Conspiracy theories and Conspiracy theorists

[Brant Gaede]

4 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

William,

This is an incorrect assumption.

The Ruling Class is a mentality more than anything else. It is made up of people who WANT to rule others and believe they are ENTITLED to do it. And this feeling goes all the way down to their gut. They recognize each other, too, so a lot of them actually do make the rules. A Ruling Class person will admit a similar to his or her particular power club, but will block an independent thinking person devoted to reality and reason.

Here's a concrete situation for you to see the difference. And I'll deal with one that hits home to me, addiction. If a person is loved by a Freedom Class person (which is the opposite of a Ruling Class person), and he is a destructive addict, the Freedom Class person generally will put up with the addict (and put up with a hell of a lot) and try his damnedest to help. But in the end, he will tell the destructive addict to go his own way.

The Ruling Class person would think of staging an intervention right off the bat once the addiction becomes inconvenient, then forcing or tricking the addict into taking pharmaceuticals. The patience of Ruling Class people is generally short, so after they get tired or bored with the addict, they have him committed. If Ruling Class people get in power, real power, they eventually opt for some kind of eugenic cleansing of the addict. They keep calling it different names, but killing and sterilizing troubled people--or turning them into human vegetables--is what they mean. 

I'm not saying a Freedom Class person will not try an intervention. It's just that this will be a last resort, highly emotional, and, even then, he will not treat the addict as an inferior life form.

To a Freedom Class person, respect for the free choice of people, even self-destructive people, is a fundament. The Ruling Class people couldn't give a flying fuck about the free will of the hoi polloi. Cattle are to be herded, not respected. Human beings are among the Ruling Class. Commoners are a form of subhuman.

Oh... I forgot something else. They despise the fact that The Cattle can vote.

Michael

Cattle voting: Shall we go to the feedlot or not?

--Moo

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

1 hour ago, Brant Gaede said:

Cattle voting: Shall we go to the feedlot or not?

Brant,

To be clear, I gave the mindset of the Ruling Class, the "in here" perspective. In the "out there" perspective, not all Ruling Class people are rulers. The vast majority are toadies and suck-ups. They constantly kiss the asses of those in the Ruling Class who actually rule over others.

And they all look down on The Cattle. When they are not looking down, like in a victimization story, they are using The Cattle as a prop for their virtue signaling. In other words, they are still looking down.

 

Michael

[william.scherk]

17 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

20 hours ago, william.scherk said:

I think of the Ruling Class as all who make rules, who have 'rule' in their hands.

This is an incorrect assumption.

Damn right; That is why I wrote the rest of the paragraph, and extended the scope.

17 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

The Ruling Class [...] is made up of people who WANT to rule others and believe they are ENTITLED to do it.

That makes  the scope narrower or wider? I still think that categories can do work when the criteria are clear, even if the criteria are lengthy and take some figuring to apply. The "Ruling Class" and "Freedom Class" categories are very hard to discern, given what I already know. How does a bifurcation into Good/Evul help in figuring out whether a person is of the one class or the other?

Quote

a Freedom Class person (which is the opposite of a Ruling Class person)

Yah. No.

My objection to this is that it doesn't cut reality at its joints. It is just two labels, one sunny and one dark. The argument that follows follows on a beggared question: does the criteria between Freedom/Ruling class actually distinguish something important?  I mean, does it help  to discern the motives of folks,  to cast them into a Good Pile and a single other pile?

Quote

If Ruling Class people get in power, real power, they eventually opt for some kind of eugenic cleansing of the addict. They keep calling it different names, but killing and sterilizing troubled people--or turning them into human vegetables--is what they mean. 

I am thinking of my country, and its leaders over time, large and small, those who commanded industry, who presided at the bar, who were elected and who appointed, who had climbed their way up through the mandarinate of the civil service, who had vaulted from a power-pole into the House, who had been put in charge of reform in this or that department, who was the Bay Street-approved finance minister, who regulated the banks, who was at the vaults at the Bank of Canada.

Who was promulgating the 'missions' of various large and wealthy institutions from foundations to think tanks to University chancellors. And more, and more. A 'ruling class' thus seemed to be a place one could aspire to be, a step beyond a mere citizen.  Some may have been born into an upper class (as measured in income) but did not find their place in the professions or politics or 'service' or leadership in business or philanthropy.

