Recommended Posts

On the "Donald Trump" thread, Brant posted the comment (link below) about WSS's recent diarrhea of images on his Member Album.

"William S has decided to use OL as a toilet. --Brant"

Quite.  However,  I want to mention one of the images William posted, the one of "Dr. Oz" saying on Fox News that the recent coronavirus is actually common.  NO, IT ISN'T.  "Dr. Oz" appears not to be aware that there are multiple kinds of coronaviruses.  Some of them have been common for years in humans and generally produce mild symptoms.  COVID-19 is a new virus in humans, "novel."

Ellen

https://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/topic/15329-donald-trump/page/570/?tab=comments#comment-292537

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I wrong, or wasn't it said previously that dogs and cats can't catch Covid 19?
https://week.com/2020/03/25/no-your-pet-wont-give-you-covid-19/

 

"There is however a cat corona, which is a different strain.

"That's where, vets believe, the confusion is coming from.

"'It's not the same as COVID-19. I think that's where it gets. We call it by it's last name, family name, of Corona and it's not the exact same virus. That's like saying Uncle Bob and Uncle Sam are the same people. They're not. They're just in the same family,' said Dr. Khun-Siegel."



now...

https://www.foxnews.com/world/cat-in-belgium-first-to-test-positive-for-coronavirus-report

So the question is: is it Covid 19, or the other strain mentioned in the first article?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Peter said:

Michael quoted, “No matter how bad you think something is, when you look into it, it's always worse."  

That sounds like a “deep” generalization but taken by itself it is twaddle. For that to make sense you would need to explain what “something” is.

Peter,

Of course. The issue is--I explained what that "something" is and even provided a reading list for tons of examples. Hell, I even gave the research process of M. Stanton Evans and Diana West.

If you ignore all of that, that's your right. But it will only be twaddle to you. Not to those who look.

Here's a principle about using your senses. If you don't look, you can't see.

:) 

Here.

Maybe a couple of short videos in the mainstream will be more interesting to you for a first look. This will remove the trappings of the personal squabbles that unfold here on the forum. There's nothing to prove to anyone in me posting this, nor any attempt at controlling anything. I'm just posting it so you can look if you so desire.

 

The first video is from the Glenn Beck show on Fox News about 10 years ago. This is where I first heard of M. Stanton Evans (the guy who came up with the  twaddle :) ).

 

The second is by Diana West at the 2018 CPAC (and try not to fall in love :) --btw - she's a sweetheart, but that isn't even her best video  :) ):

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ayn Rand's 1957 novel, ATLAS SHRUGGED, contained a counter-conspiracy involving a radio speech given by a man who vowed "to stop the motor of the world."
On March 28, 2020, we have this speech dropped by the counter-conspiracy known as "Q", via the internet...

"The entire world is watching.
Patriots from around the world are praying for AMERICA.
We are all bound by a feeling deep inside, a feeling that cannot be publicly expressed for fear of ridicule, a feeling that challenges the mainstream (narrative), against that which we are told to accept and dare not question, put simply, that people are being abused by those in power and time is running out. "

Read the entire drop here:

https://qmap.pub/

https://twitter.com/StormIsUponUs/status/1243987443533205504?s=20

Many have criticized Rand for Galt's speech being too long to hold people's attention, and too unfilmable for a movie. But whatever else one may think about "Q", you gotta admit, they figured a way around all that...

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Q's line about doubting Thomas's and mocking "conspiracy theorists":
----------
"The entire world is watching.
Patriots from around the world are praying for AMERICA.
We are all bound by a feeling deep inside, a feeling that cannot be publicly expressed for fear of ridicule, a feeling that challenges the mainstream (narrative), against that which we are told to accept and dare not question, put simply, that people are being abused by those in power and time is running out. "

----------

Makes me think of a passage from Rand's THE ROMANTIC MANIFESTO, regarding the mocking of Romanticism in children, and how it might relate to those who rush to judge those looking into conspiracies:

“His rationality is turned against him by means of a similar dichotomy: reason versus emotion. His Romantic sense of life is only a sense, an incoherent emotion which he can neither communicate nor explain nor defend. It is an intense, yet fragile emotion, painfully vulnerable to any sarcastic allegation, since he is unable to identify its real meaning. It is easy to convince a child, and particularly an adolescent, that his desire to emulate Buck Rogers is ridiculous: he knows that it isn’t exactly Buck Rogers he has in mind and yet, simultaneously, it is—he feels caught in an inner contradiction—and this confirms his desolately embarrassing feeling that he is being ridiculous.

