Tucker Carlson interviews & ideologies

[Mililea]

what I find it interesting is Putin's choice of the word "soul". I guess he used the work in the context of "essence". In the west (particularly in political discourse), we rarely hear the word "soul" and mainly used by high-end intellectuals with not much consensus.

Yes, but it can also be the "soul" of the population in russia in general. Not individual souls of people but like the spirit of the people as a soul of the country maybe. I think Russians think/feel like that. You are right in other countries, Germany for example, there is no such thing

 

[Altair]

what I find it interesting is Putin's choice of the word "soul". I guess he used the work in the context of "essence". In the west (particularly in political discourse), we rarely hear the word "soul" and mainly used by high-end intellectuals with not much consensus.

Rather "soul" in the context of Christianity.

 

[Beau]

But factually speaking, just about every government on the planet is bad. I spent years of research and travel finding the right one to move to - there are not a lot of good choices. In fact only lesser evils. China is definitely one of the bad ones.

We've been through this discussion before. Best to take the "Is China evil?" talk to its appropriate thread:

Gulags in China?

Reports of hundreds of Gulag-style camps in Northern China, imprisoning millions.

cassiopaea.org

https://cassiopaea.org/forum/threads/pro-china-bias.36896/post-542250

 

[luc]

Yes, but it can also be the "soul" of the population in russia in general. Not individual souls of people but like the spirit of the people as a soul of the country maybe. I think Russians think/feel like that. You are right in other countries, Germany for example, there is no such thing

That's how I understood it as well. This used to be a common concept especially in European thought, i.e. Oswald Spengler who talked about souls and destinies of cultures and civilizations, and there still are some sayings and folk wisdoms and the like that talk about the soul of a people. Hard to grasp for Americans I suppose, because America has no soul is a new nation that has emerged recently via immigration.

 

[seek10]

Rather "soul" in the context of Christianity.

I am not sure whether the meaning of "soul" different in Eastern orthodox Christianity and in Western forms. As per the wiki page, the word has so many different meanings in the modern Christian denominations( I guess they are influenced by materialism of modern Industrialization).

Religious views​

In Judaism and in some Christian denominations, only human beings have immortal souls (although immortality is disputed within Judaism and the concept of immortality was most likely influenced by Plato).[3] For example, Thomas Aquinas, borrowing directly from Aristotle's On the Soul, attributed "soul" (anima) to all organisms but argued that only human souls are immortal.[4] Other religions (most notably Hinduism and Jainism) believe that all living things from the smallest bacterium to the largest of mammals are the souls themselves (Atman, jiva) and have their physical representative (the body) in the world. The actual self is the soul, while the body is only a mechanism to experience the karma of that life. Thus if one sees a tiger then there is a self-conscious identity residing in it (the soul), and a physical representative (the whole body of the tiger, which is observable) in the world. Some teach that even non-biological entities (such as rivers and mountains) possess souls. This belief is called animism.[5]
...

Christianity​

According to some Christian eschatology, when people die, their souls will be judged by God and determined to go to Heaven or to Hades awaiting a resurrection. The oldest existing branches of Christianity, the Catholic Church and the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches, adhere to this view, as well as many Protestant denominations. Some Protestant Christians understand the soul as "life," and believe that the dead have no conscious existence until after the resurrection (Christian conditionalism). Some Protestant Christians believe that the souls and bodies of the unrighteous will be destroyed in Hell rather than suffering eternally (annihilationism). Believers will inherit eternal life either in Heaven, or in a Kingdom of God on earth, and enjoy eternal fellowship with God. Other Christians reject the punishment of the soul.[citation needed]

Paul the Apostle used ψυχή (psychē) and πνεῦμα (pneuma) specifically to distinguish between the Jewish notions of נפש (nephesh) and רוח ruah (spirit)[11] (also in the Septuagint, e.g. Genesis 1:2 רוּחַ אֱלֹהִים = πνεῦμα θεοῦ = spiritus Dei = "the Spirit of God").

