The Intellectual Dark Web

[roamer_1]

Bookmark.

Jump in @DB ... I'd love to hear what you have to say...

[roamer_1]

How about making "The Intellectual Dark Web" a sub-board in Editorial/Opinion?  This way each video could be posted separately and generate its own discussion. 

@Sanguine

@Right_in_Virginia

GAK. Howabout 'The Big Think' or 'The Pipe and Chair' or something and not lend credence to liberal tags. 

[Sanguine]

@roamer_1, I am very disappointed by Yiannopoulos.  He is very bright, articulate and quick witted, but he wastes it all on being provocative only.   

[Sanguine]

@Right_in_Virginia

GAK. Howabout 'The Big Think' or 'The Pipe and Chair' or something and not lend credence to liberal tags. 

I like the Big Think.  Not too familiar with pipe smoking, so that does nothing for me.

[Sanguine]

Ping to @Quix and @the_doc  and @The_Reader_David

[roamer_1]

The artificial constraints of social media certainly hamper effective thought, but frankly I think Conservatism has failed to articulate a coherent, overarching philosophy.  What single principle unites pro-life, low tax, traditional marriage, RKBA, property rights, strong defense, etc?  And if we could articulate this principle, how would we distinguish the American (more libertarian) version from the on-its-deathbed European (more statist) version?

@HoustonSam
Well, of course there can be no single principle, unless you want to call it Reaganism, or Reagan Conservatism. Conservatism has always been factions, some drawn more to one set of factional principles, some drawn to another. Big 'C' Conservatism believes them all, and knows them to be interlocking. One cannot have small government, nor fiscal responsibility, without a good and moral people, as an instance.

None of it works without all of  it. No one faction is more important than the other, and no faction should be in the back of the bus.

That is a question I would happily engage in, but it is one for another day. 

[Right_in_Virginia]

@Right_in_Virginia

GAK. Howabout 'The Big Think' or 'The Pipe and Chair' or something and not lend credence to liberal tags. 

I simply took the title of this thread @roamer_1   and suggested a format that would facilitate discussion --- which a sub-board would do because each video would be given its own thread.   

[Sanguine]

I simply took the title of this thread @roamer_1   and suggested a format that would facilitate discussion --- which a sub-board would do because each video would be given its own thread.

Working on your suggestion, @Right_in_Virginia

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1, I am very disappointed by Yiannopoulos.  He is very bright, articulate and quick witted, but he wastes it all on being provocative only.

@Sanguine
That is exactly my sentiments. He serves a purpose, I suppose, but not in this game. 

[roamer_1]

I simply took the title of this thread @roamer_1   and suggested a format that would facilitate discussion --- which a sub-board would do because each video would be given its own thread.

Don't be offended, @Right_in_Virginia ... Believe it or not, the 'gak' was not pointed at you in any way.... I just hate giving progressive labels the time of day...
Dunno about it being exclusively video either... Believe it or not, there are good white papers out there too that take acres to dig through... As I opined from the early days on FR.

[roamer_1]

I like the Big Think.  Not too familiar with pipe smoking, so that does nothing for me.

Works for me... I am more of a back porch and sweet tea kinda thinker myself... 

[DB]

Jump in @DB ... I'd love to hear what you have to say...

@roamer_1 Thank you for the kind invite. I'm buried on a work project that is going to take at least the next week to get working and it needed to be done yesterday... So I'm only popping in to try to stay current. Otherwise I'm trying to lay low and work... A number of people are depending on me to produce.

I bookmarked this thread so I could revisit it when I do have some time later.

[truth_seeker]

At its root, what do we Conservatives believe?

Like you @HoustonSam I drifted to these podcaster-youtubers for "intellectual depth and weight"

These people are not conservatives per se, but more so free speech advocates.

Like conservatives, they oppose stifling media, political correctness, campus progressive bias and antics etc.@Sanguine @roamer_1 @Bigun

[roamer_1]

These people are not conservatives per se, but more so free speech advocates.

That's another funny bit @truth_seeker
We see this as separate things, they see themselves as separate things, but with a broad brush in mind, classic liberalism and libertarianism, by their principles, are found in Conservatism.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1 Thank you for the kind invite. I'm buried on a work project that is going to take at least the next week to get working and it needed to be done yesterday... So I'm only popping in to try to stay current. Otherwise I'm trying to lay low and work... A number of people are depending on me to produce.

I bookmarked this thread so I could revisit it when I do have some time later.

