How can we defeat "us vs. them" mentality?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

You've backed yourself inside your own set of lables!!
Keep the immigrants out!
Zeig Heil!

What a moron. Spare me your disingenuous white guilt. Has England run out of people to persecute and plunder? You do realise that your fuck-hole of a country takes almost none of the refugees it created in the ME, and the same goes for the US.
Zeig Heil to you and your genocidal country.

Failed to recognise the irony here.

Yes, I obviously do know that we have not shown responsibility for the refugees we have helped to create. But i'm not the one throwing up the borders. You are!

Not 'helped to create'. CREATED. And the arrogant, racist English have been doing it for centuries! They persecuted the Irish to the point that they had to leave their own country rather than starve to death! Genuine refugees.
What the hell does not wanting open door immigration have to do with 'racism'?? Most of them have perfectly good countries that they've come from. They just see a softer prospect here. FFS. PCturds are the biggest wankers and hypocrites on the planet. Ok then. Let's blast every PCturd into space--then there should be enough room for more immigrants. Happy with that then?

[Sculptor]

What a moron. Spare me your disingenuous white guilt. Has England run out of people to persecute and plunder? You do realise that your fuck-hole of a country takes almost none of the refugees it created in the ME, and the same goes for the US.
Zeig Heil to you and your genocidal country.

Failed to recognise the irony here.

Yes, I obviously do know that we have not shown responsibility for the refugees we have helped to create. But i'm not the one throwing up the borders. You are!

Not 'helped to create'. CREATED. And the arrogant, racist English have been doing it for centuries! They persecuted the Irish to the point that they had to leave their own country rather than starve to death! Genuine refugees.
What the hell does not wanting open door immigration have to do with 'racism'?? Most of them have perfectly good countries that they've come from. They just see a softer prospect here. FFS. PCturds are the biggest wankers and hypocrites on the planet. Ok then. Let's blast every PCturd into space--then there should be enough room for more immigrants. Happy with that then?

According to you, that would be pandering to Big Business:
" All you 'open-borderers' are doing is pandering to Big Business interests."

[Eodnhoj7]

Is it possible to break down "us vs. them" mentality? How?

I suggest:

* Ban on team sports on large/nationwide levels.

* Ban on non-professional uniforms (police officers should carry a uniform as part of their profession, but uniforms symbolizing an ideology or religion should be banned - like Ku-Klux-Klan-uniforms and niqab etc.). Also, school uniforms should be banned.

* Abolish conscription in countries where any such thing exists.

* Make it legal to desecrate private possessions of national symbols (ie. if you own a flag of your own country, you should be free to burn it).

* Other bans on nationalism.

Read Pirsig's "Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". It is a good book.

In it he presents an argument I agree with (but am expanding upon right here): Western culture is grounded in Aristotelian Identity properities that necessitate an "us vs. them" mentality founded within the empirical perspective as "atomism". This atomism is summated under the these identity properties, within the grounds of "logic" as a means of interpreting reality, through the law of excluded middle where the "or"function is the focal point in which the western perspective is defined as a process of measurement.

In simpler terms when we observe the "or" function what we observe fundamentally is an act of separation itself as "or" is the foundation of the first "dichotomy" or "dualism", thus setting the grounds for the relation of "parts" (whether these parts are actual empirical phenomenon such as the atom, or abstract phenomenon such as the concept).

All particulation is atomism at its core, thus setting foundations for "relativity", with this atomism and relativity sythethised under the perspective of materialism through empiricism.

Aristotelian identity properties are a zeitgeist that form much of academic, and by default the surrounding, culture and as such they are as much a perspective and "means of measuring" reality considering they set the assumed axiomatic base western culture is founded upon. The "vs." mentality, exemplified under the law of excluded middle, while assumed, is a manner of assumption itself in which a phenomenon is observed an divided.

This division, whether it be abstract or empirical with this dichotomy in itself being subject to this same law of excluded middle, requires a projection of the observer as the observer him/her self is the"means" of separation in which the individual is the "point of awareness" that exists through that assumptive nature of "or".

"or", as a logical function, is a means of assumption in the respect and as such sets "a" grounding for awareness when observing the nature of assumption (or rather assuming assumption) requires a process of reception in which a phenomenon is defined "as is" thus necessitating a form of seperation because of its very act of definition requires a simultaneous "what it is not". A phenomenon, such as a bird, is assumed for what it is by what it is not, thus necessitating "or" as "assumption" being equivalent to a process of separation.

This "or" as the focal axiom of awareness reflects back to the psychology of the peoples and the culture composed of these peoples.

This further sets the ground for the process of "individualism", as a separation from the herd, that sets the context for current societal standards (under the context of consumer self-expression) that can be observed in the western process of individuation observed in Jungian Psychology, Darwin's Theory of Evolution (which mirrors Jung's process of individuation), Einstein's Relativity as the foundation for atomic technology, etc. that exists through the current industrialized manner we perceive reality as an "us vs nature".

