Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

(12-22-2018, 11:03 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]We "Blues" as a rule admire Abraham Lincoln. To be sure, FDR was not as merciful to Nazis as Lincoln was to the slave-owning planters who lost the American Civil War. Maybe people must show more tolerance of old evils that have long been tolerated out of political necessity than  to those who bring evil to the world as did Hitler and Tojo. The worst that the Confederacy did was Andersonville, and for that its commandant would die with a rope around his neck. By the way -- Abraham Lincoln and Donald Trump are two of the most dissimilar Presidents that we have ever had. I look at the deeds of Donald Trump and ask whether Lincoln would have done the same.

Liberalism includes everything from the classical liberalism of the Enlightenment (free enterprise instead of the feudal rights of an elite to a sure profit predicated upon duties of the masses to the feudal elites in return for the privilege of survival, denial of any divine right of kings, and basic rights as enumerated in the American Bill of Rights and the French  Declarations of the Rights of Man) to social democracy that extends liberalism to the ideal of equal opportunity to its fullest. "Liberalism" excludes anything still feudal (like Saudi Arabia), fascist, or Communist, all fair exclusions from liberalism. Ba'athism under Saddam Hussein or either Assad and the theocratic rule of either Iran or ISIS count as fascist in my set of definitions as does the KKK or Nazism.

Liberalism is not particularly American. I have more in common with a Japanese or Indian liberal than I have in common with an American fascist. Indeed I would sell out the American fascist war criminals to liberal Japanese or liberal Indian occupiers with no hesitation. I'm as anti-crime as I can be, and I cannot imagine worse crimes than war crimes... and I would expect American fascists to become war criminals. If I could say that there is nothing wrong with Saddam Hussein that a well-tied rope and a seven-foot drop couldn't solve, I would say the same of any American who commits such crimes. Liberalism asserts the core values of freedom of thought and expression, fair and competitive elections as the means of constituting government, the right to a fair trial to be judged by an independent judiciary, the abolition of whatever remaining feudal rights and duties, gender equity, ethnic equality, rule of law, and the absence of barbarous punishments. Liberalism is the expression of humanism (all in all, the only viable ideology) .

The kind/type of liberalism that you and Eric and some others represent/promote here is not particularly American in origin that's for sure. There is a reason why, I refer to you guys and gals (folks) as so-called liberals instead of liberals and why others refer to you folks as libtards instead of liberals and why others refer to you as loony or crazy liberals instead of liberals and why you guys are the only ones left posting here today.

(12-28-2018, 08:26 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-22-2018, 11:03 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]We "Blues" as a rule admire Abraham Lincoln. To be sure, FDR was not as merciful to Nazis as Lincoln was to the slave-owning planters who lost the American Civil War. Maybe people must show more tolerance of old evils that have long been tolerated out of political necessity than  to those who bring evil to the world as did Hitler and Tojo. The worst that the Confederacy did was Andersonville, and for that its commandant would die with a rope around his neck. By the way -- Abraham Lincoln and Donald Trump are two of the most dissimilar Presidents that we have ever had. I look at the deeds of Donald Trump and ask whether Lincoln would have done the same.

Liberalism includes everything from the classical liberalism of the Enlightenment (free enterprise instead of the feudal rights of an elite to a sure profit predicated upon duties of the masses to the feudal elites in return for the privilege of survival, denial of any divine right of kings, and basic rights as enumerated in the American Bill of Rights and the French  Declarations of the Rights of Man) to social democracy that extends liberalism to the ideal of equal opportunity to its fullest. "Liberalism" excludes anything still feudal (like Saudi Arabia), fascist, or Communist, all fair exclusions from liberalism. Ba'athism under Saddam Hussein or either Assad and the theocratic rule of either Iran or ISIS count as fascist in my set of definitions as does the KKK or Nazism.

Liberalism is not particularly American. I have more in common with a Japanese or Indian liberal than I have in common with an American fascist. Indeed I would sell out the American fascist war criminals to liberal Japanese or liberal Indian occupiers with no hesitation. I'm as anti-crime as I can be, and I cannot imagine worse crimes than war crimes... and I would expect American fascists to become war criminals. If I could say that there is nothing wrong with Saddam Hussein that a well-tied rope and a seven-foot drop couldn't solve, I would say the same of any American who commits such crimes. Liberalism asserts the core values of freedom of thought and expression, fair and competitive elections as the means of constituting government, the right to a fair trial to be judged by an independent judiciary, the abolition of whatever remaining feudal rights and duties, gender equity, ethnic equality, rule of law, and the absence of barbarous punishments. Liberalism is the expression of humanism (all in all, the only viable ideology) .

The kind/type of liberalism that you and Eric and some others represent/promote here is not particularly American in origin that's for sure. There is a reason why, I refer to you guys and gals (folks) as so-called liberals instead of liberals and why others refer to you folks as libtards instead of liberals and why others refer to you as loony or crazy liberals instead of liberals and why you guys are the only ones left posting here today.

Liberalism need not be American. Liberalism is truly international to the extent that a Zionist liberal has far more in common with an Iranian liberal than with a Jewish fascist (and it is sickening to know that there are some). Liberalism is the definitive political expression of enlightened humanism. Liberalism allows people cultural and religious identity, which explains how there are so many Islamic liberals in India.

Liberalism presumes some open-mindedness. Maybe a liberal would have no choice but to find religious bigotry, racism, slavery, militarism, homophobia, and such a practice as female genital mutilation appalling. That is not to say that we liberals recognize no rules, for there is physical and mathematical reality and there is formal logic that makes sense of the world. There are also fundamental decencies that people honor if liberalism is to be something other than cant. Consult the ancient Jews, Greeks, Hindus, and Chinese for basic truths beyond denial. Start with the rule of law, without which all social reality is a nightmare of either despotism or anarchy.

