Polls: Society & Politics

Im mostly talking about biased scientist. Not neccesarily lying on purpose more so out ignorance. The idea that many of those scientist are so deep in inside their bubble that they would approve of anything coming their way.

This is excluding huge multibillion industries and politicans expecting certain results in order to better control the population.

Perhaps we Purge style baby boomers in arenas.

I've been saying for a while, especially on this site, that the concept of "BLM leadership" is something that exists pretty much entirely in right wing media. And even floated the idea that "BLM leadership" was actually plants, propped up by right wing billionaires to be the 'animated strawman' they need for their narrative. Turns out that weird theory is likely.

I suppose it makes sense. If a casual observer such as myself can think of it then surely professional think tanks could come up with it. And as they are backed by billionaires, if it is a strategy that can be funded, the question is not if it could be done but why wouldn't they do it? And the only answers that makes any sense are variations of "because it wouldn't work." But looking around it's hard not to notice the lurch to the right in our media, both social and mainstream, despite that same media telling us it actually moved to the left (another strategy that worked). So, something the right wing billionaires wanted has been delivered and any retrospective explanation anyone can come up with likely occurred as long as it would actually work, with preference possibly given to the more cost effective ideas, however that might be measured. Propping up a few "blm leaders" almost no one on the left cared to know about is certainly within the power of the far right.

So, yes, the christian nationalists have been at this for a while and are very close to solidifying their power permanently.

Or No, at some point christian nationalism will require work to no longer take place behind the scenes and when people see it the christian-nationalists-owned media saying that isn't what they are seeing won't be enough (even though they already accomplished that once by telling people 1/6 was a peaceful protest and not an attempt at civil war).

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/reclaiming-narratives-black-lives-matter-founder-mark-fisher-s-controversial-shift-from-blm-leadership-to-trump-endorsement/ss-AA1iVHq4

I’m on the fence. IOT- internet of things means sensors on cars, gps locators etc…have been integral in creating a safer society. Crime is low and has been because of IOT and genetic genealogy, communications, etc.

BUT, the internet has been a disaster in the eyes of social science. The basic ideas of democracy has never been less popular. Extremism has never been louder.

Has the Internet been good as a whole?

See Iran's threats... it would be quite clear the attack on Israel was intended to create a broader conflict. The question is... how broad?

I don't see the Israel/ Gaza issue ending anytime soon. It will take months to dig through all tunnels and find hostages, it will take years to rebuild... and start again.

- Air Strikes in Syria...

- Multiple attacks at US facilities...

- Moving 800 troops and possibly "many more" to middle east.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/26/politics/us-strikes-facilities-syria/index.html

The question becomes... would someone be so bold as to hit in the USA mainland and how?

Would they send out "terrorists" on Halloween? It be so easy to terrorize USA and do a lot of damage... we are more arrogant than December 1941.

Hezbollah smart? How smart?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/hamas-hezbollah-israel-trump-1.6994299

Because we really don’t have time for every right wing moron too see it first hand.

Just wondering for all those folks saying 'don't bring politics up after a mass shooting.'