In simpler terms, the "vs" mentality (or rather the extremes to which it is taken as competition and seperation is inevitable), can be argued as a logical conclusion to the foundations our civilization was built upon and is evidenced by the perceived social and world division resulting in what exists today.

All you have done is just more or less explained what has happened, up to now.

The question is asking how can we defeat, or change, this most idiotic mentality?

And what "is" happening and "will" happen as well. This idiotic mentality, as grounded on illusion or false foundations of reality, will eventually cancel itself out (like all evil by nature does) when a proper catalyst occurs that it cannot hold up to.

From the perspective of "logic as a premise for civilizations grounding interpretations of reality", logic itself must be destroyed. In destroying logic, however, we are still applying logic as a means to destroy logic thus necessitating logic to exist. Thus the destruction of one logic necessitates the assumption of another.

This assumptive process, which itself is assumed thus necessitating isomorphism/recursion where one assumption is turned to many and these many assumptions observe the recursion of the one assumption through variation, is inevitable.

Assumption is the foundation of logic considering "the assumption of a premise" is the premise of logic as logic itself and is an inescapable constant truth where even the first axiom of the Munchauseen Trillema (all axioms are assumed) is in itself assumed, thus self negated as a fallacy. The fallacies act as the negative boundaries as to what "logic is not", thus necessitating an isomorphic or thetical nature, as to "what it is".

This negative approach, or "cataphatic" in the terms of theology (which must also be observed considering both theology and logic stem from a assumption of "Logos" or some absolute truth that in itself is absolute because of continuity), as the foundations of logic/theology inevitably must be ruthlessly destroyed as well.

Logic and theology, through metaphysics as "being que being" as "isomorphic/recursive assumptions", set the foundations for culture where culture stems from the latin "cultura" quite literally is the cultivating of mass perspective where certain agreed axioms set the continuum of our actions through "values" (values are the continuous irrational means through which we fold through time and space and manipulate it).

These agreed axioms act as the metaphorical tools which cultivate the field of the masses awareness, or the zietgiest, which fundamentally is "mass perspective" as mass assumption of reality which reflects the foundations of awareness as "measurement" in itself synonymous to "divine plan" of pre and post socratic conceptions of "the logos".

The zietgiest, as mass assumption, necessities itself as a "general point of awareness" considering it is a multiplied general state of "individual" assumptions where the individual act of assumption, as grounded in empty mindedness where a phenomenon is imprinted upon an "empty field" synonymous to a single point, is isomorphically observed in a recursive state.

In simpler terms the individual nature of assumption as awareness is replicated, through recursion, into a multiplied state where "I" exists through many "I"s with the idenity of "I" founded as a point of awareness because of assumption itself. Logic, as a means of defining reality which consists of the "I" itself, is as much an individual endeavor as much as a group agreed upon dogma.

Axioms are the abstract tools through which perspective is formed considering the nature of perspective is grounded in a process of imprinting in which the psyche, much like a field found in nature is synonymous to point space as a boundless field, is transformed by what it assumes. The axiom penetrates the field, in turn transforming it, and thus reflects not just basic agricultural methods as the foundation for civilization or the basic movement of a phenomenon warping the space around it through relativity but also the base act of sexual reproduction or the active male and passive female dichotomy found in nature.

This nature of logic, as an interpretation of reality, changes in accords with the axioms assumed with the destruction of axioms in turn changing the nature through which the field of awareness manifests itself. Tools form "reality", change the tools and reality changes.

Logical fallacies, as axioms in themselves, are tools.

This is considering to apply the logical fallacies to negate logic itself requires the negation of the fallacies as well requires logic to have actual undiscovered/created foundations.

Thus to change the nature of logic, the first place to start in the assumptive process, is the "self" and how judgments are and are not applied.

This is all assumed of course, but this assumption of assumption by default follows its own laws and as such is rational.

[Age]

Read Pirsig's "Zen and The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". It is a good book.

In it he presents an argument I agree with (but am expanding upon right here): Western culture is grounded in Aristotelian Identity properities that necessitate an "us vs. them" mentality founded within the empirical perspective as "atomism". This atomism is summated under the these identity properties, within the grounds of "logic" as a means of interpreting reality, through the law of excluded middle where the "or"function is the focal point in which the western perspective is defined as a process of measurement.

In simpler terms when we observe the "or" function what we observe fundamentally is an act of separation itself as "or" is the foundation of the first "dichotomy" or "dualism", thus setting the grounds for the relation of "parts" (whether these parts are actual empirical phenomenon such as the atom, or abstract phenomenon such as the concept).

All particulation is atomism at its core, thus setting foundations for "relativity", with this atomism and relativity sythethised under the perspective of materialism through empiricism.