Christians generally believe in the existence and eternal, infinite nature of the soul.[12]

Origin of the soul​

The "origin of the soul" has provided a vexing question in Christianity. The major theories put forward include soul creationism, traducianism, and pre-existence. According to soul creationism, God creates each individual soul directly, either at the moment of conception or at some later time. According to traducianism, the soul comes from the parents by natural generation. According to the preexistence theory, the soul exists before the moment of conception. There have been differing thoughts regarding whether human embryos have souls from conception, or whether there is a point between conception and birth where the fetus acquires a soul, consciousness, and/or personhood. Stances in this question might play a role in judgements on the morality of abortion.[13][14][15]

Trichotomy of the soul​

Augustine (354-430), one of Western Christianity's most influential early Christian thinkers, described the soul as "a special substance, endowed with reason, adapted to rule the body". Some Christians espouse a trichotomic view of humans, which characterizes humans as consisting of a body (soma), soul (psyche), and spirit (pneuma).[16] However, the majority of modern Bible scholars point out how the concepts of "spirit" and of "soul" are used interchangeably in many biblical passages, and so hold to dichotomy: the view that each human comprises a body and a soul. Paul said that the "body wars against" the soul, "For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit" (Heb 4:12 NASB), and that "I buffet my body", to keep it under control.

Tota in toto corpore​

According to Saint Thomas Aquinas, the soul is «tota in toto corpore».[17][18][19] This means that the soul is entirely contained in every single part of the human body, and therefore ubiquitous and cannot be placed in a single organ (heart or brain, etc.), nor it is separable from the body (except after the body's death).

In the fourth book of De Trinitate, also Augustine of Hippo states that the soul is all in the whole body and all in any part of it.[20]

Views of various denominations​

Roman Catholicism
The present Catechism of the Catholic Church states that the term soul

"refers to the innermost aspect of [persons], that which is of greatest value in [them], that by which [they are] most especially in God's image: ‘soul’ signifies the spiritual principle in [humanity]".[21]
All souls living and dead will be judged by Jesus Christ when he comes back to earth. The Catholic Church teaches that the existence of each individual soul is dependent wholly upon God:

"The doctrine of the faith affirms that the spiritual and immortal soul is created immediately by God."[22]
Protestantism
Protestants generally believe in the soul's existence and immortality, but fall into two major camps about what this means in terms of an afterlife. Some, following John Calvin, believe that the soul persists as consciousness after death.[23] Others, following Martin Luther, believe that the soul dies with the body, and is unconscious ("sleeps") until the resurrection of the dead.[24][25]

Adventism
Various new religious movements deriving from Adventism — including Christadelphians,[26] Seventh-day Adventists,[27][28] and Jehovah's Witnesses[29][30] — similarly believe that the dead do not possess a soul separate from the body and are unconscious until the resurrection.

Latter-day Saints ('Mormonism')
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that the spirit and body together constitute the Soul of Man (Mankind). "The spirit and the body are the soul of man."[31] Latter-day Saints believe that the soul is the union of a pre-existing, God-made spirit[32][33][34] and a temporal body, which is formed by physical conception on earth.

After death, the spirit continues to live and progress in the Spirit world until the resurrection, when it is reunited with the body that once housed it. This reuniting of body and spirit results in a perfect soul that is immortal, and eternal, and capable of receiving a fulness of joy.[35][36]

Latter-day Saint cosmology also describes "intelligences" as the essence of consciousness or agency. These are co-eternal with God, and animate the spirits.[37] The union of a newly-created spirit body with an eternally-existing intelligence constitutes a "spirit birth"[citation needed] and justifies God's title "Father of our spirits".[38][39][40]

 

[maiko]

I was so looking forward to seeing the interview, and it didn't disappoint. Time flew by watching it, and there were many details, and aspects I never really considered. Like the free trade zone between Ukraine, and Russia in the past, and what Ukraine moving closer to the West meant in that light. I never thought of that. I highly appreciate Putin's clear and precise explanations. He is laser focused and his way of reacting to questions, and still being able to get back into his line of argument speaks of real knowledge, and not of someone who just memorized talking points. Normally I enjoy Tucker's more boisterous, a bit flamboyant interview style, but compared to Putin's calmness I was nearly startled whenever he spoke.