I figure the notion of a ruling class is tied to a time when smaller circles within circles defined who could approach the portals of real power, in an earlier age, when royal power was checked by commons, when the fourth estate was conceived. At one time only an educated bewigged holder of inherited wealth and title could ascend to the Round Table. Waves of democratization in the English-speaking world expanded the remit, so to speak. Now a born 'commoner' can come to rule, to wield  power, without having been a spawn of the cliques of yesteryear. 

If the endgame of human history in re Ruling Class abuts wholesale 'cleansing,' killing, sterilizing or bevegetabilizing humans of lesser classes, well, it sure is gonna be a while up here in Canada, relatively speaking.

Quote

To a Freedom Class person, respect for the free choice of people, even self-destructive people, is a fundament. 

We are back in the bayou with You People and Ye Eleetz and The Cattle.  Commoners. Them. I just can't get my oar in play with that.

Edited October 27, 2016 by william.scherk
Added argument about stereotyping

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

2 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

Damn right; That is why I wrote the rest of the paragraph, and extended the scope.

William,

If you want to see where the meme came from, it might be this 2010 book:

The Ruling Class: How They Corrupted America and What We Can Do About It by Angelo M. Codevilla

It wasn't a huge best-seller, but it sold to enough of the right people to get it into the culture. Also, Rush Limbaugh wrote the Introduction to it and discussed it several times on his show.

That was probably the syringe for the media virus (to use a cute analogy by Douglas Rushkoff).

I've only skimmed the book so far, but Codevilla's explanation is probably better than mine, although I like mine a lot.

 

Michael

[william.scherk]

54 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

That is why I wrote the rest of the paragraph, and extended the scope.

If you want to see where the meme came from, it might be this 2010 book:

The Ruling Class

My first connotation was the 1972 Peter O'Toole film. The phrase and the meaning of was not fixed by Codevilla after a long history of incorrect usage. But there is certainly something congenial to a Red Hat in Codevilla's thoughts about the ruling class.  From Powerline ... July 27 2015:

Quote

DOES TRUMP TRUMP? ANGELO CODEVILLA ON OUR PRESENT MOMENT

Angelo Codevilla is a former staff member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, professor emeritus of international relations at Boston University, and the author of more than a dozen fine books on politics, arms control, and intelligence (if I had to pick a favorite it might be The Character of Nations), including a fine translation of Machiavelli’s Prince published by Yale University Press. Most recently his essay-turned-book The Ruling Class: How They Corrupted America and What We Can Do About It caught the attention of Rush Limbaugh and many others. It argues that our fundamental political problem is not “big government,” but the creation of a ruling class, inhabiting both parties, that is steadily increasing its authoritarian control over the nation. In a conversation a few months ago Angelo remarked, “The 2016 election is simple; the person who runs on the platform ‘Who do they think they are?’ will win.”

[...]

Does Trump trump?

By Angelo M. Codevilla

 

“In the land of the blind,” so goes the saying, “the one-eyed man is king.” Donald Trump leapt atop other contenders for the Republican presidential nomination when he acted on the primordial fact in American public life today, from which most of the others hide their eyes, namely: most Americans distrust, fear, are sick and tired of, the elected, appointed, and bureaucratic officials who rule over us, as well as their cronies in the corporate, media, and academic world. Trump’s attraction lies less in his words’ grace or even precision than in the extent to which Americans are searching for someone, anyone, to lead against this ruling class, that is making America less prosperous, less free, and more dangerous.

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

54 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

The phrase and the meaning of was not fixed by Codevilla after a long history of incorrect usage.

William,

Incorrect? Incorrect for whom?

Lot's of people in the culture say "motherfucker" these days as a term of endearment. I doubt they are inviting the person to sleep with their mothers. Is that "incorrect usage?"

 

The fact is, neither you, nor I, nor the ruling class get to give the final meaning of a word. Common usage does. That's how and why languages evolve.

The following is you quoting Codevilla.

57 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

... most Americans distrust, fear, are sick and tired of, the elected, appointed, and bureaucratic officials who rule over us, as well as their cronies in the corporate, media, and academic world.

That sounds exactly like what most people I know who use the term "ruling class" mean--and it's right there on the surface. Probe a bit deeper and you will find them saying things similar to what I say.

