A small issue that arises when dealing with political issues.....

[Jaskalas]

Imagine you went through a fascist dictatorship and a concentration camp as a child and suppressed all memory of it to survive by feeling that you really deserved it, do you think you wouldn't tend to project that fear at the drop of a hat as anxiety about tomorrow? It would also be hard to answer that question if you don't know what you really feel. But if anything like that were true than your fears would be such a needless waste. You had to have acquired an antipathy toward fascism from somewhere to feel empathy for those who have to endure it.

Born and raised Americans have never felt that. But we are beginning to learn as the rule of law vanishes and is pushed aside by the executive use of force.
The changes to this country, the unmasking of humanity as we reveal our true face, that contributes to the breakdown of political discourse in America.
Who can honestly look at this country and not feel anxiety about tomorrow?

 

[Moonbeam]

I think this is a crucial insight. You hear a response with a disagreeable opinion as a negation of you. You read Jaskalas's post and concluded that they were directly dismissing your ideas, which is tantamount to demanding that you accept what they say is true when you know it to be false. To me he was just responding with his opinion like others did. You made his post about you. This is what I meant about giving people the benefit of the doubt, starting from an assumption of good faith. It's possible you already have a history with Jaskalas and have concluded that when he responds he is always fundamentally attacking you, I don't know. I don't think so because you have responded this way with many forum members in many different contexts. I am certain you periodically get dismissive responses. I've responded dismissively towards you. I really believe Jaskalas was sharing their opinion. I ask you to consider whether you are the one who is making it about you rather than the respondent.

OK, let’s make this about me making this about me.

What I take that to mean is that you are saying I have personally attached, somehow, some sort of self importance, some sort of ego identification to what I say, that if my opinions are not correct I will have lost something or other that would make me experience something I do not want to experience. Does that sound about right?

If my ideas are challenged I feel attacked., that I take it personally and do not hear the comment as it was actually properly intended and that this is dismissive and discourteous to the other person???

Am I on the right track here?

If so could you please suggest to me any reason you might see that could be causing me to do that.

 

[Moonbeam]

Born and raised Americans have never felt that. But we are beginning to learn as the rule of law vanishes and is pushed aside by the executive use of force.
The changes to this country, the unmasking of humanity as we reveal our true face, that contributes to the breakdown of political discourse in America.
Who can honestly look at this country and not feel anxiety about tomorrow?

I take it as a scientific fact of human psychology that we create what we fear and that what we fear is to feel our real feelings.

The inevitable facts that tumble out of such this ‘believed to be repeatably observable phenomenon, in my opinion, is that those engaged in creating a dictatorial state have repressed the fearful memories of one like it that have already lived through. I therefore humbly reject your opinion that born and raised Americans have never experienced that.

The psychological teachings and teacher I once had informed the younger me who would have argued just like you do, that I had already experienced what was worse than a concentration camp. I remember going into my feelings toe deep one night and sobbing in tears of despair and repeating over and over out loud that I had no idea I felt this bad even though I had already been told that I did. So I can appreciate where you are coming from. I had no idea and boy was that true.

When I look at the America you see that is causing you anxiety I think I know exactly what you mean. I think I see the same US. I just don’t view my anxiety reactions to it like you do. I don’t want a violent revolution with slaughter in the streets and I rather doubt it will happen. Most people, in my opinion including you, based on your past posts, want somebody else to start the revolt while you observe some 5000 yards off shore through heavy lenses. (Jonathan Winters)

I am certain by having directly experienced tracing present day anxieties to past childhood events an enormous shock of revelation that what I thought I was feeling at some past present was actually rooted much farther into my past. Not only did the experience of having the real root of some feeling or other, say anger, go from the present to the past in a completely unknown and surprising way, to say the least, to an extent of allowing it to manifest into full force fury and beating myself black and blue moments before, but that itself lead on moments later to the onslaught of tenderness and pity for a long lost suffering child. To grieve is to heal and we deeply hide our grief.

To awaken to what we really feel is to heal and that is the real revolution that needs to take place. Nobody is completely safe in a world where we fear death. That is a given. We make matters worse hating what is inevitable. But the real tragedy is that fear amounts to the fear of life itself. That’s not a health path to go down.

We are stuck with what we feel we deserve. Grief flips the world on its head. There is nothing to do but try to awaken from the world of creatively imagined impending doom that may or may not ever happen and in talented cases probably never will.