Aristotelian identity properties are a zeitgeist that form much of academic, and by default the surrounding, culture and as such they are as much a perspective and "means of measuring" reality considering they set the assumed axiomatic base western culture is founded upon. The "vs." mentality, exemplified under the law of excluded middle, while assumed, is a manner of assumption itself in which a phenomenon is observed an divided.

This division, whether it be abstract or empirical with this dichotomy in itself being subject to this same law of excluded middle, requires a projection of the observer as the observer him/her self is the"means" of separation in which the individual is the "point of awareness" that exists through that assumptive nature of "or".

"or", as a logical function, is a means of assumption in the respect and as such sets "a" grounding for awareness when observing the nature of assumption (or rather assuming assumption) requires a process of reception in which a phenomenon is defined "as is" thus necessitating a form of seperation because of its very act of definition requires a simultaneous "what it is not". A phenomenon, such as a bird, is assumed for what it is by what it is not, thus necessitating "or" as "assumption" being equivalent to a process of separation.

This "or" as the focal axiom of awareness reflects back to the psychology of the peoples and the culture composed of these peoples.

This further sets the ground for the process of "individualism", as a separation from the herd, that sets the context for current societal standards (under the context of consumer self-expression) that can be observed in the western process of individuation observed in Jungian Psychology, Darwin's Theory of Evolution (which mirrors Jung's process of individuation), Einstein's Relativity as the foundation for atomic technology, etc. that exists through the current industrialized manner we perceive reality as an "us vs nature".

In simpler terms, the "vs" mentality (or rather the extremes to which it is taken as competition and seperation is inevitable), can be argued as a logical conclusion to the foundations our civilization was built upon and is evidenced by the perceived social and world division resulting in what exists today.

All you have done is just more or less explained what has happened, up to now.

The question is asking how can we defeat, or change, this most idiotic mentality?

And what "is" happening and "will" happen as well. This idiotic mentality, as grounded on illusion or false foundations of reality, will eventually cancel itself out (like all evil by nature does) when a proper catalyst occurs that it cannot hold up to.

From the perspective of "logic as a premise for civilizations grounding interpretations of reality", logic itself must be destroyed. In destroying logic, however, we are still applying logic as a means to destroy logic thus necessitating logic to exist. Thus the destruction of one logic necessitates the assumption of another.

This assumptive process, which itself is assumed thus necessitating isomorphism/recursion where one assumption is turned to many and these many assumptions observe the recursion of the one assumption through variation, is inevitable.

Assumption is the foundation of logic considering "the assumption of a premise" is the premise of logic as logic itself and is an inescapable constant truth where even the first axiom of the Munchauseen Trillema (all axioms are assumed) is in itself assumed, thus self negated as a fallacy. The fallacies act as the negative boundaries as to what "logic is not", thus necessitating an isomorphic or thetical nature, as to "what it is".

This negative approach, or "cataphatic" in the terms of theology (which must also be observed considering both theology and logic stem from a assumption of "Logos" or some absolute truth that in itself is absolute because of continuity), as the foundations of logic/theology inevitably must be ruthlessly destroyed as well.

Logic and theology, through metaphysics as "being que being" as "isomorphic/recursive assumptions", set the foundations for culture where culture stems from the latin "cultura" quite literally is the cultivating of mass perspective where certain agreed axioms set the continuum of our actions through "values" (values are the continuous irrational means through which we fold through time and space and manipulate it).

These agreed axioms act as the metaphorical tools which cultivate the field of the masses awareness, or the zietgiest, which fundamentally is "mass perspective" as mass assumption of reality which reflects the foundations of awareness as "measurement" in itself synonymous to "divine plan" of pre and post socratic conceptions of "the logos".

The zietgiest, as mass assumption, necessities itself as a "general point of awareness" considering it is a multiplied general state of "individual" assumptions where the individual act of assumption, as grounded in empty mindedness where a phenomenon is imprinted upon an "empty field" synonymous to a single point, is isomorphically observed in a recursive state.

In simpler terms the individual nature of assumption as awareness is replicated, through recursion, into a multiplied state where "I" exists through many "I"s with the idenity of "I" founded as a point of awareness because of assumption itself. Logic, as a means of defining reality which consists of the "I" itself, is as much an individual endeavor as much as a group agreed upon dogma.

Axioms are the abstract tools through which perspective is formed considering the nature of perspective is grounded in a process of imprinting in which the psyche, much like a field found in nature is synonymous to point space as a boundless field, is transformed by what it assumes. The axiom penetrates the field, in turn transforming it, and thus reflects not just basic agricultural methods as the foundation for civilization or the basic movement of a phenomenon warping the space around it through relativity but also the base act of sexual reproduction or the active male and passive female dichotomy found in nature.

This nature of logic, as an interpretation of reality, changes in accords with the axioms assumed with the destruction of axioms in turn changing the nature through which the field of awareness manifests itself. Tools form "reality", change the tools and reality changes.

Logical fallacies, as axioms in themselves, are tools.

This is considering to apply the logical fallacies to negate logic itself requires the negation of the fallacies as well requires logic to have actual undiscovered/created foundations.