Do as you wish, but in your shoes, I would give it up this go around. Nitpicking and gotcha are not going to make this meme go away. It's out there in the culture and will be for a long time.

The election is not between Democrats and Republicans at root. Not right now. It is between the ruling class and everyone else.

Don't worry, though. The ruling class will return.

Like cockroaches, you can't get rid of 'em forever.

  

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I've only skimmed the book so far, but Codevilla's explanation is probably better than mine, although I like mine a lot.

For the record, the book is essay-length and has the Declaration of Independence, The Constitution of the United States and a few other things for padding. It is based on a long essay that appeared in The American Spectator.

If anyone wants to read this thing for free, here it is as it was originally published July 16, 2010:

America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution
Angelo M. Codevilla

Michael

[william.scherk]

3 hours ago, william.scherk said:

19 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

23 hours ago, william.scherk said:

I think of the Ruling Class as all who make rules, who have 'rule' in their hands.

This is an incorrect assumption.

Damn right; That is why I wrote the rest of the paragraph, and extended the scope.

Truncquoating is deprecated, but hey.

47 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

The phrase and the meaning of was not fixed by Codevilla after a long history of incorrect usage.

William,

Incorrect? Incorrect for whom?

Yah. It seems that The Corrector has stepped into discussion.

I look at it this way: there are abundant points of view on 'The Ruling Class.'  I have one, which I sketched above beyond the truncquoat. Other people use the term and understand the term with a scope all their own. That is good. That is what makes discussion ripe. If we all thought the same or bullied each other into pseudo-compliance with the sole Politically-Correct usage and definition, then this place would become a boring echo chamber.

So, a chunk of everyone has a view of the Ruling Class, and a few fewer have strong views on what comprises the Ruling Class.

Do I believe a Ruling Class conspire to dominate the Country Class ... or the Freedom Class? No, not exactly. I think of the abstract Ruling Class as containing all manner of human motivations, and I differentiate it from the non-Ruling classes in a different way.

That is a good thing. I don't seek to impose my opinion on anyone else. 

To return to Korben's theme, I will next mention a few conspiracy theories that (I feel) are pretty much debunked. But first I have to find the ones that impinge on this election/ordeal my OL friends are going through.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I'm going through the Codevilla essay right now. He gives a genesis of the term Ruling Class in modern usage.

It started as "Political Class" with the bank bailouts under Obama, which the majority of the country was against, then morphed into "Ruling Class" when the bank bailouts extended to setting winners and losers in the automotive industry, passing the massive Obamacare without Congress reading it, etc.

The thing I'm getting the most kick out of, though, is that he is tracing the Ruling Class's sense of inherent superiority over the masses back to the slave-owners of yesteryear and the intellectuals who defended the natural superiority of the whites over the blacks at the time. The classes have changed, but the principle that one class is innately superior to another is alive and well in the Ruling Class, thank you very much.

 

Don't think this is a shallow essay, though. Codevilla goes through Darwin, Adorno, McCloskey, Feuerbach, Marx and all kinds of thinkers and their influence on American higher education (where the Ruling Class received their intellectual sanction for their superiority over the rest of humanity  ).

btw - I made up the term "Freedom Class." I was gratified to see that Codevilla made up a similar term, but used it in the exact way I intended for Freedom Class. He called it "Country Class."

It's a hell of a good essay.

Michael

[william.scherk]

3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

[Quoating Codevilla: ] "elected, appointed, and bureaucratic officials who rule over us, as well as their cronies in the corporate, media, and academic world."

Quoting Michael:

Quote

eugenic cleansing of the addict. They keep calling it different names, but killing and sterilizing troubled people--or turning them into human vegetables--is what they mean. 

My list included, what -- political office-holder, commanders of industry, the bar/justice, elected/appointed, civil services, parliamentary neophytes in cabinet, Canucki Wall Street and their sway, governors of bank, regulators, foundations, think tanks, universities ... and more

(Leaders over time, large and small, those who commanded industry, who presided at the bar, who were elected and who appointed, who had climbed their way up through the mandarinate of the civil service, who had vaulted from a power-pole into the House, who had been put in charge of reform in this or that department, who was the Bay Street-approved finance minister, who regulated the banks, who was at the vaults at the Bank of Canada, who was promulgating the 'missions' of various large and wealthy institutions from foundations to think tanks to University chancellors. And more, and more.)