 

[Pontius Dilate]

OK, let’s make this about me making this about me.

What I take that to mean is that you are saying I have personally attached, somehow, some sort of self importance, some sort of ego identification to what I say, that if my opinions are not correct I will have lost something or other that would make me experience something I do not want to experience. Does that sound about right?

If my ideas are challenged I feel attacked., that I take it personally and do not hear the comment as it was actually properly intended and that this is dismissive and discourteous to the other person???

Am I on the right track here?

If so could you please suggest to me any reason you might see that could be causing me to do that.

Sort of. Repasting what you said earlier:

You express later in this post that on this subject I am anything but doubtful that self hate is the hidden puppet master pulling the strings of our actions and rationalizations to maintain that dependent relationship. Keeping that in mind what do you think I hear when someone dismisses all of this as unreal.

I hear people demanding I give credit to the rationalizations produced by their self hate, a plea to buy into those delusions, to say yes your self hate is a good thing and you should stick with it. Not going to happen where I am conscious enough to not fall into that enabler trap.

Specifically this: "what do you think I hear when someone dismisses all of this as unreal. I hear people demanding I give credit to the rationalizations produced by their self hate." When did that happen? Did Jaskalas dismiss everything you said as unreal? Did Jaskalas demand that you accept what they said? You started this thread with a set of propositions and observations. I assume you wanted to engage in conversation about it, otherwise why choose an open forum? But for some reason Jaskalas's post appears to have struck you as being directed AT you instead of in response to what you said. As far as hearing the comment as it was actually properly intended, we can run with what we believe the intention to have been, or we can ask for clarification if we're not sure. But misunderstanding the intent is not itself dismissive and discourteous, dismissing everything the person said and instead talking ABOUT the person as if they were an automaton is dismissive and discourteous.

I don't know why you responded the way you did in this case. I know it's not an isolated incident, you've responded to others in much the same vein. But I pulled out those quotes because you ascribed specific actions and intentions to the commenter, and indicated that this happens repeatedly. So my question is did Jaskalas really write what you ascribe to them? Are some people required to adopt and reference your framework in order to be addressed as conscious beings with conscious intentions?

 

[Moonbeam]

Sort of. Repasting what you said earlier:

I know what repasting something would be mean and I know what what you quoted that I sort of repasted but I don't know what you refer to that I previously posted that you are saying is basically a repaste. And regardless of whether I said something before or not that is similar, I don't recall anything you said that addresses the question of what you might suggest is causing me to do what you say I am doing. I did not reread everything I have said to you here to try to identify what you think I am repeating.

Specifically this: "what do you think I hear when someone dismisses all of this as unreal. I hear people demanding I give credit to the rationalizations produced by their self hate." When did that happen? Did Jaskalas dismiss everything you said as unreal? Did Jaskalas demand that you accept what they said? You started this thread with a set of propositions and observations. I assume you wanted to engage in conversation about it, otherwise why choose an open forum? But for some reason Jaskalas's post appears to have struck you as being directed AT you instead of in response to what you said. As far as hearing the comment as it was actually properly intended, we can run with what we believe the intention to have been, or we can ask for clarification if we're not sure. But misunderstanding the intent is not itself dismissive and discourteous, dismissing everything the person said and instead talking ABOUT the person as if they were an automaton is dismissive and discourteous.

Why is that dismissive? Is it not because you are not happy thinking of yourself as a robot? This is what I mean by having automatic unexamined assumptions that you are not conscious you have. I also refer to that as being a robot. You automatically and involuntarily assume that being a robot is a criticism and a fault for which you could be dismissed for having. To me this is ego pride. It insults the image you have of yourself, of how it is proper to view others.

I have tried to tell you this is an inevitable reaction I am profoundly aware will be people's reaction and why? I have been a robot most all of my life. I see it in myself everyday. I constantly fall asleep, fail to maintain awareness just of the present, wonder off into intellectualism and dreaming and because I am mercilessly self analytical. I told you my inability to pretend life was great cost me everything I held sacred including the delusion I have free will. I see a monster is me, a fireball of incandescent rage. I am why horror movies exist. There's a line from a One Eyed Jacks. 'you may be a one eyed jack around here, but I seen the other side of your face' I can't forget. I've seen the other side of my face. What happens with Beauty kisses that beast? Everywhere you look you will see truth that is hidden come forth as allegory. The enemy is a hydra with a thousand heads, none of which you can look at directly without turning to stone. This is why the Hero comes armed with a mirror for a shield to see the monster by reflection, and a sword to cut off the heads. Without a mirror all the intention to kill the dragon is totally useless because the dragon is always 180 degrees from where you thrust the sword. If you don't understand the function of a mirror the appearance of Cinderella will disturb your vanity. Only the seeker will not l flee from the horror seen there.