“They arrest his value-development on a primitively literal, concrete-bound level: they convince him that to be like Buck Rogers means to wear a space helmet and blast armies of Martians with a disintegrator-gun, and that he’d better give up such notions if he ever expects to make a respectable living. And they finish him off with such gems of argumentation as: ‘Buck Rogers—ha-ha!—never gets any colds in the head. Do you know any real people who never get them? Why, you had one last week. So don’t you go on imagining that you’re better than the rest of us!’”

And then, Rand says something about their motives that makes me think something similar is motivating those who rush to mock and dismiss “conspiracy theorists”:

“Their motive is obvious. If they actually regarded Romanticism as an “impractical fantasy,” they would feel nothing but a friendly or indifferent amusement—not the passionate resentment and uncontrollable rage which they do feel and exhibit.”

Ayn Rand. The Romantic Manifesto (Kindle Locations 2190-2191). Signet. Kindle Edition

This could apply both to the attitudes towards both the real and the "woo" conspiracies. With stuff like aliens or time-travel, as Rand says of "impractical fantasies", they might "feel nothing but a friendly or indifferent amusement". But with the plausible policial conspiracies, one is more likely to get "the passionate resentment and uncontrollable rage which they do feel and exhibit."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ellen Stuttle said:

On the "Donald Trump" thread, Brant posted the comment (link below) about WSS's recent diarrhea of images on his Member Album.

"William S has decided to use OL as a toilet. --Brant"

Quite.  

Ellen,

Well, going from one image on that stream, William certainly does not like the word "they." Or at least he doesn't like me using it.

:) 

It's funny to see him--him of all people--try to criticize this word visually as he simultaneously treats most people on OL as a "them."

:)

I think he honestly can't see himself.

The Holy Bible (Matthew 18:9) says my response best to such lack of awareness: "If thine eye offend thee, pluck it out."

Metaphorically, that's what William did. But he did not gain greater awareness that way. All he did was lose an eye, poor thing.

:) 

As usual, this leads me to taking the idea a bit deeper. So off I go. 

Here is a comment about The Apostate novel I am writing (loosely based on Barbara). I came across some discussions online that led me to come up with a kind of clunky term to help point to it when I see it in other places: jargon concept. I may invent a better term later, but that's the term for now: jargon concept.

This is different than a jargon word or jargon term. (Or a normal concept, for that matter.) It's a rationalized abstraction that replaces a reality-based (or observation based) abstraction. A jargon concept can go by many different words and phrases, but it will always mean the proposition that gave rise to it.

In the book I am writing, after the protagonist (female so far, but I think I'm going to keep this as a woman) is thrown out of the cult, this is one of the notions that start becoming clear to her. It is an idea throughline I will be peppering into the story as it goes along and there will be plenty of examples from her life. (I'll obviously start with her not understanding it at all except for a bit of cognitive dissonance in a few events, and progress by stages to her full understanding at the end--arrived at by her own thinking it through based on what she lived in the story.)

A jargon concept always starts with a proposition by someone reified to an axiomatic principle, then, from there on out, reality by believers is deduced from that principle. Sometimes this is on a child-like level (we are better than the rest of humanity because we know the truth and nobody else does). But a child-like level proposition like that--for this purpose--is quite powerful. Notice that neuroscience, modern psychology, biology, evolution and so on are almost always excluded from how a statement like this becomes reified as the truth. The only grounding is another statement. There is no mention of cognitive biases, neurochemicals or anything like that.