Some of us liberals  are anarcho-syndicalists; some of us are near-libertarians, depending on whether we think the improvement of Humanity and public institutions adequate for creating freedom and prosperity or believing that the harsh logic of an unfettered vital to economic success that solves all problems. Some of us are religious and some of us are pure atheists. We can look like anything, and as much as we can look like anything we have many places in the continuum.

In case you ask 'What about conservatism?' -- I have used conservative arguments for racial equity and gay rights. 'Law and order' is a conservative bromide, but I can say that without law and order, liberty is moot. Tyranny and disorder are criminal brothers. Oppression is not so much an excess of law and order but instead its denial. I have no use for lynchings, evidence of the breakdown of social order. I formulated a conservative defense of gay rights by stating that gay-bashing is so horrible that the promotion of homosexuality as normal protects us all just as does anti-racist law. Having been a victim of antisemitic rhetoric and having been scared of a homophobic beating, I must take the side of Jews and of gays when their right to human dignity are under attack. (Modern antisemitism is mostly racist, so an attack on racism is the defense of Humanity as a whole, which may explain why Jews sponsored the founding of the NAACP. Much of the basis of our morality is ancient knowledge. Murder, rape, theft, torture, enslavement, exploitation, adultery, perjury, and fraudulent oaths remain abominations because human nature is much the same as it was in antiquity.

I  suggest that you think it through. Your pattern of thought shows extreme superficiality. You are missing something in life, and it shows.

Has anyone thought about whether financial institutions (banks that offer credit cards) have a right to control purchases of objects, to wit firearms) that purchasers will never pay for because they will be arrested or killed for using in illegal ways ... and whose use can kill people and end the ability of credit-card users to pay back their credit-card charges?

I am not much of a friend of banks, but I would be on their side on that matter. I would be willing to have an embargo upon firearms purchases except for legitimate purposes of sport or for the obvious necessity of self-defense (Bear Country, and I do not mean fans of the Chicago Bears; any place with much drug activity).

(12-29-2018, 02:00 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Liberalism need not be American. Liberalism is truly international to the extent that a Zionist liberal has far more in common with an Iranian liberal than with a Jewish fascist (and it is sickening to know that there are some). Liberalism is the definitive political expression of enlightened humanism. Liberalism allows people cultural and religious identity, which explains how there are so many Islamic liberals in India.

Liberalism presumes some open-mindedness. Maybe a liberal would have no choice but to find religious bigotry, racism, slavery, militarism, homophobia, and such a practice as female genital mutilation appalling. That is not to say that we liberals recognize no rules, for there is physical and mathematical reality and there is formal logic that makes sense of the world. There are also fundamental decencies that people honor if liberalism is to be something other than cant. Consult the ancient Jews, Greeks, Hindus, and Chinese for basic truths beyond denial. Start with the rule of law, without which all social reality is a nightmare of either despotism or anarchy.

Some of us liberals  are anarcho-syndicalists; some of us are near-libertarians, depending on whether we think the improvement of Humanity and public institutions adequate for creating freedom and prosperity or believing that the harsh logic of an unfettered vital to economic success that solves all problems. Some of us are religious and some of us are pure atheists. We can look like anything, and as much as we can look like anything we have many places in the continuum.

In case you ask 'What about conservatism?' -- I have used conservative arguments for racial equity and gay rights. 'Law and order' is a conservative bromide, but I can say that without law and order, liberty is moot. Tyranny and disorder are criminal brothers. Oppression is not so much an excess of law and order but instead its denial. I have no use for lynchings, evidence of the breakdown of social order. I formulated a conservative defense of gay rights by stating that gay-bashing is so horrible that the promotion of homosexuality as normal protects us all just as does anti-racist law. Having been a victim of antisemitic rhetoric and having been scared of a homophobic beating, I must take the side of Jews and of gays when their right to human dignity are under attack. (Modern antisemitism is mostly racist, so an attack on racism is the defense of Humanity as a whole, which may explain why Jews sponsored the founding of the NAACP. Much of the basis of our morality is ancient knowledge. Murder, rape, theft, torture, enslavement, exploitation, adultery, perjury, and fraudulent oaths remain abominations because human nature is much the same as it was in antiquity.

I  suggest that you think it through. Your pattern of thought shows extreme superficiality. You are missing something in life, and it shows.

Hmmm. I'm a popular guy. I have many friends. I own a decent home. I own a business. I own all kinds of fun stuff. I have a decent wife. I'm financially stable, I'm close with my kid. I have a group of close friends that I've known since childhood or my early teenage years. I have some loving pets. My family (me and my siblings) is very close (we love and respect each other a lot and we enjoy and we enjoy being around each other and we're supportive of each other at all times) as well. I like my job and my career and the bulk of my customers and business associates.  

So, in your expert/professional opinion, what am I missing in my life at this point. I can see all kinds of things in that list that you're probably missing. So, I suggest you start thinking things through better while I'm around here. You're a better poster when you think things through better or recognize your mistakes and attempt redeem yourself with clarifications. I'm not worried about me. I'm pretty well armed and pretty well trained with firearms and I'm familiar with the outdoors and familiar with reds and familiar with decent blue folks too. I mean, you're superficial comments and statements and views are easy to identify, challenge, surgically dissect and seriously bring them all into question by other readers, people who pass through or other posters who participate from time to time.

(12-29-2018, 02:10 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone thought about whether financial institutions (banks that offer credit cards) have a right to control purchases of objects, to wit firearms) that purchasers  will never pay for because they will be arrested or killed for using in illegal ways ... and whose use can  kill people and end the ability of credit-card users to pay back their credit-card charges?

I am not much of a friend of banks, but I would be on their side on that matter. I would be willing to have an embargo upon firearms purchases except for legitimate purposes of sport or for the obvious necessity of self-defense (Bear Country, and I do not mean fans of the Chicago Bears; any place with much drug activity).