You can't solve the problem of self hate by self hating your self for self hate and turn that hatred outward onto the world. We do thin because we believe we are to blame, that blame is the moral thing to do, that if we can just blame enough we will change our ways.

I believe the answer lies in another direction. There is nobody to blame because the process of blame is built on the lie of free will. You can change if you want to. Nope, you can't change that way because that is the ego saying I am to blame and am now going to do better because it's the master of lies. When you have seen this you have come to the end of the line. You are completely trapped and effort to escape is what the bars consist of. The man on a cliff with a tiger above and below is in a state where grace may appear. He found a strawberry and it tasted so good. All blame is a projection of self blame. All who blame believe the other is no good because he will not change. All who blame are confessing to feeling no good. Blame is based in on the unconscious suppressed feeling one is worthless and that becoming aware of it would just confirm what we already believe is true. You can't stop blaming by will power. You can see that it is useless and self destructive and know that you would be free of you could forgive. You can withdraw egotistical self approval and see instead you are a fool. This increases personal humility which decreases arrogance and self certainty.

Jaskalas thinks that by taking arms against a sea of troubles he can end them, but he doesn't know who the enemy is. He needs to relax and be happy but he can't. But he would de emphasize the faith he has in his plans. I think he deserves to hear that. I believe I know him because he is me but I'm less interested in being sucked into my own insanity. Perhaps. I'm not feeling it's a contest.

I don't know why you responded the way you did in this case. I know it's not an isolated incident, you've responded to others in much the same vein. But I pulled out those quotes because you ascribed specific actions and intentions to the commenter, and indicated that this happens repeatedly. So my question is did Jaskalas really write what you ascribe to them? Are some people required to adopt and reference your framework in order to be addressed as conscious beings with conscious intentions?

We go way back. I see him as really stuck on a negative view of human nature that distorts his thinking and turns it toward violence as the proper solution to external threat. He does not see what I think is the deeper reality, that his fears are the creation of what he believes, a product of excessive thought and overly active imagination likely of traumatic origin. A common variation is jumping off of a bridge. It's all fixable if one is open to it. So many do so because they do not know there is a way out, that the answers they seek have always been within them, requiring only some sort of shock to set them in motion.

 

[Pontius Dilate]

I know what repasting something would be mean and I know what what you quoted that I sort of repasted but I don't know what you refer to that I previously posted that you are saying is basically a repaste. And regardless of whether I said something before or not that is similar, I don't recall anything you said that addresses the question of what you might suggest is causing me to do what you say I am doing. I did not reread everything I have said to you here to try to identify what you think I am repeating.

I meant that I was re-pasting (quoting) something you said that I had pasted (quoted) before, so I could respond to it again with the context of your quote in close proximity, for clarity. I'm sorry if that was confusing. And no I didn't address the question of what causes you to react the way you do. I don't think any speculation I provide will be of use to you.

Why is that dismissive? Is it not because you are not happy thinking of yourself as a robot? This is what I mean by having automatic unexamined assumptions that you are not conscious you have. I also refer to that as being a robot. You automatically and involuntarily assume that being a robot is a criticism and a fault for which you could be dismissed for having. To me this is ego pride. It insults the image you have of yourself, of how it is proper to view others.

Why is it dismissive to dismiss the entirety of what someone says? On the basis that they are speaking as an unconscious robot? I wish you continued success with this manner of engagement.

 

[Moonbeam]

I meant that I was re-pasting (quoting) something you said that I had pasted (quoted) before, so I could respond to it again with the context of your quote in close proximity, for clarity. I'm sorry if that was confusing. And no I didn't address the question of what causes you to react the way you do. I don't think any speculation I provide will be of use to you.