Thus to change the nature of logic, the first place to start in the assumptive process, is the "self" and how judgments are and are not applied.

This is all assumed of course, but this assumption of assumption by default follows its own laws and as such is rational.

I do not like to assume any thing.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Failed to recognise the irony here.

Yes, I obviously do know that we have not shown responsibility for the refugees we have helped to create. But i'm not the one throwing up the borders. You are!

Not 'helped to create'. CREATED. And the arrogant, racist English have been doing it for centuries! They persecuted the Irish to the point that they had to leave their own country rather than starve to death! Genuine refugees.
What the hell does not wanting open door immigration have to do with 'racism'?? Most of them have perfectly good countries that they've come from. They just see a softer prospect here. FFS. PCturds are the biggest wankers and hypocrites on the planet. Ok then. Let's blast every PCturd into space--then there should be enough room for more immigrants. Happy with that then?

According to you, that would be pandering to Big Business:
" All you 'open-borderers' are doing is pandering to Big Business interests."

The reason you have no counterargument and resort to the usual PC insults is because the PC position is completely irrational (not to mention hypocritical). They have no rational arguments because their position is entirely unreasonable. Who the hell are you twits to dictate to everyone else what they should be 'allowed' to think and feel? The PC always come across as patronising, false, and generally quite unhinged, but scratch the surface and you find a cess-pool of decidedly NON-PC thoughts and 'naughty' views. Classic divertionists. It's the only explanation for their nauseating stance: misplaced guilt, and wanting everyone else to be as full of self-loathing as they are--the political equivalent of the Ted Haggards of religious fundamentalism, both of whom set themselves up as society's moral standard-bearers.
There is no way that anyone with even half a brain really believes that 'there is no culture but human culture' and we are all exactly the same. It might be the case from the standpoint of an alien species obversing us from a great distance, but anyone who is part of it understands that it's not part of the human condition. Typical of the hypocrisy of the PC was their weeping and wailing when Hillary Clinton lost--the same mass-murdering Hillary Clinton who is a rabid warmonger and so racist that she relishes the torture and murder of muslims--especially muslim children.
So save your empty 'fascist' and 'racist' accusations for those who really are that way inclinced (starting with yourselves).
Btw, are you a school teacher by any chance? Or a clueless 'academic'? The worst of the the PC fascist brigade seem to be holed up in their academic ivory towers, too stupid and self-righteous to see that their patronising double-standards are doing just what they are dictating to everyone else NOT to do--treating certain 'races' as more sensitive, helpless, and stupid than everyone else. Strange, but that thought had never even crossed the minds of anyone but a tiny group of actual racists. Why would they assume that everyone but themselves is a rabid racist if not to point the finger and divert attention from their own innate rottenness?
Wow. The Japanese are anti-immigration in an extreme way. They don't give a damn what wet white Western 'academics' have to say about it (actually weirdly nothing). Are you saying that they are racists and fascists for taking that stance? Or do your demands for 'tolerance and acceptance' only extend to Western countries that have historically been predominantly white? How very patronising.
Self-serving politicians and Big Business really love you lot.
ps. If there's 'no such thing as culture except human culture' then why are you lot always banging on about 'embracing multiculturalism'?? I guess if there's only 'one cultural and ethnic identity' then that lets England off the hook for all its land thievery, so when they stole Ireland they were really only stealing from themselves

[Sculptor]

Not 'helped to create'. CREATED. And the arrogant, racist English have been doing it for centuries! They persecuted the Irish to the point that they had to leave their own country rather than starve to death! Genuine refugees.
What the hell does not wanting open door immigration have to do with 'racism'?? Most of them have perfectly good countries that they've come from. They just see a softer prospect here. FFS. PCturds are the biggest wankers and hypocrites on the planet. Ok then. Let's blast every PCturd into space--then there should be enough room for more immigrants. Happy with that then?

According to you, that would be pandering to Big Business:
" All you 'open-borderers' are doing is pandering to Big Business interests."