I more or less overlap with the bones of Codevilla, and not exactly with Michael's 'mind-set' of "power-luster" vs non-power-luster and the urge to kill. I do think the Ruling Class is a good prism for projecting and assessing all the kinds of 'power point' in a society, in a nation, in an alliance of nations.  The 'networks' of rule, so to speak. And I think -- on reasonable evidence -- that every heart can hold a dark urge or two, never brought forward, but lurking. (I twice read a neat book from twenty years ago that looked into normal everyday fantasies and impulses of the murderous kind. I will edit that link here if I find it)

So, to make it a class sorting doesn't work for me in the same way.

I would use an associative frame -- where urge to dominate, to kill, to 'cleanse,' to over-rule, to impose, to crimp or close down independence,  to interfere with another's personal freedoms -- all are attributes, behaviours,  aspects of personality that cross the usual class boundaries.

I am sure that everyone on the forum has some direct experience of those who rule or seek to rule in such a way that you judge their character badly -- like a particularly authoritarian parent, a 'controlling' personality, one who not only wishes to rule, but to dominate psychologically, to use shame, belittlement, threats, force, and so on --  in a family or other relationship. I am not so quick to place all those folks I have known in the Ruling Class.  They seem more of  kind of Bully Class ... and such a thing isn't always a useful category for me. 

 

Yours sincerely,

William Scott 'Gotcha McNitpicker' Scherk

 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2016 by william.scherk
Can't find the book title ...

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

24 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

I more or less overlap with the bones of Codevilla, and not exactly with Michael's 'mind-set' of "power-luster" vs non-power-luster and the urge to kill.

William,

You are attributing things to me that I didn't say. I mentioned the EXTERNAL results as eugenic cleansing, not any kind of urge to kill (with a sadistic implication at that).

On the INTERNAL part, the urge is conceit, not predation. The urge in the Ruling Class is to presume that man is perfectible and they (said Ruling Class members) already have their places assured on the perfection side. They may not claim to be perfect, but they believe they are at least close. And when human perfection arrives (probably through technocrats), they are right there ready to step into it.

What's worse, this is a comparative urge, not a metaphysical one. This means it only kicks in when the Ruling Class looks down on its "inferiors." Otherwise, most of the Ruling Class know they are fucked up, especially when 3:00 AM comes around and they wake up feeling anxiety.  

The urge to kill Lesser Life Subhumans (or sterilize them or dismantle their minds) does not really exist in the Ruling Class (with the exception of a few psychos on the fringe, but they are not what I am talking about). Their INTERNAL urge is to assert their innate superiority and treat Lesser Life Subhumans as experimental animals for their grand plan of human perfection, or as low-information manual workers who have to keep society running so they can have their comfort.

If they have to break a few eggs along the way, hey. That's how you make omelets. Sorry about that...

Once again, the urge is not to kill. It's to be a Superior One who will guide mankind to perfection and be served by the very human animals the person feeling the urge wants to perfect.

Anyway, it's a hoot tracing this urge back to white slave-owners of the past centuries.

What's worse, it's true.

   

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

52 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

They seem more of  kind of Bully Class ... and such a thing isn't always a useful category for me.

William,

I once redefined my interest in Objectivism regarding evil. Rather than altruism, emotionalism, to think or not to think, etc., being the source of all social evil, I began to see bullying as even deeper. Bullying underlies all main social evils. Once bullying is acknowledged, we can talk about the other stuff.

btw - Even though I am having some fun talking about The Ruling Class, I equally despise Christian bullies, Objectivist bullies, science bullies, business bullies, social justice warrior bullies, etc.

I am no friend of bullies.

That may seem inconsistent with my support of Trump, but he is a bully to bullies, not to helpless people. He's a good guy with a swagger. Oh, he's made some mistakes, but good guy with a swagger is his heart. And that's how I see him.

Michael

[william.scherk]

2 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I mentioned the EXTERNAL results as eugenic cleansing, not any kind of urge to kill (with a sadistic implication at that).

On the INTERNAL part, the urge is conceit, not predation. The urge in the Ruling Class is to presume that man is perfectible and they (said Ruling Class members) already have their places assured on the perfection side. They may not claim to be perfect, but they believe they are at least close. And when human perfection arrives (probably through technocrats), they are right there ready to step into it.