How do you sort out the mass murderer who kept their mouth shut or lied about their use of their purchase to a store clerk who passed a legal background check from the hunter who wants to use an AR-15 or some other assault rifle for hunting, the law abiding citizen who has a legal right to own an AR-15 to have or possibly use for self defense or the gun enthusiasts who think they're cool looking and fun to use target shooting who also passed their legal back ground checks and so forth. Do you want it to be a right to assume that your crazy and have you placed in an insane asylum for the rest of your life based purely on an assumption? Dude, pull your head out of some blue activists ass for once and think for yourself. Dude, you could be looking at the barrel of a sawed off shotgun, pistol or rifle of some burglar, hardened criminal or mass murderer at anytime or anyplace these days. You don't have to be a criminal for a criminal to point a gun at you. Criminals point guns at law abiding citizens and members of law enforcement all the time.

(12-30-2018, 04:15 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-29-2018, 02:10 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone thought about whether financial institutions (banks that offer credit cards) have a right to control purchases of objects, to wit firearms) that purchasers  will never pay for because they will be arrested or killed for using in illegal ways ... and whose use can  kill people and end the ability of credit-card users to pay back their credit-card charges?

I am not much of a friend of banks, but I would be on their side on that matter. I would be willing to have an embargo upon firearms purchases except for legitimate purposes of sport or for the obvious necessity of self-defense (Bear Country, and I do not mean fans of the Chicago Bears; any place with much drug activity).

How do you sort out the mass murderer who kept their mouth shut or lied about their use of their purchase to a store clerk  who passed a legal background check  from the hunter who wants to use an AR-15 or some other assault rifle  for hunting, the law abiding citizen who has a legal right to own an AR-15 to have or possibly  use for self defense or the  gun enthusiasts who think they're cool looking and fun to use target shooting who also passed their legal back ground checks and so forth. Do you want it to be a right to assume that your crazy and have you placed in an insane asylum for the rest of your life based purely on an assumption? Dude, pull your head out of some blue activists ass for once and think for yourself. Dude, you could be looking at the barrel of a sawed off shotgun, pistol or rifle of some burglar, hardened criminal or mass murderer at anytime or anyplace these days. You don't have to be a criminal for a criminal to point a gun at you. Criminals point guns at law abiding citizens and members of law enforcement all the time.

Did I discuss the AR-15 outside of its context as a massacre weapon? One is enough, and if someone is purchasing huge amounts of ammo such should be the warning sign. Someone buying a huge number of guns and a huge amount of ammo is likely not someone likely to pay back a credit card debt for the purchase.

Bankers are already responsible for people using credit cards in attempts to launder money or participate in fraud of any kind. Certain charges are illegal, such as use of credit cards in illicit transactions such as gambling in violation of state laws.

Point a firearm at me,and you have committed assault with a deadly weapon. Point a gun on a cop, and expect to die.

I should be able to live without a firearm if I so choose. I am not stupid. This said, I have a dog, and few burglars want to face my dog's large, dirty teeth or claws that can do great damage first from painful lacerations followed by serious infections. I got hospital treatment for a dog scratch that got infected. The dog was my cocker spaniel. Dogs do not scratch like cats; they scratch worse.

Four Dobermans, Rottweilers, or German leopards are good reasons to back off from a potential burglary. Such dogs might as well be one tiger in an angry confrontation with a burglar. I was only a Census enumerator when facing about 400 ponds of top predator... and I got the primal fear that I could have been meat.  People in crime-ridden South Africa often have firearms, but they have to protect the guns that criminals would love to steal. Dogs are even more aggressive than lions.

(12-30-2018, 01:16 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-30-2018, 04:15 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-29-2018, 02:10 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone thought about whether financial institutions (banks that offer credit cards) have a right to control purchases of objects, to wit firearms) that purchasers  will never pay for because they will be arrested or killed for using in illegal ways ... and whose use can  kill people and end the ability of credit-card users to pay back their credit-card charges?

I am not much of a friend of banks, but I would be on their side on that matter. I would be willing to have an embargo upon firearms purchases except for legitimate purposes of sport or for the obvious necessity of self-defense (Bear Country, and I do not mean fans of the Chicago Bears; any place with much drug activity).

How do you sort out the mass murderer who kept their mouth shut or lied about their use of their purchase to a store clerk  who passed a legal background check  from the hunter who wants to use an AR-15 or some other assault rifle  for hunting, the law abiding citizen who has a legal right to own an AR-15 to have or possibly  use for self defense or the  gun enthusiasts who think they're cool looking and fun to use target shooting who also passed their legal back ground checks and so forth. Do you want it to be a right to assume that your crazy and have you placed in an insane asylum for the rest of your life based purely on an assumption? Dude, pull your head out of some blue activists ass for once and think for yourself. Dude, you could be looking at the barrel of a sawed off shotgun, pistol or rifle of some burglar, hardened criminal or mass murderer at anytime or anyplace these days. You don't have to be a criminal for a criminal to point a gun at you. Criminals point guns at law abiding citizens and members of law enforcement all the time.

Did I discuss the AR-15 outside of its context as a massacre weapon? One is enough, and if someone is purchasing huge amounts of ammo such should be the warning sign. Someone buying a huge number of guns and a huge amount of ammo is likely not someone likely to pay back a credit card debt for the purchase.

Bankers are already responsible for people using credit cards in attempts to launder money or participate in fraud of any kind. Certain charges are illegal, such as use of credit cards in illicit transactions such as gambling in violation of state laws.

Point a firearm at me,and you have committed assault with a deadly weapon. Point a gun on a cop, and expect to die.

I should be able to live without a firearm if I so choose. I am not stupid. This said, I have a dog, and few burglars want to face my dog's large, dirty teeth or claws that can do great damage first from painful lacerations followed by serious infections. I got hospital treatment for a dog scratch that got infected. The dog was my cocker spaniel. Dogs do not scratch like cats; they scratch worse.

Four Dobermans, Rottweilers, or German leopards are good reasons to back off from a potential burglary. Such dogs might as well be one tiger in an angry confrontation with a burglar. I was only a Census enumerator when facing about 400 ponds of top predator... and I got the primal fear that I could have been meat.  People in crime-ridden South Africa often have firearms, but they have to protect the guns that criminals would love to steal. Dogs are even more aggressive than lions.