The reason you have no counterargument and resort to the usual PC insults is because the PC position is completely irrational (not to mention hypocritical). They have no rational arguments because their position is entirely unreasonable. Who the hell are you twits to dictate to everyone else what they should be 'allowed' to think and feel? The PC always come across as patronising, false, and generally quite unhinged, but scratch the surface and you find a cess-pool of decidedly NON-PC thoughts and 'naughty' views. Classic divertionists. It's the only explanation for their nauseating stance: misplaced guilt, and wanting everyone else to be as full of self-loathing as they are--the political equivalent of the Ted Haggards of religious fundamentalism, both of whom set themselves up as society's moral standard-bearers.
There is no way that anyone with even half a brain really believes that 'there is no culture but human culture' and we are all exactly the same. It might be the case from the standpoint of an alien species obversing us from a great distance, but anyone who is part of it understands that it's not part of the human condition. Typical of the hypocrisy of the PC was their weeping and wailing when Hillary Clinton lost--the same mass-murdering Hillary Clinton who is a rabid warmonger and so racist that she relishes the torture and murder of muslims--especially muslim children.
So save your empty 'fascist' and 'racist' accusations for those who really are that way inclinced (starting with yourselves).
Btw, are you a school teacher by any chance? Or a clueless 'academic'? The worst of the the PC fascist brigade seem to be holed up in their academic ivory towers, too stupid and self-righteous to see that their patronising double-standards are doing just what they are dictating to everyone else NOT to do--treating certain 'races' as more sensitive, helpless, and stupid than everyone else. Strange, but that thought had never even crossed the minds of anyone but a tiny group of actual racists. Why would they assume that everyone but themselves is a rabid racist if not to point the finger and divert attention from their own innate rottenness?
Wow. The Japanese are anti-immigration in an extreme way. They don't give a damn what wet white Western 'academics' have to say about it (actually weirdly nothing). Are you saying that they are racists and fascists for taking that stance? Or do your demands for 'tolerance and acceptance' only extend to Western countries that have historically been predominantly white? How very patronising.
Self-serving politicians and Big Business really love you lot.
ps. If there's 'no such thing as culture except human culture' then why are you lot always banging on about 'embracing multiculturalism'?? I guess if there's only 'one cultural and ethnic identity' then that lets England off the hook for all its land thievery, so when they stole Ireland they were really only stealing from themselves

I think you are clinically insane.

[Eodnhoj7]

All you have done is just more or less explained what has happened, up to now.

The question is asking how can we defeat, or change, this most idiotic mentality?

And what "is" happening and "will" happen as well. This idiotic mentality, as grounded on illusion or false foundations of reality, will eventually cancel itself out (like all evil by nature does) when a proper catalyst occurs that it cannot hold up to.

From the perspective of "logic as a premise for civilizations grounding interpretations of reality", logic itself must be destroyed. In destroying logic, however, we are still applying logic as a means to destroy logic thus necessitating logic to exist. Thus the destruction of one logic necessitates the assumption of another.

This assumptive process, which itself is assumed thus necessitating isomorphism/recursion where one assumption is turned to many and these many assumptions observe the recursion of the one assumption through variation, is inevitable.

Assumption is the foundation of logic considering "the assumption of a premise" is the premise of logic as logic itself and is an inescapable constant truth where even the first axiom of the Munchauseen Trillema (all axioms are assumed) is in itself assumed, thus self negated as a fallacy. The fallacies act as the negative boundaries as to what "logic is not", thus necessitating an isomorphic or thetical nature, as to "what it is".

This negative approach, or "cataphatic" in the terms of theology (which must also be observed considering both theology and logic stem from a assumption of "Logos" or some absolute truth that in itself is absolute because of continuity), as the foundations of logic/theology inevitably must be ruthlessly destroyed as well.

Logic and theology, through metaphysics as "being que being" as "isomorphic/recursive assumptions", set the foundations for culture where culture stems from the latin "cultura" quite literally is the cultivating of mass perspective where certain agreed axioms set the continuum of our actions through "values" (values are the continuous irrational means through which we fold through time and space and manipulate it).

These agreed axioms act as the metaphorical tools which cultivate the field of the masses awareness, or the zietgiest, which fundamentally is "mass perspective" as mass assumption of reality which reflects the foundations of awareness as "measurement" in itself synonymous to "divine plan" of pre and post socratic conceptions of "the logos".

The zietgiest, as mass assumption, necessities itself as a "general point of awareness" considering it is a multiplied general state of "individual" assumptions where the individual act of assumption, as grounded in empty mindedness where a phenomenon is imprinted upon an "empty field" synonymous to a single point, is isomorphically observed in a recursive state.

In simpler terms the individual nature of assumption as awareness is replicated, through recursion, into a multiplied state where "I" exists through many "I"s with the idenity of "I" founded as a point of awareness because of assumption itself. Logic, as a means of defining reality which consists of the "I" itself, is as much an individual endeavor as much as a group agreed upon dogma.

Axioms are the abstract tools through which perspective is formed considering the nature of perspective is grounded in a process of imprinting in which the psyche, much like a field found in nature is synonymous to point space as a boundless field, is transformed by what it assumes. The axiom penetrates the field, in turn transforming it, and thus reflects not just basic agricultural methods as the foundation for civilization or the basic movement of a phenomenon warping the space around it through relativity but also the base act of sexual reproduction or the active male and passive female dichotomy found in nature.

This nature of logic, as an interpretation of reality, changes in accords with the axioms assumed with the destruction of axioms in turn changing the nature through which the field of awareness manifests itself. Tools form "reality", change the tools and reality changes.

Logical fallacies, as axioms in themselves, are tools.

This is considering to apply the logical fallacies to negate logic itself requires the negation of the fallacies as well requires logic to have actual undiscovered/created foundations.