What's worse, this is a comparative urge, not a metaphysical one. This means it only kicks in when the Ruling Class looks down on its "inferiors." Otherwise, most of the Ruling Class know they are fucked up, especially when 3:00 AM comes around and they wake up feeling anxiety.  

I hate that.

2 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

The urge to kill Lesser Life Subhumans (or sterilize them or dismantle their minds) does not really exist in the Ruling Class (with the exception of a few psychos on the fringe, but they are not what I am talking about). Their INTERNAL urge is to assert their innate superiority and treat Lesser Life Subhumans as experimental animals for their grand plan of human perfection, or as low-information manual workers who have to keep society running so they can have their comfort.

What is so shitty about Canadian-style mixed socialism is Lesser Life Subhumans are classed as 'dangerous offenders.' They are put away for permanent, under a special rule of law.  For those who are better than them but still  'lesser,' well, our danged system keeps putting ramps up for the feeble and blows big money keeping lessers alive.

If the ruling class were up for systemic cleansing, they have found a much less direct means. Universal education and universal health care and universal child benefits tend to allow all manner of unfit cattle or commoners to erupt beyond their station. Why, I remember a great man from my youth, a high school French teacher who went on to become a popular mayor.  He 'ruled' Coquitlam with a sunny optimism and an inclusive community-development process.  He was a nobody from a Caribbean island. I see the marks he made in the community not as scars or shackles, but as bones for development. He is dead, but the bones he laid down in concert with his community are being built up into a city. Insert pointless Traboulay landscape here.

He was gifted in the classroom. French was the most deadly of 'electives' for most people. The thought of learning it was associated with hell and damnation and long lines in the rain. But somehow he brought his class up to a functional level.  

He was definitely destined to rise higher in the ruling clique had he not died. He would have gone to Ottawa as an MP and ended up  as Deputy Minister of Sterilizing Your Dreams. But I digress.

2 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

If they have to break a few eggs along the way, hey. That's how you make omelets. Sorry about that...

Once again, the urge is not to kill. It's to be a Superior One who will guide mankind to perfection and be served by the very human animals the person feeling the urge wants to perfect.

Anyway, it's a hoot tracing this urge back to white slave-owners of the past centuries.

Superior One guiding humankind to perfection. Sounds like it could get godly.  Or eggy.   I see a candidate on the horizon that promises the world. Eggs must be whipped. 

The worst thing about the American political system is the Two Party System. It is too officialized, institutionalized (why the fuck should the government 'register' my party affiliation? Why is the government organizing and overseeing primary elections?)  How can such elaborate constructions as each party has built be dislodged or made more responsive?  Your rates of incumbency are fouled by the incredible amount of money spent to contest a race. The big reefs of power just get more cemented in place, it seems.  

No fixing that by November 8, and no prospect of a new party. It seems so shitty that America can't elect a third party to congress. turf a lot more grey carbuncles from their posts.  After each election you always seem to add one ratchet to the size or reach of government. 

Well, luckily there is an "Only I Can Fix" kind of guy with the best education, the best words, the best company, the best wife, the best hands, the best relations with women, the best deals.  He has ruled the roost at Trump Inc without compere, without shackles, without a care for the critics of the world, the slings and arrows.  He is of the Ruling Class, ready to take power and wield it responsibly.  He was destined to rule his entire life, since he first punched out a teacher.  He governs himself the way he would govern America ... 

Hail Trump, you weaklings, you losers. Hail Trump! He will take care of you. 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

24 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

Hail Trump! He will take care of you.

William,

No he won't.

That's what you hear.

The message Trump supporters hear is different:

He will get rid of the assholes who are in your way so you can't take care of yourself.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

27 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

If the ruling class were up for systemic cleansing, they have found a much less direct means.

William,

They have to.

The problem with the increasing wealth capitalism is providing the world, even with all the cronyism, is that normal everyday people don't like eugenics. Not when they understand that's what it is.

With the Internet, this situation gets worse for The Superior Ones. That's why they always scream for gatekeeper powers for information.

But, ultimately, they deal with it. Cockroaches have been around ever since they evolved and this Ruling Class form of human, too. They constantly adapt how they feed on what's available.

