Trump Elected: The True MAGA Era Begins, Now What?

axj said:
Why does it seem so difficult to not fall into black and white thinking, seeing Trump as either a "complete and total disaster" or a "saviour" who can basically do no wrong? The fact that he is doing at least some good is already a huge improvement over what we had before.
Click to expand...

I think your question is rhetorical, but I'll give my two cents anyways. Most people have been trained to have their emotions primed by high expectations or wishful thinking - 'Trump will fix it all' - then give themselves permission to feel hurt when reality doesn't do what they want it to do. This is black-or-white thinking in a nutshell. It's not really thinking, actually, it's a lack of thinking and awareness. And given Laura's recent post on the hyperdimensional manipulation of online echo chambers through AI, we can guess that many people are being ever more efficiently 'stampeded' into echo chambers so that the aliens can feed on their suffering.

Another thought is that there's also two different modes of building a theory, or viewing reality - the Baconian and the Popperian. The Baconian method is to continue adding supporting evidence to one's theory. This can easily lead to cognitive bias. The Popperian method, on the other hand, is where one actively brings to bear strong counter-evidence against one's own ideas. That's the essence of critical thinking and necessary for an accurate picture of reality - leading usually to a more balanced response, which the C's have indicated is one hallmark of STO.

Session 14 January 1995​


Q: (L) Okay, let's take a short break... [break] Now, guys, I guess you have been listening to our discussion and you listened to Jan read the paragraph from the article about 4th density experience being the highest level of wishful thinking, that wishful thinking becomes reality... (J) Or did I take it out of context?

A: Close. STS.

Q: (L) So, STO wishful thinking...

A: STO does not wishfully think.

Q: (L) Well, how does STO think? (T) Responsibly... (L)[experiencing acute pinching feeling at nape of neck] God! You guys are doing strange things to my body...

A: Helpful and balanced. Wishes are strictly STS.

Q: (L) So, acceptance of experience in the sense of just allowing things to happen and responding in a balanced and helpful way is an STO response or experience in 4th density, is that correct?

A: Close.
Click to expand...

Because the brain is programmed to always to conserve energy, most people go for the easier Baconian model, because doing all that Popperian work of questioning oneself and balancing contradictory evidence, and therefore 'staying with uncertainty', is not how our machines are wired. Instead, we like to observe, then convince ourselves we've seen clearly, and then try to force the quantum wave function to collapse in the way we desire. That leads to Trump good or Trump evil.
 
axj said:
Objectively, Trump has done very positive things as well:

- Exited the WHO (big pharma totalitarianism) and Paris Climate Accord ("green" totalitarianism)
- Closed USAID and other funding of globalist operations worldwide
- Basically ended the DEI and "woke" culture war insanity to a large degree within the US
- Stopped the illegal immigration crisis to a large extent
- Appointed non-globalists and even 'rebels' into powerful positions, such as RFK jr, Tulsi Gabbard, Hegseth
- Took at least some steps already towards transparency on JFK, RFK and the Fauci lies
- Did NOT go along with Israeli plans to attack Iran so far
- Basically agrees with Russia about what caused the Ukraine war, infuriating the remaning globalists in the EU

Why does it seem so difficult to not fall into black and white thinking, seeing Trump as either a "complete and total disaster" or a "saviour" who can basically do no wrong? The fact that he is doing at least some good is already a huge improvement over what we had before.

Will it be enough to avoid the decline or even destruction of the US? Most likely not, at least according to the C's.
Click to expand...
You are right in there is a balance between good and bad, and he has done a lot of good things. But when you look at the things that affect the most people versus the symbolic, it is pretty lopsided on the bad side. Sure, he has cleaned up a lot of wasted money at DOGE, but almost that same amount he has saved has been sent to Israel, so where did it get Americans? And more importantly how many more people have been killed as a result of it being sent to Israel? He exited the WHO but that is largely symbolic and saves the US a little bit of money at this point, and the PARIS accords really were not really being enforced in the US - only the Europeans have aggressively adopted that suicidal policy. The woke stuff was on its way out before Trump got in office as a consequence of economics as Bud Light and Disney figured out too late. I enjoy the changes but the impact of war and the economic stupidity affect more people profoundly,

And look at a lot of the "non-globalists" he appointed. Can we see their influence in policy? The neocons still seem to dominate and run things. Does anyone even consult Gabbard on anythying? RFK Jr looks like he has sold out on a lot of issues that he used to care about. "Basically agrees with Russia about what caused the Ukraine war, infuriating the remaning globalists in the EU" but he continues to send weapons to Zelensky. Trump is talking out of both sides of his mouth on the Ukraine since he got into office, literally one day insulting Zelensky and the next sending out a post demanding Putin stop the killing when the Ukranians will not even entertain peace. I am honestly not convinced Trump will withdraw support entirely, and would not be shocked if he is playing nice temporarily just to get Russia to backoff from supporting Iran, the war he really cares about and would be much worse than continuing to fund a loser Zelensky.