Thus to change the nature of logic, the first place to start in the assumptive process, is the "self" and how judgments are and are not applied.

This is all assumed of course, but this assumption of assumption by default follows its own laws and as such is rational.

I do not like to assume any thing.

Your subjectivism is an assumed stance.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

According to you, that would be pandering to Big Business:
" All you 'open-borderers' are doing is pandering to Big Business interests."

The reason you have no counterargument and resort to the usual PC insults is because the PC position is completely irrational (not to mention hypocritical). They have no rational arguments because their position is entirely unreasonable. Who the hell are you twits to dictate to everyone else what they should be 'allowed' to think and feel? The PC always come across as patronising, false, and generally quite unhinged, but scratch the surface and you find a cess-pool of decidedly NON-PC thoughts and 'naughty' views. Classic divertionists. It's the only explanation for their nauseating stance: misplaced guilt, and wanting everyone else to be as full of self-loathing as they are--the political equivalent of the Ted Haggards of religious fundamentalism, both of whom set themselves up as society's moral standard-bearers.
There is no way that anyone with even half a brain really believes that 'there is no culture but human culture' and we are all exactly the same. It might be the case from the standpoint of an alien species obversing us from a great distance, but anyone who is part of it understands that it's not part of the human condition. Typical of the hypocrisy of the PC was their weeping and wailing when Hillary Clinton lost--the same mass-murdering Hillary Clinton who is a rabid warmonger and so racist that she relishes the torture and murder of muslims--especially muslim children.
So save your empty 'fascist' and 'racist' accusations for those who really are that way inclinced (starting with yourselves).
Btw, are you a school teacher by any chance? Or a clueless 'academic'? The worst of the the PC fascist brigade seem to be holed up in their academic ivory towers, too stupid and self-righteous to see that their patronising double-standards are doing just what they are dictating to everyone else NOT to do--treating certain 'races' as more sensitive, helpless, and stupid than everyone else. Strange, but that thought had never even crossed the minds of anyone but a tiny group of actual racists. Why would they assume that everyone but themselves is a rabid racist if not to point the finger and divert attention from their own innate rottenness?
Wow. The Japanese are anti-immigration in an extreme way. They don't give a damn what wet white Western 'academics' have to say about it (actually weirdly nothing). Are you saying that they are racists and fascists for taking that stance? Or do your demands for 'tolerance and acceptance' only extend to Western countries that have historically been predominantly white? How very patronising.
Self-serving politicians and Big Business really love you lot.
ps. If there's 'no such thing as culture except human culture' then why are you lot always banging on about 'embracing multiculturalism'?? I guess if there's only 'one cultural and ethnic identity' then that lets England off the hook for all its land thievery, so when they stole Ireland they were really only stealing from themselves

I think you are clinically insane.

I was expecting that. True to form. It all just happens to be 100% true. The only reason you can't see that is because PC is a religion,and religion messes up the brain chemicals. It's a shame how religious zeal muddies and corrupts even the most basic human ideals--eg kindness and compassion--and turns them into something self-serving, negative and destructive.

[Sculptor]

The reason you have no counterargument and resort to the usual PC insults is because the PC position is completely irrational (not to mention hypocritical). They have no rational arguments because their position is entirely unreasonable. Who the hell are you twits to dictate to everyone else what they should be 'allowed' to think and feel? The PC always come across as patronising, false, and generally quite unhinged, but scratch the surface and you find a cess-pool of decidedly NON-PC thoughts and 'naughty' views. Classic divertionists. It's the only explanation for their nauseating stance: misplaced guilt, and wanting everyone else to be as full of self-loathing as they are--the political equivalent of the Ted Haggards of religious fundamentalism, both of whom set themselves up as society's moral standard-bearers.
There is no way that anyone with even half a brain really believes that 'there is no culture but human culture' and we are all exactly the same. It might be the case from the standpoint of an alien species obversing us from a great distance, but anyone who is part of it understands that it's not part of the human condition. Typical of the hypocrisy of the PC was their weeping and wailing when Hillary Clinton lost--the same mass-murdering Hillary Clinton who is a rabid warmonger and so racist that she relishes the torture and murder of muslims--especially muslim children.
So save your empty 'fascist' and 'racist' accusations for those who really are that way inclinced (starting with yourselves).
Btw, are you a school teacher by any chance? Or a clueless 'academic'? The worst of the the PC fascist brigade seem to be holed up in their academic ivory towers, too stupid and self-righteous to see that their patronising double-standards are doing just what they are dictating to everyone else NOT to do--treating certain 'races' as more sensitive, helpless, and stupid than everyone else. Strange, but that thought had never even crossed the minds of anyone but a tiny group of actual racists. Why would they assume that everyone but themselves is a rabid racist if not to point the finger and divert attention from their own innate rottenness?
Wow. The Japanese are anti-immigration in an extreme way. They don't give a damn what wet white Western 'academics' have to say about it (actually weirdly nothing). Are you saying that they are racists and fascists for taking that stance? Or do your demands for 'tolerance and acceptance' only extend to Western countries that have historically been predominantly white? How very patronising.
Self-serving politicians and Big Business really love you lot.
ps. If there's 'no such thing as culture except human culture' then why are you lot always banging on about 'embracing multiculturalism'?? I guess if there's only 'one cultural and ethnic identity' then that lets England off the hook for all its land thievery, so when they stole Ireland they were really only stealing from themselves

I think you are clinically insane.

