trump being a silver spooned billionaire, he is also a used car salesman, which is something we associate with a self made man. The reality is that if you are a billionaire used car salesman, that makes you disgusting, not self made. You choose to be dishonest, not out of necessity to eat, and put a roof over your head.

I think deception is honest work. lol. I have said before that rigging the World Series is more impressive than winning it.

 

[JonesBones]

That's funny how you close that up, because i was thinking as I read it, that the Romans, and Greeks figured it out long ago. Olympics and gladiator games, AKA MMA.

Yes, the gladiators were like video games back then. Why does our society love all these games where you kill other people?

I really don't think MMA is moral either. It is celebrating brain damage and violence. Guys like Robbie Lawlor are heroes.

 

[VivaRevolution]

I think deception is honest work. lol. I have said before that rigging the World Series is more impressive than winning it.

It is also amazingly short sighted. It is everything I hate about corporatism. Short terms gains, in exchange for long term viability. It is vulturism and decay in action.

 

[JonesBones]

It is also amazingly short sighted. It is everything I hate about corporatism. Short terms gains, in exchange for long term viability. It is vulturism and decay in action.

I am only here for a short time. We all are. That is a problem, I agree. Every human is just trying to get theirs in their lifetime.

 

[JonesBones]

So, I'm reading this TAC article on Andrew Jackson, interesting read.......

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/andrew-jackson-our-first-populist-president/

.......and it uses the phrase, "the right kind of enemies".

"Both are known for their populist rhetoric and anti-establishment appeal. In speaking about the seamy side of political life, both have spoken with frankness, at times to a fault. Both can be rightly criticized for excesses of temperament, including self-righteousness and anger, and both have faced unprecedented vitriolic opposition. Hatred directed at each has made their admirers even more loyal because they detect the right enemies. Finally, we can see parallels in the sheer force of will that has driven the careers of both men."

This phrase was striking to me. Whether right or wrong, I must admit that a significant amount of my political opinions is driven by this.

If the banks don't like you, I do.

If the corporate media doesn't like you, I do.

The establishment of either party doesn't like you, I do.

If the Israeli government doesn't like you, I do.

If Saudi Arabia doesn't like you, I do.

I am thinking that this is true of everyone, but your villain is different. If your are on the right, you have your own boogeyman, if on the left, even a different set of boogeyman.

Do we basically have 3 factions of people in this country all forming their opinions based on whether Soros, commies/big oil, NRA/or banks and MIC are secretly working against our interests, and only by reading the tea leaves can you see what is going on?

Are we a nation of conspiracy theorists, with different conspiracies?

Discuss........

Actually I am not trapped by this. I can see why people think George Soros is scum bit I respect him as an investor. I look at things as, "what can I do with them?". I can use stuff from Soros. From people of all stripes. They can all do things for me. They are tools in my belt.

 

[VivaRevolution]

I am only here for a short time. We all are. That is a problem, I agree. Every human is just trying to get theirs in their lifetime.

Seems this is just another example of yin and yang.

Need a lack of resource scarcity to prevent war, but need strife to give life meaning. Need to be in balance.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Yes, the gladiators were like video games back then. Why does our society love all these games where you kill other people?

I really don't think MMA is moral either. It is celebrating brain damage and violence. Guys like Robbie Lawlor are heroes.

Robot jocks ftw. We build giant robots that we all play video games to train to operate where only the elite rise, and fight wars on PPV.

 

[grizzard2bid]

Jackson knew how treat the banker rats.

It's funny they purposely gave him a huge insult to his memory by putting him on the $20

He still shut them down for 100 years.
BUT this just shows that the banksters aren't just a one generation and a small group of people. It's more of a cabal that is hard to eradicate. Like weeds, they just keep popping up.

 

[IDL]

I am only here for a short time. We all are. That is a problem, I agree. Every human is just trying to get theirs in their lifetime.

That is only true of an outlook that doesn't incorporate something bigger than ones self.

Heck even if you just have a family you then have to take into account those that will be here after you.