The modern Producer Class is the historical exception and not nearly as old in human evolution as the Ruling Class.

(I just luuuuuuuv class warfare...)

 

Michael

 

[KorbenDallas]

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

William,

I once redefined my interest in Objectivism regarding evil. Rather than altruism, emotionalism, to think or not to think, etc., being the source of all social evil, I began to see bullying as even deeper. Bullying underlies all main social evils. Once bullying is acknowledged, we can talk about the other stuff.

btw - Even though I am having some fun talking about The Ruling Class, I equally despise Christian bullies, Objectivist bullies, science bullies, business bullies, social justice warrior bullies, etc.

I am no friend of bullies.

That may seem inconsistent with my support of Trump, but he is a bully to bullies, not to helpless people. He's a good guy with a swagger. Oh, he's made some mistakes, but good guy with a swagger is his heart. And that's how I see him.

Michael

MSK,

"Bullying underlies all main social evils," but I think it's more differentiated than that.  Does that say anything about the bully's psychology, psycho-epistemology, epistemology, morality, rearing, experience, cognitive development, moral development?  Etc.?

[william.scherk]

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

2 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Urge to dominate, to kill, to 'cleanse,' to over-rule, to impose, to crimp or close down independence,  to interfere with another's personal freedoms -- all are attributes, behaviours,  aspects of personality that cross the usual class boundaries.

I am sure that everyone on the forum has some direct experience of those who rule or seek to rule in such a way that you judge their character badly -- like a particularly authoritarian parent, a 'controlling' personality, one who not only wishes to rule, but to dominate psychologically, to use shame, belittlement, threats, force, and so on --  in a family or other relationship. I am not so quick to place all those folks I have known in the Ruling Class.  They seem more of  kind of Bully Class ... and such a thing isn't always a useful category for me. 

I once redefined my interest in Objectivism regarding evil. Rather than altruism, emotionalism, to think or not to think, etc., being the source of all social evil, I began to see bullying as even deeper. Bullying underlies all main social evils. Once bullying is acknowledged, we can talk about the other stuff.

btw - Even though I am having some fun talking about The Ruling Class, I equally despise Christian bullies, Objectivist bullies, science bullies, business bullies, social justice warrior bullies, etc.

I remember my first bully, and my last. It seemed to me that my bullies always 'picked' someone 'beneath them.'  Somebody weaker, lacking, lesser. So, I will agree that we can do some good psychological work figuring out and getting in the way of bullying behaviour.  

My point here is that bullying behaviour is associated with individual psychology and sociology.  I do not believe that bullying or a psychological class of Bully stays within the boundary of Ruling Class.  Bullies and bullying behaviour are found in all social classes, all economic, and all education classes. 

Quote

I am no friend of bullies.

That may seem inconsistent with my support of Trump, but he is a bully to bullies, not to helpless people.

This makes me think of the instances where Donald Trump has used his power position to bully contractors, to suggest they take his discounted payment, because it will cost them more to litigate. Meaning, he had the money to overpower them with legal maneuvers, so they should take what he deigns to give them, if anything at all. 

That is the kind of thing that stuck with me. I mean, was it that every single one of these instances had a lower-class Bully, a blue-collar bully demanding something not normally due them?  Were they bullies to Trump to demand payment for services rendered?

Quote

He's a good guy with a swagger. Oh, he's made some mistakes, but good guy with a swagger is his heart. And that's how I see him.

That's nice.  Some folks see him as a bully incarnate.  Who don't want a bully as their Leader. 

51 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

Hail Trump! He will take care of you.

William,

No he won't.

That's what you hear.

The message Trump supporters hear is different:

Of course. That is the best part.  Trump supporters couldn't give a shit about 'taking care' of the vets. They hear that the assholes will be taken out so the vets can take care of themselves -- by taking their problems to their choice of doctor, and paid in full by Uncle Sam.

Same with taking care of the economy. Trump supporters hear that jobs will begin to flow back from Foreign Adversaries. They hear that Mr Trump is smarter than all the generals, a real world-class  military strategist, thus he can take care of ISIS. They hear he is going to take care of the African Americans. They hear he is going to take care of the Inner Cities. They hear he is going to take care of the illegals and the refugees from Syria. He is going to take care of people who are sick in the streets. He is going to take care of Social Security. 