And I expected to agree with you that he is "already a huge improvement over what we had before." But I am not seeing that now because the two biggest issues are (1) the economy and (2) war. The tariff stuff was the equivalent of reimposing lockdowns on your economy without COVID! I don't have a problem with tariffs, but you have to do them (1) legally and (2) with enough foresight so business does not come to a screeching halt. Here is the video I referenced above where the guy interviews a lot of technology companies in the US
and they talk about how DISASTROUS this is. One US tech company said he had lived through a lot of different crises since he started his business in the 1990s and THIS IS THE WORST! Another says companies are having to shut down 3-4 weeks because they have no idea what is going on. Another is saying they literally are going to have to stop selling stuff to the US because their product margin is like $5 and the tariffs would cause their margin to more than a $100 loss. That same company said you could not even bring manufacturing to the US in five years and even if you could the prices would still be above what they are with the 170% tariffs (which is the total tariff on Chinese goods). If you move production to Vietnam or Thailand you are still facing at least 30-40% higher costs,and there is no way to do as people suggest just shipping these products from one country to another and changing the label because these are not commodities - the customs people know the supply chains.

But the biggest commonality was that it was the uncertainty that Trump was creating for US BUSINESSES more than even the tariffs (and that is pretty bad too) because they cannot plan their supply chains. So you just stop and have to lay people off in the interim. US workers - foreign manufacturers can just redirect products overseas and stop shipping to the US. I mean anyone with an Economics 101 understanding should know better. I don't even think Biden would make this mistake. The economic fallout from this could be worse than even the oil shock from the war in the Ukraine. And to be brutally honest, the only way this even makes sense is if Trump is planning on gong to actual war with China later this year and wants to start the divorce process before then when it would be forced...

Which gets me the second part - the war part. "Did NOT go along with Israeli plans to attack Iran so far" says NOTHING given where he is going.Trump did go along with their violating the ceasfire in Gaza. He did go along with the genocide. He did go along with chosing the war in Yemen that Biden had ZERO success with over protecting the lives of Gazans. Biden did not even SUGGEST a war with Iran TO HIS CREDIT!! This non sense in Iran is even more foolhardy than what the US did to Ukraine. At least Ukrain was a proxy war with no US troops involved. At least both sides did not have nukes (Unlike the Ukraine Iran probably has them, or can at least have them in a short order of time, and that is before we talk about the potential direct conflcit between Russia and the US if Russia decides to protect their proxy state). If Trump goes to war with Iran, and I am would not be shocked if he did right now, it would involve US troops directly and probably the sinking of several aircraft carriers and the closing of the Strait of Hormuz sending oil to the moon - making inflation even worse. There is no reason to even play around with this. Iran has minded its own business and never responded to Israel's last attack. Not to mention the whole Gaza / Yemen thing.

Sure Trump cannot stop the decline of the US...but he appears to want to accelerate it.
 
WhiteMountain said:
But when you look at the things that affect the most people versus the symbolic, it is pretty lopsided on the bad side.
Click to expand...
Trump is of course at his worst when it comes to Israel/Zionists/Mossad, as well as the technocrats who are apparently misleading him. But your claim that his positive deeds have been mostly symbolic while the negative deeds affect the most people seems to be too simplistic and too premature.

We do not know what the economic impact of the tariff negotations will be, just like we do not know what the outcome of the negotiations with Iran will be. We also do not know whether RFK jr "sold out" or not. We do know that JD Vance, Gabbard and Hegseth were apparently responsible for convincing Trump not to go along with the Israeli attack plans on Iran.

Omitting things like the stopping of illegal immigration and the impact it has on a lot of people also shows a lack of objectivity. Stopping the "woke" indoctrination of children also has a huge impact and was most likely not going to go away on its own. Not to mention that instead of inching closer to WW3 against Russia, the US is making a real effort towards ending that conflict. How many people does that affect?

The chaotic introduction and temporary removal of tariffs is indeed most likely not the best approach, just like limiting free speech in the US or ignoring due process by sending illegal immigrants (and even those who were in the US legally) to a prison in a different country. The attacks on Yemen have been very limited so far, so let's see if Trump will actually start his first war there. He is still one of the few presidents who did not initiate any wars.
 