No, you haven't really discussed it and don't seem willing or knowledgeable enough or open minded enough to discuss it beyond that particular context or parameter that you have set for yourself.

(12-30-2018, 07:43 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-30-2018, 01:16 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-30-2018, 04:15 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-29-2018, 02:10 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone thought about whether financial institutions (banks that offer credit cards) have a right to control purchases of objects, to wit firearms) that purchasers  will never pay for because they will be arrested or killed for using in illegal ways ... and whose use can  kill people and end the ability of credit-card users to pay back their credit-card charges?

I am not much of a friend of banks, but I would be on their side on that matter. I would be willing to have an embargo upon firearms purchases except for legitimate purposes of sport or for the obvious necessity of self-defense (Bear Country, and I do not mean fans of the Chicago Bears; any place with much drug activity).

How do you sort out the mass murderer who kept their mouth shut or lied about their use of their purchase to a store clerk  who passed a legal background check  from the hunter who wants to use an AR-15 or some other assault rifle  for hunting, the law abiding citizen who has a legal right to own an AR-15 to have or possibly  use for self defense or the  gun enthusiasts who think they're cool looking and fun to use target shooting who also passed their legal back ground checks and so forth. Do you want it to be a right to assume that your crazy and have you placed in an insane asylum for the rest of your life based purely on an assumption? Dude, pull your head out of some blue activists ass for once and think for yourself. Dude, you could be looking at the barrel of a sawed off shotgun, pistol or rifle of some burglar, hardened criminal or mass murderer at anytime or anyplace these days. You don't have to be a criminal for a criminal to point a gun at you. Criminals point guns at law abiding citizens and members of law enforcement all the time.

Did I discuss the AR-15 outside of its context as a massacre weapon? One is enough, and if someone is purchasing huge amounts of ammo such should be the warning sign. Someone buying a huge number of guns and a huge amount of ammo is likely not someone likely to pay back a credit card debt for the purchase.

Bankers are already responsible for people using credit cards in attempts to launder money or participate in fraud of any kind. Certain charges are illegal, such as use of credit cards in illicit transactions such as gambling in violation of state laws.

Point a firearm at me,and you have committed assault with a deadly weapon. Point a gun on a cop, and expect to die.

I should be able to live without a firearm if I so choose. I am not stupid. This said, I have a dog, and few burglars want to face my dog's large, dirty teeth or claws that can do great damage first from painful lacerations followed by serious infections. I got hospital treatment for a dog scratch that got infected. The dog was my cocker spaniel. Dogs do not scratch like cats; they scratch worse.

Four Dobermans, Rottweilers, or German leopards are good reasons to back off from a potential burglary. Such dogs might as well be one tiger in an angry confrontation with a burglar. I was only a Census enumerator when facing about 400 ponds of top predator... and I got the primal fear that I could have been meat.  People in crime-ridden South Africa often have firearms, but they have to protect the guns that criminals would love to steal. Dogs are even more aggressive than lions.

No, you haven't really discussed it and don't seem willing or knowledgeable enough or open minded enough to discuss it beyond that particular context or parameter that you have set for yourself.

There is no other context in which to discuss an AR-15, other than as a military weapon.

(12-28-2018, 12:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]We are in a Crisis Era, one in which spiritual awakening is practically impossible. There might be foxhole conversions, but those are hollow and transitory.  Many American soldiers (I refer to Catholics) made vows to God in a tight scrape that if He got them through it they would become priests. Few became priests. They might better serve God as tool-and-die makers who have large Catholic families. (Change stereotypes to fit other religious traditions). Maybe there were too many people experiencing the foxhole conversion.

The time for an Awakening is about twenty years after the end of the Crisis Era, when a fresh set of young adults emerge without memories of the dangerous Crisis era and see themselves with  less stake in economic and political orthodoxies that the winning side imposed or protected. It is still possible that the winners of this Crisis Era might impose a conformist, reactionary, repressive, hierarchical, and inequitable order much like that of Spain after its Civil War. In such a case, America will need an Awakening just to eliminate the scorpions in its collective soul and the cobwebs in its collective mind. I hope for better. But our chances to experience an Awakening anew are practically over unless we reach our 80s or 90s.

The Second Turning is no doubt the best time for spiritual awakenings. The time is ripe, the need is there, and the groundwork has been laid during the first turning, and also in previous saecula. But a spiritual awakening can happen at any time for some people, there's no doubt about that either. They were somewhat common in the late 1930s, which is a similar time to ours. People were not in foxholes yet then, and there may well be fewer foxholes this time around. On the other hand, as you know, if our cold civil war ends up in an order like Spain, then I don't see an Awakening as likely to bloom in the USA when the time for it in the saeculum has come. A groundwork of a decent social order has to be created or restored, before the new artists and prophets can take it mostly for granted in middle age and youth enough to look beyond the need for bread alone and also look for the roses. Even in the Gilded Age, enough of such an order was created that a substantial awakening proceeded, starting in the mid-1880s. Its legacy is still with us today, if you look for it. No doubt, this Awakening was greater in Europe in many ways.

As I see it, this 4T may also have some aspects of an awakening. Such will be the case in all future 4Ts if America ever turns away from materialism and physicalism as its primary lifestyle and philosophy. And so it must, if it is to be sustainable and contribute something to humanity besides technical wizardry and material power. A healthy society always has both spirituality as part of its daily life-- and that being more than just obedience to tradition-- and also the ability to create a just and prosperous social and economic order. Some attention indeed has always been paid to that latter need during previous Awakenings/Second Turnings. So in a healthy society, which I hope someday the USA can become, must also pay attention to spiritual and cultural needs in fourth turnings.