I am easily confused by many things people say here. If I think what they are saying seems like it intends to be of value I simply ask for clarification especially if my confusion might color any intention I might have of responding. I want to be clear about what people are saying as many times I have gone off half cocked.

I note your ‘sorry’ but there is no need. As I say, I see the problem is in me.

Regarding your comment that your speculation would be useless to me, you are perhaps either dismissing yourself as being useless here or that I will shine on what you say as the product of a robot. If I felt either of those ways about you this conversation would not have taken place. I am aware that I am both useless to you and that I am also a robot.

My attitude is that the truth is the truth. It is not mine nor not mine. It is what it is regardless of what I say or believe. I have told you what I see. I have said what I see will not be a view others want to see. But I say it anyway. So perhaps you withhold speculation so as to avoid the trap you say I am in, telling people what they don’t know about themselves, dismissively.


And if in the less likely event, my speculation here, is that you were saying a sincere speculation on your part would probably not be up to snuff enough to be useful. You are dismissing yourself.

At any rate, I was not really asking for you to shed light of my internal situation. I was asking globally. How do you explain why anyone would act the way you see me.

That is what I have been trying to offer you, my answer to that question and since you do not like mine please tell me a better one.

Why is it dismissive to dismiss the entirety of what someone says? On the basis that they are speaking as an unconscious robot? I wish you continued success with this manner of engagement.

I will disregard your wishes for continued success, not because I don’t love the nasty intent behind the your irony which I do love a lot. It makes me smile. I dismiss it because it is a total fabrication of my well explained intent. You live in Plato’s cave along with me who long ago spent a second outside it. Love to you, you sleepy clown. And as soon as I really can I’m betting it’s because I impossibly managed to love me.

We are all the same covered by one truth. A Zen master said, “We are all enlightened. It would ne nice to know it.”

One last thought just popped into my head. The reason dogs love you is because they see God within you.

 

[Jaskalas]

When I look at the America you see that is causing you anxiety I think I know exactly what you mean. I think I see the same US. I just don’t view my anxiety reactions to it like you do. I don’t want a violent revolution with slaughter in the streets and I rather doubt it will happen. Most people, in my opinion including you, based on your past posts, want somebody else to start the revolt while you observe some 5000 yards off shore through heavy lenses. (Jonathan Winters)

So... you believe there will not be widespread violence, because few of us will resist the end of human rights.
That could be true, after all Germany did successfully implement the Holocaust.
Why would we be any better at stopping fascism?

Do you believe it is wrong for me to decry and speak out against MAGA Nazism?
Or perhaps is my tact in doing so misaligned, missing a more effective option?
Not that I think posts in P&N are effective towards change.
But it can still be a whetstone to sharpen one's wits on political subject.

 

[Moonbeam]

So... you believe there will not be widespread violence, because few of us will resist the end of human rights.

I don't want to put the cart before the horse. I do not know what will happen and I don't want to fall into a trauma origin imagination about it happening. You, in my opinion, have already lit the gas.

That could be true, after all Germany did successfully implement the Holocaust.

Yes and it might not happen. I have told you that I think fear of the future is fear of the past and that their is a psychological state that takes you out of time and changes everything you once believed if you experience it.

Why would we be any better at stopping fascism?

There is no reason to speculate one way or the other but we do know that what happened in the past can't be changed and never identically repeated. Now in not then so we can't say anything with certainty as to how things will go here. I already see moneyed interests breaking with Trump on some issues causing him to change course.

Do you believe it is wrong for me to decry and speak out against MAGA Nazism?

I do not believe either way on that. My issue is not whether it is right or wrong to speak our but what is the right way to speak out. I believe your view is alarmist and for the reasons I've stated, a traumatic past you fear will repeat.

Or perhaps is my tact in doing so misaligned, missing a more effective option?

Exactly. The risk of preemptive violence in the fact of growing threat, threat that is real and immediate as in right now, is that once you justify your self for violence you will permit yourself to do that puts you on the same level as those who will do that to you. The more conscious person always has to carry a greater burden.

Not that I think posts in P&N are effective towards change.

The effect here can be just like social media. We have moral responsibilities. I think I have made it clear just how ineffective I am. I am so ineffective it seems to bother people when I tell them why I think that is.

But it can still be a whetstone to sharpen one's wits on political subject.

For me i would say sharpening my wits is seeing and unlearning what I assumed without looking is true.