WhiteMountain said:
Sure Trump cannot stop the decline of the US...but he appears to want to accelerate it.
Click to expand...
Nah, I don't think he's intentionally wanting to accelerate the decline. He appears to genuinely believe that what he's doing will lead to a golden age for the US. I think he's being led astray by the deep state agents or sycophants around him just like his first term. They either intentionally omit crucial information (DS agents) or they're too scared to tell him information that isn't what he wants to hear (sycophants).

In the last session the C's said Trump has blinkers on, meaning "to be able only to see things one way and unwilling or unable to consider other possibilities". Which appears to be what's going on with Israel and also the tariffs. Bessent, who was previously Soros's minion is not to be trusted, he's egging Trump on and leading him in a direction that is looking rather dire. China perceives these blanket tariffs to be an attack, and who can blame them after what the US did during Trumps last term, a release of a bio-weapon that has potentially killed tens of millions of Chinese.

axj said:
The attacks on Yemen have been very limited so far, so let's see if Trump will actually start his first war there. He is still one of the few presidents who did not initiate any wars.
Click to expand...
He campaigned as the "peace" president. People did not vote for so-called "limited" killings of civilians in Yemen, stoking war with Iran and China or the bizzarro campaign to remove the Palestinians and build a Trump resort on their graves.
 
Candice said:
People did not vote for so-called "limited" killings of civilians in Yemen, stoking war with Iran and China or the bizzarro campaign to remove the Palestinians and build a Trump resort on their graves.
Click to expand...
How many of Trump's voters are against "supporting Israel" in Gaza, Yemen or Iran? How many support a hardline stance against China?

With rigged polls it is difficult to get an answer to these questions, but it is good to remember that many of his supporters may not see these issues as we do here.

Trump campaigned as the "peace maker", which can be interepreted in different ways, even something like "taking out Yemen to bring peace to the region and the shipping lanes".
 
iamthatis said:
Another thought is that there's also two different modes of building a theory, or viewing reality - the Baconian and the Popperian. The Baconian method is to continue adding supporting evidence to one's theory. This can easily lead to cognitive bias. The Popperian method, on the other hand, is where one actively brings to bear strong counter-evidence against one's own ideas. That's the essence of critical thinking and necessary for an accurate picture of reality - leading usually to a more balanced response, which the C's have indicated is one hallmark of STO
Click to expand...

I haven't read anything about the methods you mention, so I have perhaps misunderstood.

It seems to me based on the above example that the Popperian method could just as easily feed cognitive biases towards nihilism and meaninglessness. I think that both supporting and counter evidence should be considered with the flexibility to tease out nuance because. McGilchrists model would have us consider both/and rather than either/or and that should lead to a more balanced response.
 
Jones said:
I haven't read anything about the methods you mention, so I have perhaps misunderstood.

It seems to me based on the above example that the Popperian method could just as easily feed cognitive biases towards nihilism and meaninglessness. I think that both supporting and counter evidence should be considered with the flexibility to tease out nuance because. McGilchrists model would have us consider both/and rather than either/or and that should lead to a more balanced response.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's a good point. The cognitive bias of the Popper mode would be that empirical falsification, or left hemipshere thinking, is all there is to getting at the truth. Although a true Popperian approach would also question the Popper approach - to subject it itself to a strong test. Which, as you say, MgCilchrist does by way of phenomenology and studies that show how despite our best efforts, we live in mystery and uncertainty. Discoveries, or accurate perceptions of reality, also come from strange 'eureka moments' or divine inspiration - or Seeing the Unseen - the best example being August Kekule's dream of a snake biting its own tail to inspire him for the chemical structure of the benzine ring.

Popper is all about empirical falsification - the ability to think critically about how one thinks, or 'thinking with a hammer'. I don't see a problem with that, as I'm not certain it necessarily leads to nihilism and bias, although it often does. Like if someone has a core belief of Trump as saviour, and subjects that to a test of the evidence of his positive moves (despite the crazy challenges of operating under secret power structures and aliens who feed on us) I don't think that's a big issue. Balance also includes imbalance at times.

Edit: As McGilchrist says, a higher order of 'both/and' thinking would somewhat paradoxically include 'either/or' thinking, which is a useful tool.
 