But I would not disagree that, so far, that latter attention has been far from adequate, especially in regard to culture. But pockets of folks, mostly older, do continue to nurture the awakenings that first appeared and happened in the USA 40-50 years ago. People today still practice meditation, for example, and give attention to the beauties of the present moment, whereas in the previous first turning people paid virtually no attention to such things, and were consumed with the need to keep up with the Joneses and make sure to wear that grey flannel suit to their meaningless work every morning, and keep their inner gyroscopes tuned into whatever the authorities wanted amidst the lonely crowd, and respond to the hidden persuaders to buy, buy, buy. But, a prosperous and just social order they did have, at least among those who were white and male adults.

(12-30-2018, 11:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-30-2018, 07:43 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-30-2018, 01:16 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-30-2018, 04:15 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-29-2018, 02:10 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Has anyone thought about whether financial institutions (banks that offer credit cards) have a right to control purchases of objects, to wit firearms) that purchasers  will never pay for because they will be arrested or killed for using in illegal ways ... and whose use can  kill people and end the ability of credit-card users to pay back their credit-card charges?

I am not much of a friend of banks, but I would be on their side on that matter. I would be willing to have an embargo upon firearms purchases except for legitimate purposes of sport or for the obvious necessity of self-defense (Bear Country, and I do not mean fans of the Chicago Bears; any place with much drug activity).

How do you sort out the mass murderer who kept their mouth shut or lied about their use of their purchase to a store clerk  who passed a legal background check  from the hunter who wants to use an AR-15 or some other assault rifle  for hunting, the law abiding citizen who has a legal right to own an AR-15 to have or possibly  use for self defense or the  gun enthusiasts who think they're cool looking and fun to use target shooting who also passed their legal back ground checks and so forth. Do you want it to be a right to assume that your crazy and have you placed in an insane asylum for the rest of your life based purely on an assumption? Dude, pull your head out of some blue activists ass for once and think for yourself. Dude, you could be looking at the barrel of a sawed off shotgun, pistol or rifle of some burglar, hardened criminal or mass murderer at anytime or anyplace these days. You don't have to be a criminal for a criminal to point a gun at you. Criminals point guns at law abiding citizens and members of law enforcement all the time.

Did I discuss the AR-15 outside of its context as a massacre weapon? One is enough, and if someone is purchasing huge amounts of ammo such should be the warning sign. Someone buying a huge number of guns and a huge amount of ammo is likely not someone likely to pay back a credit card debt for the purchase.

Bankers are already responsible for people using credit cards in attempts to launder money or participate in fraud of any kind. Certain charges are illegal, such as use of credit cards in illicit transactions such as gambling in violation of state laws.

Point a firearm at me,and you have committed assault with a deadly weapon. Point a gun on a cop, and expect to die.

I should be able to live without a firearm if I so choose. I am not stupid. This said, I have a dog, and few burglars want to face my dog's large, dirty teeth or claws that can do great damage first from painful lacerations followed by serious infections. I got hospital treatment for a dog scratch that got infected. The dog was my cocker spaniel. Dogs do not scratch like cats; they scratch worse.

Four Dobermans, Rottweilers, or German leopards are good reasons to back off from a potential burglary. Such dogs might as well be one tiger in an angry confrontation with a burglar. I was only a Census enumerator when facing about 400 ponds of top predator... and I got the primal fear that I could have been meat.  People in crime-ridden South Africa often have firearms, but they have to protect the guns that criminals would love to steal. Dogs are even more aggressive than lions.

No, you haven't really discussed it and don't seem willing or knowledgeable enough or open minded enough to discuss it beyond that particular context or parameter that you have set for yourself.

There is no other context in which to discuss an AR-15, other than as a military weapon.

Hunting feral pigs, dangerous social predators with the lethality of bears and the group cohesion of dogs, is practically a military activity. To take out a man-eating Big Cat or bear is not a leisure activity; it is a search-and-destroy mission. So it is with feral pigs. That is military in character, and it is perhaps best done with an AR-15 or an AK-47.

(I checked the article on the AR-15 in Wikipedia).

This said, I know sport hunters, and they are the people that I would most trust with weapons except for the 'well-regulated militia' in the Second Amendment. That means the Armed Forces and police forces. Sport hunters typically have more concern with criminals such as burglars taking their sporting items than with the government confiscating them. They typically keep their rifles under lock and key, and they often keep large dogs. The dog may be Man's Best Friend, but it is also not far from being the last animal with which one wants a hostile confrontation.

I have a suggestion for people who love handling military weapons and meet the standards of discipline appropriate for handling them: join the National Guard. Such qualifies as a "well-disciplined militia", the only condition in which the right to bear military arms has unqualified recognition in the Second Amendment. Police work? Firing a gun toward a criminal is the third-to-last thing that one wants to ever do. Second-worst is to kill in error. The worst is of course being killed by someone who threatens oneself or innocent people with deadly force. Many police never fire a gun on a person on the job in a long career. (Most likely, they might dispatch a deer crippled in a car-deer accident, which I have seen, or a dangerous dog).

(12-28-2018, 12:52 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:The Enlightenment has been recognized as an 18th century movement out of which the USA was born. It was correctly seen in the recent second turning, however, as inadequate and superficial. It has been modified and added to, first by an expansion as brower mentioned as "social democracy that extends liberalism to the ideal of equal opportunity to its fullest." Second, by the greenpeace and spiritual revolution of the sixties, The Enlightenment was seen as a disenchantment of the world, robbing it of its deeper dimensions of meaning and reducing it to a shallow rationalism. The New Age alternative sees some revival of esoteric traditions from the Renaissance and ancient philosophy and from the Oriental religions, plus aspiration of human potential and new methods of self-transformation. Whereas The Enlightenment eventually reduced the view of humans to automatons miraculously endowed with reason who need to subdue a stupid universe, the New Age sees humans as conscious spiritual beings first, connected to a superconscious cosmic consciousness revealed to many people through revival of the ancient traditions and experience expended through psychedelics. This greenpeace view also includes a new respect for Nature as alive and not stupid, and the necessary foundation of life of which we are a part rather than something to be subdued by technology to serve rational beings miraculously emergent from the stupid mechanical universe. These are the greens.