I hope the interview in it's original form, not the interpretation by Western media, reaches a lot of people.

 

[kenlee]

• ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
  • From this interview one can see that Putin is indeed a man of awesome superb intellect and that may be the true value of this interview. However Tucker may be somewhat naive about Russian history but has a good mind in his own right.
    
    It may be that when sleeping mankind has reached a certain quantity then there is a loss of awakened mankind of a certain quality such as Putin and the great thinkers of years ago. There might be a natural ratio of the two and if the ratio of the two becomes lopsided in favor of sleeping humanity then it usurps the
    energy/information exchange in the ray of creation and affects inner earth and the higher worlds and chaos results.
  • 
    
  • It's like the energy exchange gets clogged up and the growing branch cannot be fed and can die on the vine so to speak. The psychopaths will capitalize on it and try to lock us in with their machinizations so they could become "gods" with infinite power. But in the end it's up to the universe to make determinations along any lines of culling based on the stupidity of sleeping humanity if a certain percentage does not wake up. The psychopaths like the predators they are just chase down the weakened prey but it's mankind that really causes it thru our laziness, sloth, actions/inactions, lack of caring and just plain stupidity.
  
  ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏

 

[Andrian]

22 hours later the Putin interview has reached 149 Million people on Carlson’s X account alone!

I do think the interview is historic not really because much new or groundbreaking stuff has been presented, but given the context and how it was conducted and handled from both sides.

I thoroughly enjoyed it. I think what Putin said and what Carlson asked represents a perfect primer and rebuffing of many key corner stones of western propaganda not only towards Russia but the world in general.

Why there is so much "fuss" about interview with Putin's now. Didn't Megan Kelly did interview with him before? At that time, Fox presented it with their spin to American audience. I guess PTB don't want that this time as they can't spin easily with Tucker's interview- particularly after he parted ways from MSM.

The interview was great but as mentioned by Cosmos, it hadn't touched groundbreaking arguments, especially for those that are paying attention to the geopolitical affairs. I mean, i've found Oliver Stone's interviews more interesting and groundbreaking.

But, the fact that in less than 24 hours the interview got almost 150 mln views on X to me it shows that a LOT of people are "thirsty" for sane, reasonable and grounding words and rational reasoning from a real leader as an antidote to the fecklessness and the rotten pathological minds of most of the western world leadership.

That's why the "western golden chosen ones" are melting down because of it, you don't want people to be encouraged by a sane leader to start opening their eyes questioning what the hell is happening all around them.

 

[Aeneas]

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the Chinese government is great or impeccable. Just that if you want to understand it, it's best if you first pay attention to those who threaten it. Maybe that is one of the reasons why China and Russia get along? Both are "giants" geographically speaking, and have focused on national unity and defending from outside threats. Some may see that as repression, others as the best they can do in such vast territories to prevent Western powers from interfering.

I think that is a very good point. The more pressure and interference from outside, the more a country will have to actively defend itself and its interests and this will lead to more socalled repressive measures to protect itself. Such measures will of course then be used by outside forces interested in interfering, to point the finger and say "Look how repressive they are and how free we are".

Hungary is another example of a country which has taken measures to protect itself from mass immigration and from attacks from the woke ideology and this led predictably to attacks from Western countries who used it show how repressive Hungary is and what an autocrat Orban is. Yet, if a country doesn't protect itself and its people it will be taken over so damned if you do and damned if you don't.

 

[axj]

The more pressure and interference from outside, the more a country will have to actively defend itself and its interests and this will lead to more socalled repressive measures to protect itself. Such measures will of course then be used by outside forces interested in interfering, to point the finger and say "Look how repressive they are and how free we are".

