via How to prevent debate while claiming to be in favour of it.

David Malone at the Golem XIV Blog demonstrates how Riven with BIAS and Hautier our discourse have become.
As ever the comments on the Article are deeply enriching and Davids welcoming and always encouraging remarks do nothing less than inspire.

May 11, 2019

THE SATURDAY ESSAY: WHY THE KEY TO BRITAIN’S DIVIDED AND NEUROTIC DOMESTIC POLITICS LIES IN ITS LILY-LIVERED FOREIGN POLICY

#PDC #TheSlog @JoeBlob20 @financialeyes @Albion_Rover @briangukc @mikeukc #ExtinctionRebellion @2013Boodicca @Ian_Fraser @financialeyes #ConquestofDough

The US is Ten years Ahead, nothing to worry about there then,

Then there’s this to pick the bones out of,

Billy’s got to be a bit of a Luvvie over the years he is the closest that the Left gatekeepers get to someone actually straining very hard to think but not quite getting past the starting conclusion looking for vindication.

I must say, John, I am fearing for my own sanity at this point, I can not see why anyone could be offended by anything you have said above?

David Starkey really nails it in this interview.

July 31, 2018

AND HERE IS THE OPINION. THIS JUST IN.OPINION AT TEN.

“I read that News editorial with interest I would remind our listeners that the Times of London News Editorial is, in fact, a factual news piece and the consensus opinion of my fellow opinionators here in New York and the Lobby in Washington have felt secure in the consensus of that opinion. To be clear, that the consensus is; that the facts simply do not support the consensus in this case and our collective consensus opinion is that the Facts are not a correct reflection of how we feel about it”.

Professor Bruce Charlton, PC , Playing the Man and Not the Ball. #JESUISBOURGOISEBLANCHOMME #CONQUESTOFDOUGH. JE SUIS BOURGOISE BLANC HOMME. STAY SAFE ONLINE AND ON THE STREETS. #OCCUPYTHEEUROPEANSPRING

Roger Lewis Rees-Mogg is I think Brilliant, the tories Claim a great Intellect for BoJo and For me, I do not see it, Rees-Mogg another matter altogether.
As a left Anarchist myself I do have time for conservative libertarians. I have read a fair Bit of Edmund Burke recently and Quote extensively from his, On these Present Discontents Speech.

http://letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/…/on…

One has to consider the question at what point would a Radical become Conservative, accepting that life is a journey and Everything Flows, believing in Free Will as I do, there is though an imagined point at which a holding pattern in the Flow might appear attractive, would that be conservative?

http://letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/…/uk…

On the present discontents, Burke opined #Conquest of Dough

mais par impatience de souffrir On the present…

LETTHEMCONFECTSWEETERLIES.BLOGSPOT.COM

LikeShow more reactions

· Reply · Remove Preview · June 19 at 9:00pm

Adrian Bailey I like Burke too. Hume my favourite philosopher, a Tory. Eric Hobsbawm maintained a ‘fondness’ for soviet style marxism, yet he remained culturally conservative. I’m pretty conservative myself when it comes to conserving basic core values or ‘holding patterns’ of ‘socialism’ , and conservative too in having a pretty pessimistic view of potentials for significant changes in power structures. Political philosophy is its own place for some, but I include it in a broader philosophical tradition that includes skepticism that’s not light years away from anarchism. Epistemologically, I am wary of anyone who clings on to the belief that they know – a tendency from which I try hard to guard myself.

🙂

LikeShow more reactions

Anekāntavāda (Sanskrit: अनेकान्तवाद, “many-sidedness”) refers to the Jain doctrine about metaphysical truths that emerged in ancient India.^[1] It states that the ultimate truth and reality is complex and has multiple aspects.^[2] Anekantavada has also been interpreted to mean non-absolutism, “intellectual Ahimsa”,^[3] religious pluralism,^[4] as well as a rejection of fanaticism that leads to terror attacks and mass violence.^[5] Some scholars state that modern revisionism has attempted to reinterpret anekantavada with religious tolerance, openmindedness and pluralism.^[6]^[7]

Affirmation: syād-asti—in some ways, it is,
Denial: syān-nāsti—in some ways, it is not,
Joint but successive affirmation and denial: syād-asti-nāsti—in some ways, it is, and it is not,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-asti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syān-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is not, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-asti-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is, it is not, and it is indescribable,
Joint and simultaneous affirmation and denial: syād-avaktavyaḥ—in some ways, it is indescribable.