The New Age has much cultural baggage, and I must advise you (Eric) that the Millennial Generation does not go along with it. That generation is too rational to accept something that does not process easily. Occam's razor compels us to seek the simplest explanation for natural phenomena and historical patterns. Let's remember that after the callow hedonism of the latest Third Turning,  the rise of the Religious Right, the Tea Party, and the Trump Presidency the cold application of reason will solve much. Morality is all that keeps some of us from using rational power to do horrible things to people, but even religion can go awry when (and I am speaking of the political proclivities of evangelical Christians on the whole) self-righteousness comes with neither empathy nor scruples.

The historical  cycle has an unsettling way of making cultural baggage irrelevant. The Millennial Generation probably sees the environment differently than you do. It does not consist of druids who see consciousness in trees, flowers, and ants. It sees Nature as a refuge from the ugliness of consumerism, urban sprawl, and bureaucratic organization. This said, the Religious Right and the Tea Party are losing people other than core support itself aging. Don't count on people in their sixties today like ourselves having anything more than a fossil relevance thirty years from now.  

I see things differently, because those of us in the Green meme and Yellow Meme, as it's called in spiral dynamics, see beyond the Enlightenment physicalist worldview. I also see that many in the Millennial Generation have lost contact with the Awakening, except perhaps for the cultural baggage that the dominant powers have made them see as its only legacy. It won't matter whether those young Millennial physicalists and Occam Razor users of today see us green new age boomers as irrelevant or not. That won't matter in the slightest. The current Millennial fall-back to the old views will become irrelevant in turn, and the wheels will turn. The more-advanced view will come back around, rising up during the next first turning, with more pioneers reviving the awakening wisdom, and it shall break out strongly in the next second turning as it did in the last. 

The Awakening is less relevant now, I agree; that's necessarily true in a time when secular needs for a renewed political, social and economic system and leadership are needed by all of us of all ages. But the cycles will keep turning, and needs will change again with the times.

Remember brower, in our culture, Awakenings are periodically suppressed, and we are programmed to live within narrow views that satisfy our technological commercial culture's need for rationally-trained mechanics and machine tenders. But Spirit rises above these limits, and as I said, American society is not sustainable if it merely rests upon a rational, physicalist view. NO society can survive on that basis. The Awakening of Spirit must become an ongoing foundation of society, replacing both the outdated, throwback fundamentalist religions and the narrow scientisms of physicalism and the technocracy. Our cultural evolution will continue. It will not stall just because most millennials have lost track of it today. Nor because many Boomers and Xers have lost it too, or never got it to begin with. The American Spirit seeks more than bread; it seeks roses too. And those who were awakened in the 1960s and 70s counter culture and human potential movements and the New Age in the 80s will continue to practice and promote Spirit, and some will latch on to it who are younger too. Our society is diverse, and home to many cultures and worldviews. The Millennials are not monolithic any more than Boomers and Xers are, nor are the next younger generations.

A new Occam's Razor (or rather the perennial one) will be found again, for there is really nothing more simple than awareness of spirit, and yet it's the fount of all creativity, morality and wisdom. That is the meaning of the New Age; that Spirit is to be infused permanently into our society on an ongoing basis, and if on the other hand, Gen X and Millennials have now turned their back on this new revelation, by focusing only on the baggage, that will only mean it comes back stronger than ever, because the need will determine the next Awakening, which clearly will be the fulfillment of the previous one according to all cycles I can see, and will establish all its goals. And clearly, the alpha wave prophets will look back upon what we who today are in our sixties 70s and 80s (and/or already passed on) did in our Awakening (mostly in our 10s, 20s and 30s), as well as what previous prophets and artists did in their awakenings, and revive it as has always been done in previous Awakenings of Spirit in 2nd turnings. And by the time of the next 2T, some sensitive younger pioneer Millennial leaders and artist Gen Z Homelanders will help guide and revive it too. The wisdom is perennial, and was what Jesus and Buddha and all teachers of wisdom taught, and what the best leaders of the recent Awakening taught as well.

It shall be so. And happy new year of Spirit! May we realize that the God within all things and all beings is always present and can always be called upon. We can each be more than we have been, and better, with Spirit's help and guidance. May it be so!

(12-30-2018, 03:16 AM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-29-2018, 02:00 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Liberalism need not be American. Liberalism is truly international to the extent that a Zionist liberal has far more in common with an Iranian liberal than with a Jewish fascist (and it is sickening to know that there are some). Liberalism is the definitive political expression of enlightened humanism. Liberalism allows people cultural and religious identity, which explains how there are so many Islamic liberals in India.

Liberalism presumes some open-mindedness. Maybe a liberal would have no choice but to find religious bigotry, racism, slavery, militarism, homophobia, and such a practice as female genital mutilation appalling. That is not to say that we liberals recognize no rules, for there is physical and mathematical reality and there is formal logic that makes sense of the world. There are also fundamental decencies that people honor if liberalism is to be something other than cant. Consult the ancient Jews, Greeks, Hindus, and Chinese for basic truths beyond denial. Start with the rule of law, without which all social reality is a nightmare of either despotism or anarchy.

Some of us liberals  are anarcho-syndicalists; some of us are near-libertarians, depending on whether we think the improvement of Humanity and public institutions adequate for creating freedom and prosperity or believing that the harsh logic of an unfettered vital to economic success that solves all problems. Some of us are religious and some of us are pure atheists. We can look like anything, and as much as we can look like anything we have many places in the continuum.

In case you ask 'What about conservatism?' -- I have used conservative arguments for racial equity and gay rights. 'Law and order' is a conservative bromide, but I can say that without law and order, liberty is moot. Tyranny and disorder are criminal brothers. Oppression is not so much an excess of law and order but instead its denial. I have no use for lynchings, evidence of the breakdown of social order. I formulated a conservative defense of gay rights by stating that gay-bashing is so horrible that the promotion of homosexuality as normal protects us all just as does anti-racist law. Having been a victim of antisemitic rhetoric and having been scared of a homophobic beating, I must take the side of Jews and of gays when their right to human dignity are under attack. (Modern antisemitism is mostly racist, so an attack on racism is the defense of Humanity as a whole, which may explain why Jews sponsored the founding of the NAACP. Much of the basis of our morality is ancient knowledge. Murder, rape, theft, torture, enslavement, exploitation, adultery, perjury, and fraudulent oaths remain abominations because human nature is much the same as it was in antiquity.