To keep to the example I gave, why are we better that the rest of humanity? Why is that statement true? Well, because we know the truth and nobody else does (another statement). I could take that down by degrees, but let's get to the end. Why do we know the truth and nobody else does? The ultimate kicker, the unspoken statement at the root of all jargon concepts: Because I said so.

It seems stupid when said that way, but that's the root of much of what people argue about in ideologies and religions. And even a lot of science.

Another jargon concept in O-land and l-land is NIOF (non-initiation of force). This principle replaces reality for those who are fanatical about it. You certainly can't find it in nature like the animal kingdom, observe it, then say this is how the world is. When challenged for proof, NIOF is always deduced from other statements like "you can't force a mind to think" and so on, but it always boil down to: Because I said so.

This error is constant in all utopic ideologies.

Where it becomes really toxic is when notions like Rand's idea of the basis of romantic love are taken to heart as axiomatic. Rand said people love each other romantically based on their deepest held chosen values. She used different phrasing and terms, but on a concept level, if you take a simple look at the history of human mating, it doesn't work like that. So it's no wonder marriages consistently fall apart all throughout O-land. :) Rand came up with a jargon concept that people use to replace their own awareness with. And when they base their relationships on it it, reality will not be denied. What's worse, in many cases, everybody becomes miserable. That is, the toxicity deepens as they blame themselves for not being good enough to know how to do this properly. And it's one lousy guilt trip after another.

(Here is my typical disclaimer. I get tired of saying it, but if I don't some people will misunderstand what I am saying and send their own misunderstanding all around as if it were mine. So here goes. Rand also got a lot right, which is why I admire her and centered my worldview on her work when I first came across it. I do not regret one minute of that. In fact, I am proud of it.)

For now, that's enough, but before I stop, I do want to tie this into my comment about William.

Big government liberals are masters at using jargon concepts. It's one of the things that keeps them switching labels and keeps them gaining power all the time. In the early days, they proudly called themselves communists and socialists. But those words lost their power to persuade, so from their collectivist jargon concept of who they were as opposed to the rest of humanity, they settled on the word "progressive." When they proceeded to make a huge mess of things and the label "progressive" became toxic, they shopped around for a successful idealistic-sounding term and came up with "liberal." But they kept their original jargon concept--they were the collectivist enlightened ones who must rule over the rest of human livestock because they were awesome and nobody else was, Then, when that became toxic, they reverted to "progressive." Along the way, they keep trying to use phrases like "social Democrat" or "compassionate conservative," and so on, but the jargon concept always stayed the same.

William's jargon concept--in the example I started this post with--is that people like him don't do "us against them." Why? Because he says so, I guess. :) In reality, his "us" are those who don't divide people up into "us against them." And his "them" are people like us who apparently do. And he doesn't see the irony.

:) 

But wait, there's more!

Conceptually, he's not against dividing up people into us versus them. Like I alluded to, he does it all the time in his own posting. But, since it is a jargon concept and not jargon term, he presents it with other words and images. He just doesn't want people using particular words, especially "them" or "they." And, it follows if people don't use those words, he can tell the world--and himself--that he (and people like him) are better than them others (oops, I used the word again :) ).

Self-deception at its finest.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/27/2020 at 3:21 PM, ThatGuy said:

I did see it just speculated that Dylan's song being release today about Kennedy is timed to go with Q's drop, yesterday, that quotes Kennedy's "Invasion instead of Infiltration."
(in the twitter thread, below. fpr anyone who cares to see it) 
 

For those who just want the low-down, these 3 tweets are the specific ones in the thread, re: Kennedy and Dylan:

https://twitter.com/prayingmedic/status/1243611997905674242?s=20

https://twitter.com/prayingmedic/status/1243611999281397761?s=20

https://twitter.com/prayingmedic/status/1243617438031155200?s=20

 

More JFK Jr stuff coming up, today:
JFK Jr vs. Joe Biden, 1994:

"'Dear Senator Biden, You are  a traitor."'Bearing the signature John F. Kennedy, Jr."

https://vault.fbi.gov/John F. Kennedy Jr./John F. Kennedy Jr. Part 1 of 1

JFK Jr on the LENO show, reading a poem from a 9-year old Monica Lewinsky, where she descibes herself as a pizza (think "Pizzagate"). It's disturbing, in retrospect, how she describes herself.

https://twitter.com/intheMatrixxx/status/1243920138321244163?s=20

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

TG,

What happened? Did you get discombobulated?

