2011-08-13
Russian Confessions
While involving myself in debates over at Strategy Page, I ran across a Russian who caught my attention. I think he admitted he had lost arguments on Strategy Page, and people who are willing to change their mind based on logical arguments seem to be very rare and very valuable. As is my usual style, I strip people down until I find out their unchangable dogma that they have been indoctrinated with or internalized for some other reason.
He opposed the Iraq war, a basically untenable position in my mind given that Saddam was ordering the rape of Iraqi women and chopping out the tongues of Iraqi men. I can logically explain that, but there is a barrier to understanding that. I had never been able to uncover the details of the barrier. I was only vaguely aware that something existed, and it was blocking the logic from being accepted. But this guy was willing to engage in the pure logic.
The logical debate ended for me on a couple of points. He was quibbling over the definition of freedom, allowing freedom to exist even in a prison. My definition is "not subjugated". The other thing was that he didn't consider inaction to be something bad. So if someone else was doing the raping, he's not in any way responsible or obliged to stop it. I really couldn't argue these basic definitional things. So I was basically stuck, and thought that was the end.
However, what I didn't realise was that his heart probably wasn't in those definitional things - they seem to have been thrown up just to avoid having to admit defeat. So he went away and did further thinking on his own, and forged a path from anti-interventionism to pro-interventionism. When I found out this, I asked him to document it, as I believe it may hold the key to world freedom. He has now documented it and it is truly fantastic.
You really need to read the whole thing. But here is one thing he said:
"But, regardless of logic, I still had to justify this to myself on an emotional level. How could I believe in something so... abhorrent?"
Basically logic is not enough. I personally operate in a paradigm where I am an individual in the world/universe, and where logic rules supreme. But not everyone else does, and that stumbling block of nationalism needs to be overcome.
Look at this:
"without national pride, logic takes precedence, and logic states 'avoid casualties' as opposed to 'don't invade another country'"
Gold. Pure gold.
This blog post should be the basis for an entire curriculum. The UK government should be expanding on this, with examples etc, and use it to properly assimilate immigrants. Even if at the end of the process they reject it out of hand, at least they will understand the culture they are entering.
Speaking of culture, the way people are currently being taught is totally the wrong way around:
"Western culture is uniquely inferior to the more authentic, spiritual, and wise cultures it has brutally subjugated"
Anyway, I've been waiting for this key for years. Ever since message 666 failed to do the trick on its own. I'll now spend my time trying to see what I can do to expand on this theme. In the same way I used to debate strangers to see if I could get them to respond to pure logic, I'll see if I can get them to respond to this different way of expressing the same thing.
There's this intriguing bit too:
"had secret dreams of seeing Russian fighter jets flying over the British skies"
We need to embrace the sheer power of that statement. This is the natural state of immigrants. They can be turned to our side, as has been done in this case already, but let us be honest that there's no program in place to turn immigrants. A lot of words have been written about the Japanese internment camps (in the US), but this is the honest reason why we have things like that - the divided loyalties of immigrants is a major cause for concern. Also I'm not sure how to reconcile this with the supposed hatred of war he mentions later. I'm more inclined to believe that war is in our blood. ie we are genetically inclined to wage war, as those who weren't waging war and forming appropriate alliances were wiped out.
Anyway, at long last I have the required blueprint. If we can get more Russians on board we'll be home and hosed. China can be isolated at the UN and we can go and liberate the rest of the world. Just as the man says:
"the vital missing piece was interventionism. Instead of simply waiting for dictators to die or run out of people to rule over, we could free the people"
Man, what a gift to the world. And guess what? I'd be happy to see a pro-western Russian fighter jets flying over the UK skies too. As invited guests! Man I would so much love to be allied with Russia. Of course I'd like to be allied with China too, but it has to be on pro-free-world terms.
|
He opposed the Iraq war, a basically untenable position in my mind given that Saddam was ordering the rape of Iraqi women and chopping out the tongues of Iraqi men. I can logically explain that, but there is a barrier to understanding that. I had never been able to uncover the details of the barrier. I was only vaguely aware that something existed, and it was blocking the logic from being accepted. But this guy was willing to engage in the pure logic.
The logical debate ended for me on a couple of points. He was quibbling over the definition of freedom, allowing freedom to exist even in a prison. My definition is "not subjugated". The other thing was that he didn't consider inaction to be something bad. So if someone else was doing the raping, he's not in any way responsible or obliged to stop it. I really couldn't argue these basic definitional things. So I was basically stuck, and thought that was the end.
However, what I didn't realise was that his heart probably wasn't in those definitional things - they seem to have been thrown up just to avoid having to admit defeat. So he went away and did further thinking on his own, and forged a path from anti-interventionism to pro-interventionism. When I found out this, I asked him to document it, as I believe it may hold the key to world freedom. He has now documented it and it is truly fantastic.
You really need to read the whole thing. But here is one thing he said:
"But, regardless of logic, I still had to justify this to myself on an emotional level. How could I believe in something so... abhorrent?"
Basically logic is not enough. I personally operate in a paradigm where I am an individual in the world/universe, and where logic rules supreme. But not everyone else does, and that stumbling block of nationalism needs to be overcome.
Look at this:
"without national pride, logic takes precedence, and logic states 'avoid casualties' as opposed to 'don't invade another country'"
Gold. Pure gold.
This blog post should be the basis for an entire curriculum. The UK government should be expanding on this, with examples etc, and use it to properly assimilate immigrants. Even if at the end of the process they reject it out of hand, at least they will understand the culture they are entering.
Speaking of culture, the way people are currently being taught is totally the wrong way around:
"Western culture is uniquely inferior to the more authentic, spiritual, and wise cultures it has brutally subjugated"
Anyway, I've been waiting for this key for years. Ever since message 666 failed to do the trick on its own. I'll now spend my time trying to see what I can do to expand on this theme. In the same way I used to debate strangers to see if I could get them to respond to pure logic, I'll see if I can get them to respond to this different way of expressing the same thing.
There's this intriguing bit too:
"had secret dreams of seeing Russian fighter jets flying over the British skies"
We need to embrace the sheer power of that statement. This is the natural state of immigrants. They can be turned to our side, as has been done in this case already, but let us be honest that there's no program in place to turn immigrants. A lot of words have been written about the Japanese internment camps (in the US), but this is the honest reason why we have things like that - the divided loyalties of immigrants is a major cause for concern. Also I'm not sure how to reconcile this with the supposed hatred of war he mentions later. I'm more inclined to believe that war is in our blood. ie we are genetically inclined to wage war, as those who weren't waging war and forming appropriate alliances were wiped out.
Anyway, at long last I have the required blueprint. If we can get more Russians on board we'll be home and hosed. China can be isolated at the UN and we can go and liberate the rest of the world. Just as the man says:
"the vital missing piece was interventionism. Instead of simply waiting for dictators to die or run out of people to rule over, we could free the people"
Man, what a gift to the world. And guess what? I'd be happy to see a pro-western Russian fighter jets flying over the UK skies too. As invited guests! Man I would so much love to be allied with Russia. Of course I'd like to be allied with China too, but it has to be on pro-free-world terms.
# posted by Paul Edwards @ 14:31 