I  suggest that you think it through. Your pattern of thought shows extreme superficiality. You are missing something in life, and it shows.

Hmmm. I'm a popular guy. I have many friends. I own a decent home. I own a business. I own all kinds of fun stuff. I have a decent wife. I'm financially stable, I'm close with my kid. I have a group of close friends that I've known since childhood or my early teenage years. I have some loving pets. My family (me and my siblings) is very close (we love and respect each other a lot and we enjoy and we enjoy being around each other  and we're supportive of each other at all times) as well. I like my job and my career and the bulk of my customers and business associates.  

So, in your expert/professional opinion, what am I missing in my life at this point.  I can see all kinds of things in that list that you're probably  missing. So, I suggest you start thinking things through better while I'm around here. You're a better poster when you think things through better or recognize your mistakes and attempt redeem yourself with clarifications. I'm not worried about me. I'm pretty well armed and pretty well trained with firearms and I'm familiar with the outdoors and familiar with reds and familiar with decent blue folks too. I mean, you're superficial comments and statements and views are easy to identify, challenge, surgically dissect  and seriously bring them all into question by other readers, people who pass through or other posters who participate from time to time.

May you bring more of your happiness and wisdom from your life into these posts here.

Did I say that I was a systematic leftist?

Market economics is generally a good idea at prevents such follies as raising pigs as pork to feed pigs. The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies as much to economics as it does to physics and chemistry.Incentives work, and anyone who disparages consumerism as base ignores that material reality exists. Everything has a price tag.

It is sheer folly to expect businesses to make business transactions harmful to themselves. Were I a banker I would not want to let people buy massacre weapons on credit cards that my bank issues.

(01-01-2019, 09:50 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Did I say that I was a systematic leftist?

Market economics is generally a good idea at prevents such follies as raising pigs as pork to feed pigs. The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies as much to economics as it does to physics and chemistry.Incentives work, and anyone who disparages consumerism as base ignores that material reality exists. Everything has a price tag.

It is sheer folly to expect businesses to make business transactions harmful to themselves. Were I a banker I would not want to let people buy massacre weapons on credit cards that my bank issues.

If you were a banker or business owner who ignored the existence American laws that are in place and imposed your own law instead, how long do you think you would be able to remain in business legally and remain afloat financially?

(12-30-2018, 11:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]There is no other context in which to discuss an AR-15, other than as a military weapon.

Well, there's a difference between a fully automatic rifle or machine gun and a semi automatic rifle that can be shot pretty fast, Now, you may not care about the difference or be able to see or hear the difference or be able understand the difference or may not be open minded enough to want to learn and find out the difference them which is fine and seems to be the norm for most so-called liberal's.

(01-02-2019, 09:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-01-2019, 09:50 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Did I say that I was a systematic leftist?

Market economics is generally a good idea at prevents such follies as raising pigs as pork to feed pigs. The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies as much to economics as it does to physics and chemistry.Incentives work, and anyone who disparages consumerism as base ignores that material reality exists. Everything has a price tag.

It is sheer folly to expect businesses to make business transactions harmful to themselves. Were I a banker I would not want to let people buy massacre weapons on credit cards that my bank issues.

If you were a banker or business owner who ignored the existence American laws that are in place  and imposed your own law instead, how long do you think you would be able to remain in business legally and  remain afloat  financially?

Bankers do not have the prerogative to discriminate in lending on the bases of race, gender, ethnicity, religion, or national origin. it is not a banker's right, especially in mortgage lending, to do the sort of racist 'social engineering' (a/k/a 'red-lining') intended to maintain 'white neighborhoods' .  Bankers are not allowed to launder money, and  if they end up getting income from such an activity as drug trafficking they are obliged to report such funds so that the rightful authorities can seize or sequester it. Bankers do not want to go to prison for laundering money.

To put it in  banking terms, there are three C's that determine whether a banker lends to a potential borrower: character, collateral, and conditions. Character should be obvious enough: does one have a pattern of work and of meeting obligations (good) -- or does the person stiff lenders if something goes wrong? Is that person willing to buy credit life and disability insurance to protect the bank? Is the potential borrower a rational actor? Does a potential borrower live within his means -- ideally much beneath his means? This explains why small-business owners might not live large as might a tradesman who makes much the same income. Collateral implies that the borrower stands to lose big if something goes wrong. It's obvious that the bank takes the car or house should the borrower default. If one is borrowing for a money-making proposition, then the borrowing goes into marketable assets such as equipment and property that a bank can sell in the event of a failure. Conditions depend upon the loan: that the borrower on an auto loan not take the funds and use them on a vacation or a party. If it is a student loan, then it really is spend on tuition, fees, and textbooks and not on 'wine, women, and song' or even living expenses -- and that the educational course must be something highly likely to result in someone getting a bigger stream of income. If one takes out a loan for residential property, then one will get homeowner's insurance and pay property taxes through an escrow account, and if for motor vehicle then one will have automobile insurance against collision and comprehensive damage. The three C's are assumptions that using someone else's hard-earned money is a privilege and that those who get that privilege should cavil at any prospect of failure to meet the terms.

In what is normally a world of free-wheeling capitalism, someone must serve as a constraint against what Robert Ringer calls 'LSD deals' -- the sorts of business activities that are practically gambling (as in oil wildcatting or stock-market speculation, for which one must rightly depend upon one's own resources) or that are otherwise completely unsound. Purchasing raw land in anticipation of the building of the Interstate 665* freeway encircling Indianapolis about ten miles outside of the I-465 beltway is highly speculative. Building a large number of tract houses for middle-income home-buyers near interchanges of I-665 in the reasonable knowledge that "if you build them they will come" is a safer item for a bank's lending. Mortgage lending for middle-class householders who buy such houses and live in them and are quickly doing better economically than renters is a far lower-risk proposition. You can see that the first is something bankers don't want to lend money on. Bankers are the only ones who can impose risk for failure. Capitalism implies prudent investment, and not gambling with other people's money.

