Comments

  1. says

    That’s true. And I believe the article is also true.
     
    People here have tried to figure out a few times what is strength and what the source of cruelty or meanness are amongst the Left.
     
    There’s a little bit of criminal psychology there as well. I’m not sure how I got to this field as an amateur, but I certainly am here, even though my high school and college education had… like zip to do with criminals and psychology. The basic requirement classes, that’s it. Psychology 101, yes. But no more. Yet I’m sitting here with a better appreciation of the human mind, including the criminal mind, than many of my peers.
     
    Part of it absolutely came from dealing with the lives and experiences of bouncers and other security specialists. The other part is a bit more fuzzy.
     
    Metaphysically, the truth is stronger than a lie because a lie is a human artifact created due to the inability to change reality. If you can create a lie as easily as reality, why not create your own reality. The answer is simple. Because it’s harder to change reality than it is to lie. It is harder to create than it is to destroy. The laws of physics which we are aware of, is consistent with those principles of energy conservation.
     
    But what this means in human terms is that people that want to build a better tomorrow have a harder task than those who just have to destroy tomorrow. So Obama’s doesn’t need to succeed in his “Leftist goals” by creating successful legislation. All he has to do is to create disasters which the US can’t solve. He doesn’t have to pass a thing or have any real success. All he has to do is to prevent us from fixing the problems. Time and entropy itself will bring us down in due time. Of course, they claim that they “know how to drive” and that “we need to get out of the driver’s seat”. That’s what they say, of course. What they keep secret is that their standard for success is far far different from what normal people might consider success.
     
     
     
     

  2. says

    Btw, institutional rot only happens after a few decades. You don’t have to worry about the Tea Party becoming corrupted. By the time it happens, you’ll most likely be dead if you are in the 40s or 50s range. Assuming America is still around by that time. Always making those assumptions.
     
    And, of course, the union and teacher’s unions and women’s rights were hijacked by Communists. Communists saw a popular cause, contributed nothing to its success, but thought it would be a great idea to hijack the movement and use its influence for the goals of Communism. The previous union leaders or what not, they all died off. Or were killed off by the Commies. Whichever way worked best.
     
    So it’s not just “institutional rot” we’re talking about. We’re also talking about deliberate sabotage, enemy infiltration and subversion. Those tends to accelerate matters on the timescale.
     
    When a church, a faith, or a belief-system cannot tolerate respectful outreach and evangelism by other faiths—if it, for example, cannot allow other faiths to reside nearby—it exhibits an insecurity that is a sign of weakness and can only sow weakness. And in response to it, something strong will eventually rise.

    This is addressing a multi faceted and complex tiered issue, and boiling it down to something like breakfast cereal. Somethings are left to be desired.

    The thing is, it’s not necessarily so that something stronger will eventually rise to replace it. Or rather, the “something else” often rises decades after the problem has had time to destroy and obliterate a couple of generations. So if you mean eventually as in centuries, yeah. If you mean eventually as in years, not necessarily.

    Spiritual strength is also a different substance than military strength. As seen in various revolutions, just because you believe, doesn’t make you immune to bullets, executions, or torture. This is reality, after all, not fantasy. While on an absolute efficiency scale, good is stronger than evil, evil tends to concentrate itself allowing itself to defeat good via divide and conquer. So it’s pointless how many people have healthy beliefs, when they can’t be organized to fight evil, while evil is greatly organized and resourced (Mullocracy, Sunni Wahabbism, Hamas, Hizbollah, MB, etc) Just cause a few families are “good” and have healthy beliefs, doesn’t mean they will win against all those evil organizations set against them. In that sense, they are not stronger than evil.
    Evil may be weak on an individual unit basis, but they sure get a bunch of numbers, now don’t they.

Leave a Reply