See if this helps. It solved a lot for me:

:)

Michael

Hah, maybe. Just a technical glitch in trying to upload a picture, and decided not to spend time on it. The point was made already.
(As for the poundage, I did factor in a limited amount of junk food in my groceries during the great stock-up. If I don't have it, I can't eat it, and can't pig out too much... Though I went through today's cookie-rations earlier than intended...but that early sugar rush had worn off by this time...)

But damned if I couldn't go for another cookie, right now...
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2020 at 6:01 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

More from Polly.

Here is Polly's latest.

You can finally see her get angry.

An avowed Marxist from Ethiopia with lots of blood on his hands is the head of the World Health Organization right now.

Dr. Fauci says he's just peachy.

That's just one problem...

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ThatGuy said:

disregard

But, but, but, they wear gloves at McDonald’s, food stores, immediate medical care facilities and liquor stores. ThatGuy.. Say it ain’t so Joe! By the way, 2000 Americans have now died at around midnight, Saturday night. Rest in peace. I hope I don’t get it. I do wash my hands, etc. etc. etc. Is it still a conspiracy, you morons? I predict Biden will select a younger woman who was running for Prez but it isn't Elizabeth Warren. Peter.

From The L.A. Times: Former Vice President Joe Biden is calling for an immediate nationwide stay-at-home order to contain the spread of the coronavirus, saying the main mistake that leaders can make in a pandemic is "going too slow." The Democratic presidential candidate told CNN on Friday that he agreed with Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates that the uneven patchwork of state and local lockdowns in effect in the United States will inevitably cost lives and prolong the economic catastrophe. "Why would we not err on the side of making sure that we are not going to have a repeat?" Biden said from his home in Wilmington, Del.

President Trump has urged Americans to practice social distancing but has declined to issue a nationwide stay-at-home order, leaving it to governors and local officials to decide whether to shut down nonessential businesses. He said this week that he'd like to have the country "opened up and just raring to go by Easter," which is just over two weeks away.

Biden said he'd watched Gates' appearance on CNN on Thursday night and found him "really insightful." "I thought Bill Gates knew what he was talking about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peter said:

Is it still a conspiracy, you morons?

Peter,

The virus is not a conspiracy and I doubt anyone posting here on OL (or reading OL for that matter) thinks the virus is a conspiracy. It may have been created artificially, or it may have emerged. We're in fog of war communications situation so nobody really knows. But the virus exists. Nobody is saying it doesn't exist.

However, the mainstream media coverage and power grabs by sundry factions are conspiracies. Technically, one can say QAnon is a counterconspiracy. There's a power struggle going on and all factions are using the emergency to bolster their power and take down their enemies when they can get away with it.

As for people like Polly, well, I can't dismiss the proven genocides and things like that she talks about as conspiracy theories. That's why I watch her. She's certainly more credible fact-wise than the The L.A. Times and CNN.

And Fox, for that matter. If Polly ever got communications power, I just don't see her firing Trish Regan over a difference of political opinion.

Michael

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Peter said:

I think I will say so long for now.

Peter,

I wish I knew--for you--how to preserve the way the mainstream media used to be, but I can't.

They disgraced themselves. They discredited themselves. They didn't tell one too many lies. They told tons too many. Day after day over years.

It's like when war breaks out. There's no going back to the way things used to be. The mainstream media are liars and I don't trust them--not even to give the date correctly.

What's worse, they show no signs of wanting to change or to rehabilitate their reputation. They want to be taken on faith and daring people to say they are wrong.