@DB
Yep. 10-4.
I have much the same going on in August. Best wishes, man. Don't wear yourself out. 

[Frank Cannon]

 

[truth_seeker]

That's another funny bit @truth_seeker
We see this as separate things, they see themselves as separate things, but with a broad brush in mind, classic liberalism and libertarianism, by their principles, are found in Conservatism.

I understand that. I think Reagan said that too.

! No longer available

[Quix]

Ping to @Quix and @the_doc  and @The_Reader_David

Great points, all. Alas, I don't have much time to respond meaningfully. Just realized I have 25,000+ impressions to my tweets in the last 24 hours. Trying to figure out how to respond meaningfully to all that.

Some quick, off-the-cuff responses:

I love Peterson, Molyneaux, Shapiro, Milo Y, Stroppy Me, Dustin Nemos, Lionel N, et al for sometimes differing reasons. But all of them at least make earnest and often effective efforts toward some elements of truth as we have experienced it and observed it.

I can give a lot of grace to the likes of Milo & Stefan M for their deficiencies. I have plenty of those myself. All who speak any degree of truth in this era are 'healthy subversives' in the best George Orwell sense.

Too many people still fail to realize this is foundationally a VERY SPIRITUAL WAR. Some of those above don't realize that. Some are beginning to, I hope, it seems.

And, even good believers do well to remember that the weapons of our warfare are not carnal--to the pulling down of strongholds from their 'near heavenly places.'

Prayer and right living are still more potent than the most brilliant word-smithing.

Praise and joy in The Lord are powerful onslaughts against the enemy and his efforts & minions.

Wisdom & understanding can devastate great swaths of the enemy's forces and camps.

Let all of good heart toward God and Man do great exploits in Christ's Blood & Spirit against the forces of darkness.

May all of the least bit of good-heartedness be freed from bondages of the enemy.

May the enemy's fantasies, thoughts, plans, efforts against people of good heart fall to the ground empty and yet return on the evil senders 10's the devastations they meant on the forces of good.

LET GOD ARISE AND HIS ENEMIES BE SCATTERED.

[roamer_1]

I understand that. I think Regan said that too.

That's right.

[Suppressed]

! No longer available

It fascinated me to see an intellectual side to the leftist Russell Brand, who always acts so vapid on the telly.   

[Smokin Joe]

@HoustonSam

I saw this posted on, of all places, Facebook the other day and it's been playing in my head ever since so I'll throw it out as a possible answer to your question


"I want a government that fits inside the Constitution."

I think that is a great start, but there will be extensive debate on that.
Even concepts so simple as being secure in your person, papers, and effects have been grossly distorted, the idea of "Due Process" warped beyond belief, the "Interstate Commerce Clause" and "Providing for the general Welfare" twisted beyond the imaginations of the founders.
We have to be able to define the Constitution using the intent of those who wrote it, including the definitions and boundaries they would have found to be common sense, or at least something they could agree upon. Between the perversion of the language and the decades of "progressive' thought injected into the very essence of our culture, first we have to drag the Constitution from the semantic morass and clean up the fundamental concepts of our Liberty in simple language--ironically, concepts many today who are dependent on Federal largess or programs, either for sustenance or employment, would heartily object to.

[Bigun]

I think that is a great start, but there will be extensive debate on that.
Even concepts so simple as being secure in your person, papers, and effects have been grossly distorted, the idea of "Due Process" warped beyond belief, the "Interstate Commerce Clause" and "Providing for the general Welfare" twisted beyond the imaginations of the founders.
We have to be able to define the Constitution using the intent of those who wrote it, including the definitions and boundaries they would have found to be common sense, or at least something they could agree upon. Between the perversion of the language and the decades of "progressive' thought injected into the very essence of our culture, first we have to drag the Constitution from the semantic morass and clean up the fundamental concepts of our Liberty in simple language--ironically, concepts many today who are dependent on Federal largess or programs, either for sustenance or employment, would heartily object to.

@Smokin Joe

You mean like this for example:

"With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."

           Constitutional architect James Madison in a letter to James Robertson

[Smokin Joe]

@Smokin Joe

You mean like this for example:

"With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."

           Constitutional architect James Madison in a letter to James Robertson

Yep. One of a multitude of phrases which have been given meaning distorted by cultural reeducation.

[verga]

Hey @verga , over here...

Yoohoo @RoosGirl

Thank you for the ping, I will have to get to this later, back to real life this week.

[Sanguine]

We have our own sub-board now.  If you want to post a specific video/article for discussion, you can make a new topic under this sub-board.