If I am a banker issuing credit cards, then I might not want people to spend their credit limit on something such as a military-style arsenal or upon weapons and ammunition that the bank can never collect upon should the user use those weapons and ammo in a criminal manner. One firearm is enough as a protection against a grizzly, and I know of liberals who have a firearm for that purpose. I see it reasonable for a credit card company to demand that one show a hunting license for the purpose of buying a hunting rifle. Unsecured credit cards are higher risk to a lender than are mortgage loans or auto loans, and as such mortgage and auto loans. If one has no coherent reason for buying a firearm, then why should one be able to get one on a credit card?

But I took economics in college (my major), and I have worked in a bank. I know a few  things that you don't. I will take the side of a responsible banker over someone who chooses to use credit for reckless spending and for deeds that verge on gambling on a large scale.
So you own a highly-successful restaurant in Indianapolis and want to establish something much like it in Fort Wayne that should be similarly successful. That is wonderful. Were I a banker I would encourage such. On the other side, you have no experience in the restaurant business and no experience in profit-and-loss and you want to start a restaurant from scratch? As a banker I would tell you to keep your day job as a warehouse worker.


*The risks? First, I-665 might never be built. Second, the Indiana DOT might decide to allow it to be built as a high-cost toll road that will make it less attractive to potential users. Third, should there be a general slowdown in the economy, then people might not be  interested in buying middle-income tract housing out there. Fourth, the borrower might fail financially while developing the property -- as in grading roads and establishing drains and sewers. Finally the speculator in raw land might not get the needed zoning variances for reasons ranging from local political corruption to environmental strictures. Risk implies a premium for lending, and good cause to put paying back the loan as quickly as possible as a higher priority than living well.

(01-02-2019, 09:43 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-30-2018, 11:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]There is no other context in which to discuss an AR-15, other than as a military weapon.

Well, there's a difference between a fully automatic rifle or machine gun and a semi automatic rifle that can be shot pretty fast, Now, you may not care about the difference or be able to see or hear the difference or be able understand the difference or may not be open minded enough to want to learn and find out the difference them which is fine and seems to be the norm for most so-called liberal's.

Yet a simple device, the bump stock, can make the one into the other.  Worse, the bump stock is truly simple … simple enough to craft at home.  So yes, a semiautomatic rifle can be a machine gum in waiting.   Among many others, the AR-15 certainly qualifies.

(01-02-2019, 09:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]If you were a banker or business owner who ignored the existence American laws that are in place  and imposed your own law instead, how long do you think you would be able to remain in business legally and  remain afloat  financially?

I agree that this SHOULD happen, but often doesn't. Look at the massive outrages that lead to the 2008 meltdown, yet no one went to jail except one small sacrificial lamb. Timothy Geithner even noted that throwing Jaime Diamond in jail would only make the demands for more heads louder, so it was best to do nothing. I fully fault Geithner for that and, as his boss, Obama as well. The perp walks should have been a daily affair for weeks if not months. We needed to know that someone was watching and gave a damn. But we live in a world of wealth and privilege. Thinking otherwise is naïve.

(01-03-2019, 10:27 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-02-2019, 09:22 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]If you were a banker or business owner who ignored the existence American laws that are in place  and imposed your own law instead, how long do you think you would be able to remain in business legally and  remain afloat  financially?

I agree that this SHOULD happen, but often doesn't.  Look at the massive outrages that lead to the 2008 meltdown, yet no one went to jail except one small sacrificial lamb.  Timothy Geithner even noted that throwing Jaime Diamond in jail would only make the demands for more heads louder, so it was best to do nothing.  I fully fault Geithner for that and, as his boss, Obama as well.  The perp walks should have been a daily affair for weeks if not months.  We needed to know that someone was watching and gave a damn.  But we live in a world of wealth and privilege.  Thinking otherwise is naïve.

Well, the meltdown would have ended in mass destruction, chaos, a crippled government that was followed by a major depression of like we have ever seen during our history as a nation and the history of the world in general. Yes, it's best to shut up, let go of silly ideological beliefs and economic theories associated with failures of foreign regimes and college beliefs and go along with the views of true experts associated with the economic system that you're associated with directly and you have been directly associated with for your entire adult life (Like Queen Nancy and blue  Messiah Barrack Obama) when you understand that bulk of your wealth is also on the line, you understand that your future lively and the  future lively hood of your family members or political future/ careers are on the line and you understand that your life and the lives of your loved ones could at risk and be placed on line too. You don't think Queen Nancy loves her wealth and privilege. You don't think the Hollywood movie stars and musical artists love theirs too. You don't think the blue internet Robber Barons love theirs too. You don't think Obama loves his too. If you don't think so and don't believe that any of them are associated with them then you're a fool should continue voting the way you do instead of voting the way you should that keeps them in power.

(01-03-2019, 10:18 AM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-02-2019, 09:43 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-30-2018, 11:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]There is no other context in which to discuss an AR-15, other than as a military weapon.

Well, there's a difference between a fully automatic rifle or machine gun and a semi automatic rifle that can be shot pretty fast, Now, you may not care about the difference or be able to see or hear the difference or be able understand the difference or may not be open minded enough to want to learn and find out the difference them which is fine and seems to be the norm for most so-called liberal's.

Yet a simple device, the bump stock, can make the one into the other.  Worse, the bump stock is truly simple … simple enough to craft at home.  So yes, a semiautomatic rifle can be a machine gum in waiting.   Among many others, the AR-15 certainly qualifies.

Yes, and that simple bump stock is now illegal. Yes, altering AR-15 in a way that makes it an illegal firearm is illegal to do as well.