So I have no respect for them.

None.

Sometimes I watch a few mainstream news people. Tucker's OK. Judge Janine. Lou Dobbs. Some people like that. But I still don't trust them.

That was creepy for me at first, too. I know how hard it is to look at an entire institution like the mainstream news and think, they can't be that corrupt. They never were that way before. Why can't things be the way they were before?

Imagine what a person feels like when he is going about his day to day and his country gets invaded right in front of him. Then his own house gets taken from him. Ayn Rand knew that feeling when she was young. She watched it up close and personal. Until 9/11, most Americans never had an inkling of what that felt like. And even then, most of the country watched the 9/11 attack over the news, not in front of their very eyes.

A feeling of invasion taking something away from me in my own home is what I felt when the truth of the mainstream media finally hit me in the "they are purposely practicing evil, they are a clear and present threat, and there's no turning back from that" way.

The final straw for me was the plethora of unnamed sources the mainstream media used in attacking Trump with made up claims, the information from those alleged sources being debunked over and over, and the mainstream media's insistence on continuing one round after another as if nothing happened.

It sucked and any adult knows doing that is wrong, but the mainstream media is still doing it. So they suck. I can no longer get news from people like that and accept it as credible. Not even about the coronavirus. And it bothers me that I can't.

So I empathize strongly with your resistance to entertain this notion. It's not the way life is supposed to be. I know it made me feel insecure as all hell at first.

But they did that. I didn't. Nor did you.

And they did it because they wanted to do it. They knew what they were doing and they loved--and still love--crapping all over all of us.

I wish there were words of serenity I could include with this situation so I could say them to you. Maybe they exist, but I don't have them. I'm finding my way to deal with this situation just like others are.

But I wish serenity for you.

May you walk in deep peace.

I mean that all the way down.

Michael

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a particularly American quality that Rand identified (some speech to cadets at a military academy): "earnestness". I like seeing that in Polly (and in General Flynn, who she linked to). I seem to recall in younger days that me and many others raised in the Brit tradition rather laughed at the quality, but admiringly, some tacitly recognizing that it stood for resolve, courage and values-held. Somewhere along the line, its my belief, earnestness began disappearing in the US, replaced by "cool". Largely the second handedness of a concern of one's appearance and acts to others' eyes. With cool, followed - likely, was caused by - cynicism (about holding values, altogether).  Not altogether disappeared, earnestness is even having a comeback in America, I'm pleased to see.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Newfie kid I’m working with made me laugh today (he is 23).  He blurts out:

”I likes my Covid like I like my women!”

(19 and easily spread!)

Gotta love a shot of humour in the face of adversity. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/23/2020 at 9:21 PM, Jon Letendre said:

The mayor of Denver said today that new restrictions go into effect tomorrow. The new restrictions are staying indoors except for named essential needs. He said they will be in effect until April 10th.

Is it strange to name the date of lifting the new restrictions before they even go into effect? Have we seen that date before, 4-10-20?

After today's press conference, what's your current take on the 4/10 theory? 

"Therefore, we will be extending our guidelines to April 30, to slow the spread...Saying his earlier hope that the country could reopen by Easter was 'just an aspiration,' Trump added: 'We can expect that by June 1, we will be well on our way to recovery...'"
"Trump says coronavirus 'peak in death rate' likely in 2 weeks, extends social-distancing guidelines through April 30"
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-coronavirus-briefing-death-rate-social-distancing
 

(Edit: it was just pointed out to me that the letters in the alphabet that correspond to 4/10/20 are "D J T"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't know that Anonymous was still a thing, and I don't know if it's connected to Q...but there's a new video that just dropped tonight targeting Bill Gates re: Coronavirus:
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, merjet said:

These data are suspect. Especially comparative data. Italy does have a lot of old people and Italians love to get up close and personal. The big problem is all the Chinese who live there who went to China for the holiday and came back by the tens of thousands.

--Brant

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said:

These data are suspect. Especially comparative data.

Earth to Brant!  Jeesh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...