I was expecting that. True to form. It all just happens to be 100% true. The only reason you can't see that is because PC is a religion,and religion messes up the brain chemicals. It's a shame how religious zeal muddies and corrupts even the most basic human ideals--eg kindness and compassion--and turns them into something self-serving, negative and destructive.

If you really expected that not surprises there since you rabid polemic was designed to engender that reaction.
I don't know what the who the hell you think I am, or what I am, but nothing you have said remotely relates to me.
I'm just sitting back rather bemused at your ranting.
Can I have some more??

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I think you are clinically insane.

I was expecting that. True to form. It all just happens to be 100% true. The only reason you can't see that is because PC is a religion,and religion messes up the brain chemicals. It's a shame how religious zeal muddies and corrupts even the most basic human ideals--eg kindness and compassion--and turns them into something self-serving, negative and destructive.

If you really expected that not surprises there since you rabid polemic was designed to engender that reaction.
I don't know what the who the hell you think I am, or what I am, but nothing you have said remotely relates to me.
I'm just sitting back rather bemused at your ranting.
Can I have some more??

It relates to you perfectly. You are the one who called me a 'fascist' just because you think open door immigration is a good thing and I don't. It's a classic PC manoeuvre. If I wanted to live in a country that's bursting at the seams with far too many humans then I would go and live in Singapore or China, but at least China's population has increased naturally over thousands of years, not over a couple of decades just after acquiring its own identity.
Big Business profits and providing a convenient money-laundering service for wealthy foreigners are not my idea of paradise.

[Sculptor]

I was expecting that. True to form. It all just happens to be 100% true. The only reason you can't see that is because PC is a religion,and religion messes up the brain chemicals. It's a shame how religious zeal muddies and corrupts even the most basic human ideals--eg kindness and compassion--and turns them into something self-serving, negative and destructive.

If you really expected that not surprises there since you rabid polemic was designed to engender that reaction.
I don't know what the who the hell you think I am, or what I am, but nothing you have said remotely relates to me.
I'm just sitting back rather bemused at your ranting.
Can I have some more??

It relates to you perfectly. You are the one who called me a 'fascist' just because you think open door immigration is a good thing and I don't. It's a classic PC manoeuvre. If I wanted to live in a country that's bursting at the seams with far too many humans then I would go and live in Singapore or China, but at least China's population has increased naturally over thousands of years, not over a couple of decades just after acquiring its own identity.
Big Business profits and providing a convenient money-laundering service for wealthy foreigners are not my idea of paradise.

You don't have a fucking clue about me you stupid arse.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

If you really expected that not surprises there since you rabid polemic was designed to engender that reaction.
I don't know what the who the hell you think I am, or what I am, but nothing you have said remotely relates to me.
I'm just sitting back rather bemused at your ranting.
Can I have some more??

It relates to you perfectly. You are the one who called me a 'fascist' just because you think open door immigration is a good thing and I don't. It's a classic PC manoeuvre. If I wanted to live in a country that's bursting at the seams with far too many humans then I would go and live in Singapore or China, but at least China's population has increased naturally over thousands of years, not over a couple of decades just after acquiring its own identity.
Big Business profits and providing a convenient money-laundering service for wealthy foreigners are not my idea of paradise.

You don't have a fucking clue about me you stupid arse.

Ditto. You don't have to get so angry just because I don't agree with you. I agree with you on pretty much every other topic you've ever made a comment about.

[Sculptor]

It relates to you perfectly. You are the one who called me a 'fascist' just because you think open door immigration is a good thing and I don't. It's a classic PC manoeuvre. If I wanted to live in a country that's bursting at the seams with far too many humans then I would go and live in Singapore or China, but at least China's population has increased naturally over thousands of years, not over a couple of decades just after acquiring its own identity.
Big Business profits and providing a convenient money-laundering service for wealthy foreigners are not my idea of paradise.

You don't have a fucking clue about me you stupid arse.

Ditto. You don't have to get so angry just because I don't agree with you. I agree with you on pretty much every other topic you've ever made a comment about.

I'm not angry.
You are just on a meaningless rant, and I'd rather save your time.

[Age]

And what "is" happening and "will" happen as well. This idiotic mentality, as grounded on illusion or false foundations of reality, will eventually cancel itself out (like all evil by nature does) when a proper catalyst occurs that it cannot hold up to.