I wonder if that is the main reason why Russia is among the first to introduce a CBDC (digital ruble), as well as being already among the countries that use digital payments the most (phasing out cash).

On the surface it looks like Russia is even ahead of the West in introducing a repressive total control system - though maybe the intent behind it is different?

There is also the fact that the Russian central bank (which is bringing out the CBDC this year) is still a part of the Western IMF/BIS system for some reason. The BIS ("central bank of central banks") is one of the main drivers for bringing out these total control CBDCs across the world, which is exactly what the Russian central bank is doing.

 

[Christine]

The French translation is crystal clear on this video, it is made by "Quantum Leap translation"

L'INTERVIEW DE VLADIMIR POUTINE PAR TUCKER CARLSON INTÉGRALEMENT DOUBLÉE EN FRANÇAIS

 

[loreta]

This interview is a pleasure, like a cheesecake. Or like a box of Swiss chocolate, the taste is delicious. The pleasure of seeing Putin in shape, mentally, the pleasure of seeing a man like him. I like him so much, I'd like to marry him. With him, even if we are aware of the facts, of how this world works, of the chaos, etc., with him everything becomes clearer. It's as if he's reassuring us that you're on the right track. Keep up the good work.

I really enjoyed listening to it, and the interview with English subtitles and the beautiful voice of the man who translates it is really excellent. You can hear Putin speaking in Russian, what a marvel.

 

[Liliea]

The first time I saw Tucker C. was in the interview with Jordan Peterson, at the end JP hints at him to stop saying stupid things, well it's ironic what happened after that. Many like Tucker C. because he is strong willed and energetic, he is a great presenter but as an analytical journalist he still lacks insight and doesn't place himself very well (a serious conversation or an interview program? )

In this interview Putin allows himself to elaborate on historical terms because it is in that knowledge where most people in the west fail and they do so because we cannot see clearly how we are being manipulated and that it is due to the propaganda war that Russia seems to have if not lost it at least accepts that it is very difficult to confront the US in those terms. What this connotes is that Putin by teaching the importance of multiculturalism (the real one) and Russian roots as a factor in the defense of the Russian people is also making use of the "opportunity " to be heard in the West by the great mass media.

I also felt Putin very moved when he spoke about the concept of deznazification and goes back to the historical explanation so that it is understood who also exercised extermination on the Polish, Jewish and Russian population, as well as seeing how the ideology is spreading in other forms in the West.
Olaf Scholz says that Putin is an imperialist and a liar and this is an absurd interview; I suppose that deznazifying may also sound boring or equally absurd to him, he must be jealous because the resilience of the Russian economy surpassed more than three German mandates and he sees how Scholz buries what is left of the German economy and how the German ultra-right begins to seriously rebound since the war.

If the world is sick as Putin says, we must try to heal it or at least not to collaborate with its illness.

 

[maiko]

@loreta thanks for pointing it out. That was indeed good to see. He looked to be in good health and rested, despite the demands he must face each day. Compare that to a Zelensky who looks older and more dran by the week. Like many other politicians in the West who seem to be more rapidly aging whilst in power.

 

[Cosmos]

What I found interesting is what mainstream radio in Germany choose to report about the interview: they reported pretty accurately that Putin doesn’t want to invade other countries and especially Poland, unless Russia gets attacked by Poland. So, here is my question: Why would they choose to report that part of the interview? Mainstream radio in Germany is clearly and obviously completely bought and paid for by the interests of the western/american PTB. So, it seems likely that “somebody“ gave them the order to report exactly that. Why?

Here is my hypothesis: The PTB are either trying to bait Putin into “attacking“ another country (most likely Poland) and/or they are trying to create a situation that leaves Putin with no other choice. Then they will use his statements in the Tucker interview to “convince“ the general western public that Putin is indeed, after all, a “dangerous liar“, who is “the next hitler“ and therefore everything he tried to tell westerners is a lie too. Thereby wishing to reverse the “truth infection“ Putin has injected into the western world.

But Poland is in NATO. Are they that crazy/desperate/reckless? They might be.