Last edited:
This is surprising even more so if it passes.



 
axj said:
Trump is of course at his worst when it comes to Israel/Zionists/Mossad, as well as the technocrats who are apparently misleading him. But your claim that his positive deeds have been mostly symbolic while the negative deeds affect the most people seems to be too simplistic and too premature.

We do not know what the economic impact of the tariff negotations will be, just like we do not know what the outcome of the negotiations with Iran will be. We also do not know whether RFK jr "sold out" or not. We do know that JD Vance, Gabbard and Hegseth were apparently responsible for convincing Trump not to go along with the Israeli attack plans on Iran.

Omitting things like the stopping of illegal immigration and the impact it has on a lot of people also shows a lack of objectivity. Stopping the "woke" indoctrination of children also has a huge impact and was most likely not going to go away on its own. Not to mention that instead of inching closer to WW3 against Russia, the US is making a real effort towards ending that conflict. How many people does that affect?

The chaotic introduction and temporary removal of tariffs is indeed most likely not the best approach, just like limiting free speech in the US or ignoring due process by sending illegal immigrants (and even those who were in the US legally) to a prison in a different country. The attacks on Yemen have been very limited so far, so let's see if Trump will actually start his first war there. He is still one of the few presidents who did not initiate any wars.
Click to expand...
"The attacks on Yemen have been very limited so far" The people in Yemen might disagree about 680+ strikes conducted in March and April being limited. If you mean that he has not YET sent in ground troops (and hopefully he is not even that stupid), yes he has not sent group troops. We did send not ground troops (not officially) to Libya either, or any of Barack Obama's wars (in fact, I believe it was Trump who first put US boots on the ground in Syria to steal their oil). So does that make his wars limited as well?

"He is still one of the few presidents who did not initiate any wars." People forget that Trump did try to initiate a war his first term. Remember the bombing of Syria that happened in early 2017 right after he took office? And that likely would have led to full regime change if Russia had literally not launched warplanes in the air about to attack US targets and Trump backed off. I still remember the moment it happened. That was the first time the Russians actually took positive action to stop one of the US's regime change operations and directly called America's bluff. And that STILL did not stop Trump from putting US troops on Syrian soil in the east to steal their oil AFTER that, claiming it was part of his "war on ISIS" when everyone knew that the US was using ISIS to destabilize Syria and as a pretext for bombing there. The Syrians never asked for the help of the US. Let's also not forget his attempt to regime change Venezuela with his "random guy named Juan" he picked randomly as the legitimate president of Venezuela. As much as Trump tries to play isolationist on the campaign trail, he has a history of being just as enthusiastic for expanding the American empire.

"Omitting things like the stopping of illegal immigration and the impact it has on a lot of people also shows a lack of objectivity." I am not omitting it, I am saying it does not matter as much as the wholesale sabotage of the entire global economy or playing dangerous games on the way to potentially starting world war III. And I am guessing if I ran a poll amongst people and asked what was a bigger issue to them (1) Don't start a war with Iran which can cause much DEATH and destruction and kill the global economy, (2) Don't start a trade war that will potentially leave millions of people GLOBALLY unemployed, (3) curtailing illegal immigration, and (4) ending woke (when I still will argue woke ended itself..it was already on its way out due to economic boycotts and discrimination lawsuits that have been the courts since before Trump took office), people will easily say 1 and 2 OBJECTIVELY. Because both the national and global impacts are much greater, especially since the majority of the damage on immigration has already been done with 10s of millions already in the country. Erecting a dam after your fields are flooded is not so impactful. Punching a whole in a larger dam is a bigger problem.

And you don't sit there and say well lets let wholesale immigration happen see what happens and anymore than you will say lets test this tariff and provoking Iran thing and see what happens. The time to vocally oppose these policies strenuously IS AT THE BEGINNING because the impact of getting these policies wrong is SO HORRIFIC is as soon as they are even broached. It might already be too late on the tariffs (these are not just "negotiations" - he jacked up tariffs to 170% on Chinese goods, full stop, with little to no warning to supply chains and no legal authority = maximum uncertainty = U.S. and Chinese businesses shutdown while uncertainty exists), which was objective stupid and DANGEROUS. Just go watch that video I pasted above where people like Louis Rossman (who is by no means a Democrat, he moved to Texas from New York for a reason and is about as uncensored as it can get) and how this affects business. There is a high likelihood of lockdown like disruptions to US businesses up and down the supply chain, that were completely unnecessary.