From the perspective of "logic as a premise for civilizations grounding interpretations of reality", logic itself must be destroyed. In destroying logic, however, we are still applying logic as a means to destroy logic thus necessitating logic to exist. Thus the destruction of one logic necessitates the assumption of another.

This assumptive process, which itself is assumed thus necessitating isomorphism/recursion where one assumption is turned to many and these many assumptions observe the recursion of the one assumption through variation, is inevitable.

Assumption is the foundation of logic considering "the assumption of a premise" is the premise of logic as logic itself and is an inescapable constant truth where even the first axiom of the Munchauseen Trillema (all axioms are assumed) is in itself assumed, thus self negated as a fallacy. The fallacies act as the negative boundaries as to what "logic is not", thus necessitating an isomorphic or thetical nature, as to "what it is".

This negative approach, or "cataphatic" in the terms of theology (which must also be observed considering both theology and logic stem from a assumption of "Logos" or some absolute truth that in itself is absolute because of continuity), as the foundations of logic/theology inevitably must be ruthlessly destroyed as well.

Logic and theology, through metaphysics as "being que being" as "isomorphic/recursive assumptions", set the foundations for culture where culture stems from the latin "cultura" quite literally is the cultivating of mass perspective where certain agreed axioms set the continuum of our actions through "values" (values are the continuous irrational means through which we fold through time and space and manipulate it).

These agreed axioms act as the metaphorical tools which cultivate the field of the masses awareness, or the zietgiest, which fundamentally is "mass perspective" as mass assumption of reality which reflects the foundations of awareness as "measurement" in itself synonymous to "divine plan" of pre and post socratic conceptions of "the logos".

The zietgiest, as mass assumption, necessities itself as a "general point of awareness" considering it is a multiplied general state of "individual" assumptions where the individual act of assumption, as grounded in empty mindedness where a phenomenon is imprinted upon an "empty field" synonymous to a single point, is isomorphically observed in a recursive state.

In simpler terms the individual nature of assumption as awareness is replicated, through recursion, into a multiplied state where "I" exists through many "I"s with the idenity of "I" founded as a point of awareness because of assumption itself. Logic, as a means of defining reality which consists of the "I" itself, is as much an individual endeavor as much as a group agreed upon dogma.

Axioms are the abstract tools through which perspective is formed considering the nature of perspective is grounded in a process of imprinting in which the psyche, much like a field found in nature is synonymous to point space as a boundless field, is transformed by what it assumes. The axiom penetrates the field, in turn transforming it, and thus reflects not just basic agricultural methods as the foundation for civilization or the basic movement of a phenomenon warping the space around it through relativity but also the base act of sexual reproduction or the active male and passive female dichotomy found in nature.

This nature of logic, as an interpretation of reality, changes in accords with the axioms assumed with the destruction of axioms in turn changing the nature through which the field of awareness manifests itself. Tools form "reality", change the tools and reality changes.

Logical fallacies, as axioms in themselves, are tools.

This is considering to apply the logical fallacies to negate logic itself requires the negation of the fallacies as well requires logic to have actual undiscovered/created foundations.

Thus to change the nature of logic, the first place to start in the assumptive process, is the "self" and how judgments are and are not applied.

This is all assumed of course, but this assumption of assumption by default follows its own laws and as such is rational.

I do not like to assume any thing.

Your subjectivism is an assumed stance.

If I do not like to do some thing, then that is not an assumed stance at all. It is, just how it is.

It is in fact the exact opposite of subjectivism, as it is an objective truth.

[Eodnhoj7]

I do not like to assume any thing.

Your subjectivism is an assumed stance.

If I do not like to do some thing, then that is not an assumed stance at all. It is, just how it is.

It is in fact the exact opposite of subjectivism, as it is an objective truth.

Actually it is an assumed stance considering:

1. You are assuming you know yourself well enough as to what you like and do not like.

2. You are assuming you will not change your opinion at a later time.

3. You are assuming that "your" likes are actually "your" own and not merely a replication of other peoples behaviors as a means to fit in.


Objectivity is group subjective agreement where inner subjectivity necessitates a state of dynamic tension in perspectives that the individual holds thus necessitating "multiple I's" within the individual allowing for a state of inner objectivity to be observed. This requires a dualism between the conscious and unconscious, in Jungian Terms, or the multiple egos' in Freud's sense.

The multiple subjective states, both as extensions of the "I" can be argued as synonymous to "perspectives" or "means of awareness", effectively set the foundation for objectivity in the respect boundaries are given.

One perspective alone has little "boundary" to it and is irrational by nature considering exists as a continuum.

The multitude of perspectives, in tension with eachother, give definition to eachother by define what each one "is" and "is not" because of there synthetic interplay. For example a single point has no definition on its own terms...it exists as a boundless field.

The same point in contrast to another point gains an "atomic" or localized nature when in contrast to another point. The same applies for awareness.

In simpler terms the only way to be objective internally is to hold multiple perspectives at once.