They hear a lot of things ...

Edited October 27, 2016 by william.scherk
U within square brackets will fuck you up

[Brant Gaede]

Bully for you guys!

--Brant

bully bully

[Brant Gaede]

The Witch Doctor has been replaced by the Bully Doctor.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

2 hours ago, william.scherk said:

Trump supporters couldn't give a shit about 'taking care' of the vets.

William,

Wrong.

Trump supporters couldn't give a shit about taking care of the Ruling Class politicians who say they will take care of the vets.

Seriously.

Not even a tiny shit.

If some of these geniuses later go to jail for corruption, expect to see rejoicing among standard Trump supporters. (Me included.  )

Trump supporters are voting for Trump because they know his words have correspondence to reality when he's working. He solves problems and builds stuff. He says he will take care of the vets. Trump supporters know he will and to hell with the Ruling Class.

The Ruling Class never took care of the vets and never will. They need to go away.

But, like cockroaches, they will be back when they find more garbage to feed on.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

2 hours ago, william.scherk said:

It seemed to me that my bullies always 'picked' someone 'beneath them.'  Somebody weaker, lacking, lesser. So, I will agree that we can do some good psychological work figuring out and getting in the way of bullying behaviour.

William,

Of course. That's what bullies do.

Here's a modern technocrat bully:

Jonathan Gruber doesn't look like a bully, but he means business about deploying law enforcement to bully people once he gets power. He certainly had no problem about lying to "his inferiors" (the American public) and now he wants much stiffer penalties for forcing people to buy insurance they don't want.

Without an armed force to deploy, he probably isn't a bully, but instead a mediocre nobody.

Anyway, despite the inherent cowardice in bullies, there is a part of our lower brains that respond to weakness with violence, especially when we get enraged. Sometimes people snap with this trigger. That's not a justification since the upper part of the brain can hold this in check, but it does explain the urge. This is just part of being a carnivore and it's the law of the jungle. If an animal shows weakness in the jungle, it soon becomes dinner.

Bullies never try to improve on this urge, but that's not their only motivation.

Michael

[Wolf DeVoon]

I'm unlikely to qualify as a bully, being so far out of the organized world, but it seems to me that most of the bad guys have been small men, Napolean, Hitler, Lenin, Fidel, a long parade of popes and princes. Creepy filmmakers like Tarentino, Burton, Scorcese, Craven are little squirts, whereas most of the guys who blather harmlessly about pro sports are big men. Jonathan Gruber falls into the broad middle class of assholes that run the government, indistinguishable from female bureaucrats like Lois Lerner.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

btw - Scott Adams (the Dilbert dude) came up with one hell of a great hashtag to discuss Hillary Clinton supporters on Twitter:

#Hillbullies

He's fed up with being bullied by Clinton supporters. 

#Hillbullies have not yet noticed that their leader turned them into the thing they hate most. Her hypnosis is strong. #Trump

— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) October 27, 2016

Michael

[KorbenDallas]

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Anyway, despite the inherent cowardice in bullies, there is a part of our lower brains that respond to weakness with violence, especially when we get enraged. Sometimes people snap with this trigger. That's not a justification since the upper part of the brain can hold this in check, but it does explain the urge. This is just part of being a carnivore and it's the law of the jungle. If an animal shows weakness in the jungle, it soon becomes dinner.

Bullies never try to improve on this urge

[anthony]

10 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

William,

I once redefined my interest in Objectivism regarding evil. Rather than altruism, emotionalism, to think or not to think, etc., being the source of all social evil, I began to see bullying as even deeper. Bullying underlies all main social evils. Once bullying is acknowledged, we can talk about the other stuff.

 

Michael

I don't think that altruism is ever out of the picture, we know how deep it runs, Michael. Emotionalism, as well. To me the signs are of a large portion of citizens who are sick and tired of coming off second best -- i.e. of being told and expected to sacrifice their lives and aims and simple, straightforward views of reality and their American self-identity, to everyone else's needs, demands and self-less 'noble' feelings. It seems Donald Trump has tapped into that, and they hear him, albeit non-intellectually. Few name the culprit "altruism" (-collectivism-egalitarianism). Why haven't Objectivists picked up on this deeper layer and not bringing supporting intellectual voice, instead of simply deriding the man personally?