Rejecting Institutions

User avatar
SuburbanFarmer
Posts: 25284
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by SuburbanFarmer » Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:14 am

I’m still comfortable with my ongoing strategy. Third Party, or Challenger (if not available).
SJWs are a natural consequence of corporatism.

Formerly GrumpyCatFace

https://youtu.be/CYbT8-rSqo0

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by Smitty-48 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:17 am

everything is downstream from culture, that's why its a culture war

I don't think the culture is shaped by parties nor politicians

Canada has three parties, it doesn't make any difference whatsoever, all parties are easily co-opted by the elites
Nec Aspera Terrent

User avatar
DBTrek
Posts: 12241
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:04 pm

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by DBTrek » Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:35 am

The USSR collapsed.
I'm not sure what they have now.

What's the government time where the ex-KGB guy, the oligarchs, and the Russian mod become the new government and re-elect the same guy over and over. Or sometimes shuffle him between president and prime minister?

You can wait them out ... but what's on the other side?
:think:
"Hey varmints, don't mess with a guy that's riding a buffalo"

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by Smitty-48 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:38 am

DBTrek wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:35 am


You can wait them out ... but what's on the other side?
:think:
entropy is the nature of the universe

assuming that things will get better is a leftist paradigm

the Hegelian myth of human progress, I don't subscribe to it

so I don't see a revival on the horizon, I don't think the heydays are coming back

what is on the other side for me is the next world to come, I'm not going to live to see the end of America
Nec Aspera Terrent

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by Smitty-48 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:43 am

when I look to public intellectuals who share my values

be that Tom Sowell or Niall Ferguson or Jordan Peterson, what have you

none of them have any positive news, it's all pretty bleak in terms of the Enlightenment at this point

it's like Thomas Sowell just says he is glad he is going to die soon, so he doesn't watch the catastrophes to come
Nec Aspera Terrent

Smitty-48
Posts: 36399
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:22 am

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by Smitty-48 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:55 am

at the end of the day, it is my faith which sustains me

God has smiled on me, I have had a great life already

and I believe the universe is actually a simulation with a purpose

there is a next world to come

so when I get up in the morning, I am happy, I enjoy life, every day is a gift
Nec Aspera Terrent

User avatar
Fife
Posts: 15157
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:47 am

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by Fife » Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:59 am

2014 Malice:

Why I won't vote this year – or any year
State action proceeds independently of any democratic justification. The purest example of this could be seen during the 2012 Democratic Convention. Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa sought to amend the party platform to include a reference to God and to acknowledge Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. He put the edit to the convention floor, seeking to approve the change via acclamation. Having failed to receive the outcome he sought, he asked for a revote. Then he tried again. Finally, he simply pretended that those in the audience – unanimously Democrats and democrats – had agreed with him.

George W Bush did the same thing when he sought United Nations authority to invade Iraq in 2003. Having seen that the votes were not there, he simply grounded his invasion in earlier resolutions.

A party platform is a minor matter. War – solely government’s purview – is far more serious. Yet in both cases the vote was a formality; an ex-post-facto justification for an organization to do whatever it intended to do anyway.

User avatar
DBTrek
Posts: 12241
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2017 7:04 pm

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by DBTrek » Thu Apr 29, 2021 9:47 am

https://thenationalpulse.com/analysis/c ... oll-fraud/

Lies. Damn lies and statistics ... or biased polls.
Whatever.
"Hey varmints, don't mess with a guy that's riding a buffalo"

User avatar
C-Mag
Posts: 28305
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 10:48 pm

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by C-Mag » Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:16 am

DBTrek wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 9:47 am
https://thenationalpulse.com/analysis/c ... oll-fraud/

Lies. Damn lies and statistics ... or biased polls.
Whatever.
:dance:

It's all engineered brother. Gotta reassure the echo chamber it was as wonderful as they thought.
PLATA O PLOMO


Image


Don't fear authority, Fear Obedience

User avatar
doc_loliday
Posts: 2443
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:10 am

Re: Rejecting Institutions

Post by doc_loliday » Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:43 pm

Fife wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:59 am
2014 Malice:

Why I won't vote this year – or any year
State action proceeds independently of any democratic justification. The purest example of this could be seen during the 2012 Democratic Convention. Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa sought to amend the party platform to include a reference to God and to acknowledge Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. He put the edit to the convention floor, seeking to approve the change via acclamation. Having failed to receive the outcome he sought, he asked for a revote. Then he tried again. Finally, he simply pretended that those in the audience – unanimously Democrats and democrats – had agreed with him.

George W Bush did the same thing when he sought United Nations authority to invade Iraq in 2003. Having seen that the votes were not there, he simply grounded his invasion in earlier resolutions.

A party platform is a minor matter. War – solely government’s purview – is far more serious. Yet in both cases the vote was a formality; an ex-post-facto justification for an organization to do whatever it intended to do anyway.
Obama: I'm not a king.

Enact reform via executive action.