And the time for everyone to shout at Trump "STOP!" on Iran is before it happens. It is not fair to assume his approach to the problem with be "rational" when his policies so far speak to the opposite. Why on earth would a man panning bad wars literally TWICE try to jump into new wars right after taking office (Syria in 2017 and Yemen+Iran in 2025)? This is pathological behavior. I honestly AM more worried right now about Trump starting a catestrophic new war more than I was with Biden...and I was worried under Biden. And his ignorant tariff behavior only made me think even moreso "he is crazy enough to do this" because he acts on instincts and those instincts are often dead wrong.

We get on this train every election cycle. Everyone celebrates that the bad policies from the old guard are eliminated and then completely overlook at the new guy starts a new round of attacks on freedom, peace, and the economy FROM DIFFERENT ANGLES. That is why the false left - right paradigm works so well. If people from his own party would call out Trump more aggressively, maybe he would stop. That is why those poll numbres ARE IMPORTANT. Trump needs to know the people don't want the new stupid policies to replace the old stupid policies. That is why is is important to focus on these things so Trump knows the people who voted for him will hold him accountable, assuming he as a lame duck even cares at this point.
 
SummerLite said:
This is surprising even more so if it passes.

Click to expand...
To be completely fair, I don't entirely agree with the premise that the mRNA technology is inherently bad. That TECHNOLOGY and IMPLEMENTATION was really bad. It was not properly tested at all and evidence based medicine was rejected entirely. I used to work at a gene therapy lab and there was potentially ways to do it right. For example, there is this small tech company that has technology that could potentially do very targeted gene profile expression management that I could not have even imagined five years ago. This literally could cure a lot of diseases. But it is based on a type of mRNA technology that would tweak the expression of your own genes using mRNA products rather than directly producing what is known to be a toxic product - which is what the COVID shots did. So just banning mRNA technology is a bad idea.

Banning the mandates - that totally should be done. And then we should have proper informed consent and ACTUAL cllinical development cycles to show safety so you can have thta informed consent.
 
axj said:
How many of Trump's voters are against "supporting Israel" in Gaza, Yemen or Iran? How many support a hardline stance against China?

With rigged polls it is difficult to get an answer to these questions, but it is good to remember that many of his supporters may not see these issues as we do here.

Trump campaigned as the "peace maker", which can be interepreted in different ways, even something like "taking out Yemen to bring peace to the region and the shipping lanes".
Click to expand...
I think those polls probably adequately reflect that. I mean you have the 30-40% approvals by the Evangelical / Q Anon Trump supporters who probably would support anything Trump does, which is what we see in the polls. The Ron Paul / Libertarian Republicans are probably hard core against this. Moderates probably are as well. Remember a lot of the people who VOTED for Trump as the lesser of two evils - and there probably were a LOT of them after Biden was such a disaster - were not religiously tied to Trump like the Q Anon "trust the plan" bunch. Heck even some of the evangelicals probably did not like voting for him given the manner he conducts himself (which is the exact opposite of a professing Christian as he is an extreme narciscist in public), but those would be fine with Zionism. But there is a massive "free trade" component to the Republican party as well, and those are probably having a heart attack now.

I know from my interactions with people in my circle who voted for him or supported him (because they are not American citizens), most are horrified right now, even moreso than what I would have expected. The more moderately leaning never really liked him buy hated what the Democratic party became worse, and the more principled people are horrified with some of his actions regarding due process, free speech, and his foreign policy. The one person I know still supporting him is my mother, who is 100% into Q Anon "Trust the Plan" thinking that Biden is a clone and that the military is secretly running the country and all the Democratic politicians are actors playing a role with most of them in prison at Gitmo or already executed a long time ago LMAO :). I mean I know evangelicals now who are even upset at how bad the Gaza situation is going. Zionism is quickly dying in terms of public perception and the Israelis only brought it on themselves.
 
WhiteMountain said:
"Omitting things like the stopping of illegal immigration and the impact it has on a lot of people also shows a lack of objectivity." I am not omitting it, I am saying it does not matter as much as the wholesale sabotage of the entire global economy or playing dangerous games on the way to potentially starting world war III.
Click to expand...
The US seems to be basically in a debt trap and needs to take drastic action, which is what Trump and his team seem to be doing. Whether it will work and to what degree nobody knows yet.

And you are again omitting that Trump has defused the tensions with Russia, instead of inching towards WW3 as before. Whether he will do something stupid towards Iran, again nobody knows. He has at least shown some spine (by refusing Israeli attack plans) and that he is not fully controlled by the Zionists.

I don't know why you seem to be so invested in ignoring the positive aspects while overstating the negative ones. It seems close to black and white thinking and lacking objectivity.
.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom