Warning: file_get_contents(/home/www/settings/mirror_forum_db_enable_sql): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /var/www/html/content/Forum/functions.php on line 8
Looking over the landscape of Animalia in general I see nothing but conflict over practically everything but generally material comforts and the associated societal conditioning. This is particularly relevant to the human species as evidenced every day in this world. (...)
Again, a matter of emphasis. Conflicts (of any scale) are often resolved/won by cooperation.
There's this amazing shortcut to gradual evolution. It's called education.
One could replace conflict with cooperation to arrive at a very different outlook. Esp. for evolved social animals.
Looking over the landscape of Animalia in general I see nothing but conflict over practically everything but generally material comforts and the associated societal conditioning. This is particularly relevant to the human species as evidenced every day in this world.
So if humans are to evolve away from this profile then we are at a crux, so to speak. How and why and what? All the relevant questions. Belief is not enough. Knowledge is what it will take and the first knowledge will be that we are not helpless; that we are arrogant and selfish and prideful as a species. We have the intellectual ability to figure that part out. We need to move beyond the limitations we put on ourselves by cultural depravity and all it's destructive trends and hypocrisy. Don't talk about peace. Be peace. In the heart. In the mind. In the soul. Project it. Let the credit be revealed in us by channeling through us.
Sorry Richard, I get carried away sometimes. I don't have all the answers but I know they're out there and are coupled with any number of resultant questions. It all leads me to believe that we're going somewhere as a body. Hopefully, and dare I say, faithfully, I would begin with acknowledgement of a very apparent spiritual evolution in juxtaposition.
Not trying to make this about belief or non-belief. Just offering my opinion on what to me is blindingly obvious.
Location: At the dude ranch / above the sea Gender:
Posted:
Aug 11, 2024 - 10:02am
R_P wrote:
One could replace conflict with cooperation to arrive at a very different outlook. Esp. for evolved social animals.
Off/on topic: Tim Leary wrote a fascinating book that described the eight-circuit model of consciousness. IIRC, the first four have terrestrial concerns:
1) solo awareness, like hunger
2) small connection, like having a partner
3) small society near you, like a community
4) large groups far away, like global awareness
Make fun of the guy all you want, but he was really thoughtful and inventive.
channeling The Police
Every bet we make
every chance we take
every heart we break
every cake we bake?
We could wake up dead and still not know it was a dream or we could live in a state of grace and pump grease into those giant bearing journals and let the dead inside us live like there's no tomorrow...
We have to outgrow war. How are we going to do that? I think it has to start with learning how to navigate conflict. Level heart, level mind, level playing field.
Sure, human civilization is pretty much based on conflict. How is it even possible to change a profile like that? Good question.
Where does change actually begin? That's a rhetorical question of course.
We're all soldiers in a way, or will be.
So what is actually worth fighting for? The illusion of peace or just simple relevance? Ultimately we seek the proof of meaning. That's where the individual comes in. Living their lives, inspired or not, with the potential to change the world, chips falling where they may.
Sorry to continue threadjack.
J.D. Vance is an interesting character. Back to topic-
This seems more interesting than that character, ha.
To outgrow war would be quite something wouldnât it? But wouldnât that also mean to outgrow our instinct or nature, where there is constant conflict and violence?
I find the good parts of spirituality and religion encourage this, but havenât seen it much in politics or economics.
I should have said "examination" to bridge the relevance thing lol.
Right. I think its called evolution...
We have to outgrow war. How are we going to do that? I think it has to start with learning how to navigate conflict. Level heart, level mind, level playing field.
Sure, human civilization is pretty much based on conflict. How is it even possible to change a profile like that? Good question.
Where does change actually begin? That's a rhetorical question of course.
We're all soldiers in a way, or will be.
So what is actually worth fighting for? The illusion of peace or just simple relevance? Ultimately we seek the proof of meaning. That's where the individual comes in. Living their lives, inspired or not, with the potential to change the world, chips falling where they may.
Sorry to continue threadjack.
J.D. Vance is an interesting character. Back to topic-
This seems more interesting than that character, ha.
To outgrow war would be quite something wouldnât it?
But wouldnât that also mean to outgrow our instinct or nature, where there is constant conflict and violence?
I find the good parts of spirituality and religion encourage this, but havenât seen it much in politics or economics.
We have to outgrow war. How are we going to do that? I think it has to start with learning how to navigate conflict. Level heart, level mind, level playing field.
Sure, human civilization is pretty much based on conflict. How is it even possible to change a profile like that? Good question.
Where does change actually begin? That's a rhetorical question of course.
We're all soldiers in a way, or will be.
So what is actually worth fighting for? The illusion of peace or just simple relevance? Ultimately we seek the proof of meaning. That's where the individual comes in. Living their lives, inspired or not, with the potential to change the world, chips falling where they may.
Sorry to continue threadjack.
J.D. Vance is an interesting character. Back to topic-
One would have had to be there to speak to the experience. To hear commentary from those ignorant of that experience gives me a strange compassion for uninformed opinion. I choose to react that way rather than other ways I could react. Humility should always be the common denominator it seems. I take that approach if I can.
Nobody has ever met a veteran who didn't overstate their experiences and importance (several family members included).
Wow. Just wow. Please enlighten every veteran that you come into contact with. with this statement. I dare you. buddy wrote:
As the son of a 30-year US Army officer veteran of WWII & Korea and as a Vietnam Era US Navy veteran myself, I'm calling BS on this one. Most veterans I've know downplay their service record if anything. Talking about it tends to only be relevant to between other veterans. Many civilians have no concept or couldn't give a shit as long as they didn't have to or choose to serve.
What Buddy said.
One would have had to be there to speak to the experience. To hear commentary from those ignorant of that experience gives me a strange compassion for uninformed opinion. I choose to react that way rather than other ways I could react. Humility should always be the common denominator it seems. I take that approach if I can.
As the son of a 30-year US Army officer veteran of WWII & Korea and as a Vietnam Era US Navy veteran myself, I'm calling BS on this one.
Most veterans I've know downplay their service record if anything. Talking about it tends to only be relevant to between other veterans. Many civilians have no concept or couldn't give a shit as long as they didn't have to or choose to serve.
I was drafted in 1972 & chose to enlist in the US Navy instead of going into the Army or Marines (which what was happening at the time). That I served honorably during the years of the conflict but was not deployed to Vietnam classifies me as a "Vietnam Era Veteran". We had no choice as to our deployments, I just happened to be deployed to San Clemente Naval Auxiliary Landing Station as an Air Traffic Controller (used to train fighter pilots how to land on aircraft carriers) during my first two years 1973-1975. The conflict ended shortly before my tour at NALS San Clemente was up so I was rotated to a US shore-based billet for my last two years since those deployed were all coming home. I could have just as easily been deployed to an aircraft carrier in the Gulf of Tonkin had the conflict still have been active.
More than you likely care to know, but this was my experience. Even my Lt. Colonel father had little to no choice of his assignments at any time during his career. I'm proud of my father's service, and of my own, an of OV's and the other vets I know here. Whether you or anyone else considers it "important" is of no concern to me.
Thank you. I imagine itâs a difficult and complex decision/choice/path.
Nobody has ever met a veteran who didn't overstate their experiences and importance (several family members included).
Wow. Just wow.
Please enlighten every veteran that you come into contact with. with this statement. I dare you.
buddy wrote:
As the son of a 30-year US Army officer veteran of WWII & Korea and as a Vietnam Era US Navy veteran myself, I'm calling BS on this one.
Most veterans I've know downplay their service record if anything. Talking about it tends to only be relevant to between other veterans. Many civilians have no concept or couldn't give a shit as long as they didn't have to or choose to serve.
He didn't say it, you interpreted it. If we're at war and he was carrying a rifle (not a typewriter), he almost gets a pass when he says he carried that rifle in war. Should have said wartime.
I just think it's funny that you're not spasming over Vance taking this stand. They both served as they were called to do. Vance for 4 years, Walz for 24. Move on.
My understanding is that he was stationed overseas and receiving combat pay. So maybe an overstatement. But now we are kind of splitting hairs. Oh, and the democrats have clarified the record.
Nobody has ever met a veteran who didn't overstate their experiences and importance (several family members included).
As the son of a 30-year US Army officer veteran of WWII & Korea and as a Vietnam Era US Navy veteran myself, I'm calling BS on this one.
Most veterans I've know downplay their service record if anything. Talking about it tends to only be relevant to between other veterans. Many civilians have no concept or couldn't give a shit as long as they didn't have to or choose to serve.
I was drafted in 1972 & chose to enlist in the US Navy instead of going into the Army or Marines (which what was happening at the time). That I served honorably during the years of the conflict but was not deployed to Vietnam classifies me as a "Vietnam Era Veteran". We had no choice as to our deployments, I just happened to be deployed to San Clemente Naval Auxiliary Landing Station as an Air Traffic Controller (used to train fighter pilots how to land on aircraft carriers) during my first two years 1973-1975. The conflict ended shortly before my tour at NALS San Clemente was up so I was rotated to a US shore-based billet for my last two years since those deployed were all coming home. I could have just as easily been deployed to an aircraft carrier in the Gulf of Tonkin had the conflict still have been active.
More than you likely care to know, but this was my experience. Even my Lt. Colonel father had little to no choice of his assignments at any time during his career. I'm proud of my father's service, and of my own, an of OV's and the other vets I know here. Whether you or anyone else considers it "important" is of no concern to me.
Trump never served. He ran away. He's not ashamed. He gloats about it. He brags about how he used his daddy's privilege and wealth to avoid not only Vietnam, but serving at all.
JD Vance, he served. He did what the Marines needed him to do and went where they told him to go. He wasn't any hero, his four years in the Marines are undistinguished, and that's okay. That's okay. Most of us aren't heroes, we're just just people doing the job, we do what they need us to do, we go where they tell us. Doing your duty is enough. Or rather is should be enough. But Vance? Well JD Vance is ASHAMED of his service, of not being a snake eater. Because that's what Republicans turned service into, Hollywood heroism. If you're not a door kicker, if you're not a bearded steely-eyed SEAL, if you're not a raw meat eating Ranger parachuting into danger, you're not a real veteran. That's what Republicans have turned service into. Heroism.
And JD Vance, ain't no hero.
He was just another Marine. Like millions of others before him. Someone who showed up for four years and did the job he was assigned. No more. No less.
And it's just not enough.
It's not enough because swaggering wannabe heroes like Trump and Vance turned military service into heroism or nothing.
And now they're hoist on their own petard.
And MAGAs have no choice but to denigrate Tim Walz's service. Because they can't live up to their own manufactured ideal of what a veteran is.
Because they are ashamed of their own ordinary record.
And because most of all: they're ashamed Trump himself ran away when called.
Most of you are forgetting that Walz said in was in combat. Repeatedly from his first run as governor up until now. That is the lie. And a big one.
That is the stolen valor part. Evidently it only matters to a small few here.
He didn't say it, you interpreted it. If we're at war and he was carrying a rifle (not a typewriter), he almost gets a pass when he says he carried that rifle in war. Should have said wartime.
I just think it's funny that you're not spasming over Vance taking this stand. They both served as they were called to do. Vance for 4 years, Walz for 24. Move on.
