if I had time to waste (which I don't), I wonder if I could go back 20 odd years and find something out-of-date that nobody really agrees with anymore, that Johnny said or wrote. would it be okay if I called him 'stupid' then? heck, I believed stuff 5-6 yrs ago that I now know to have been slanted or untrue, so I guess I'm stupid too. oh dear, I wouldn't pass Johnny's 'purity of beliefs test'.
but wait... I knew that the vaccine narrative was total BS, a good 18+ years ago so I guess then I can call all those who didn't yet know, 'stupid'. but I wouldn't because I don't/won't judge people who are not in the same place in their 'awakening' journey as me or who may have some different opinions or perspectives. I simply cannot respect the 'holier than thou' cuz I'm more 'awake' than thou, regardless of whatever other worthwhile things may have been said.
so thumbs down on Mr. Vedmore. criticism of specific points is absolutely fine, but I found his glee at putting down & name-calling others in the wider 'dissident space', a turn-off.
And let's look at some logical fallacies, shall we? When Johnny says 'we' would he substitute 'I' or does he really just mean 'all of you'? For instance, 'I'm a dick.' 'I'm more negative than positive.' 'I have an ego' (no, I got rid of my ego and that's why I'm smarter than all of you) or 'I don't like being challenged.' Or does that make us nagging bots that would want him to pick up his socks rather than just having sex and shutting up?
It seems to me that schools do a fine job of destroying kids' egos. Isn't that how they indoctrinate them?
Yes, the subtext of this convo, by the end, was 'everything would be fine if all men were like us.' But no ego there. Thanks for giving a mom's perspective.
thanks back at ya, Tereza! maybe we should call it 'woman's perspective' ;) maybe some convos in the 'man cave' should stay there, lol.
what you are saying isn't really even pointing out subtext; it was pretty up front. ;) personally, I just have a visceral reaction to name-calling. careful thinkers/speakers can criticize an opinion or behavior, without slapping a label on the person. I make a conscious effort at that so maybe that's why it always stands out to me and makes it difficult to respect whatever of value the person might otherwise say.
Yes! I define my stack as "a woman's pov on global economics, geopolitics, history, psyops, socio-spirituality, metaphysics, sexual dynamics & community sovereignty." There are women who are public speakers, but they're not really speaking as women, which means speaking as moms.
The Doc and I have an interview scheduled later this month and I'm mulling over what I want my question to be. Although I cover many different topics, it all comes back to the process of how to think. Like you, I've put a lot of conscious effort into critiquing an opinion or behavior without attacking the character of the person. I think there are step and rules, that I've outlined. But that's never as sexy as launching into labels and -isms. What do you think?
I think that you are 100% spot on. the minute I hear name-calling, labels, certainty of motivations, guilt by association, judgements based on decades-old info and the like, my respect for the speaker goes way down. what makes my respect for someone go way up? admitting when they're wrong and detailing when and why they changed their minds.
very much looking forward to your chat with Doc. :)
I’m half an hour in and loving it. Johnny is one of my favourites (you too Doc): Great perspective from JV. I recommend everyone looks at his website and Newspaste articles. The one on Gates is particularly interesting and his read through makes it even better. Why oh why did good Queen Bess (Elizabeth I) not keep his family close after they were pall bearers at her father’s funeral? Why did they appear to escape to the ‘New World’ of America?
Regarding THE VOICE of the posh who have to explain things to us slowly and clearly and condescendingly from on high - there is no one worse than Chrystia Freeland - the convoy bank-account freezing Canadian Finance Minister now running to be our next prime minister. If you don't believe me just have a listen (and then scream).
So interesting about purging the left in Britain, and the good politician who conveniently died of a heart attack at the right time. The same thing happened in Canada. We had a good left party (the NDP) led by an inspiring leader who was attacked for opposing Canada's participation in the Afghan War. He won an absolutely unprecedented NDP sweep to official opposition in the election of 2011, and then died suddenly and very conveniently of cancer in August of the same year. From that point on the NDP has been a globalist front led by plants from the WEF "young global leader" set.
But I think that Johnny's mistaken about Rumble & YT, although I'm no fan of Peter Thiel. I post on both and there's no checkbox asking if your video is on YT. It asks if you've signed any proprietary agreement, but that's all. The boxes at the top ask if you want Rumble to also post your video on YT. So I think that's what Johnny must have clicked inadvertently, that reposted it.
But I've had videos on Malone, specifically, taken down by YT a year after I'd posted them, and another two years later. It's gotten me up to two strikes at one time, which means the next one would take down the whole channel with no recourse. It doesn't change what I post, but they are capable of taking old videos and running them through new speech recognition AI so that a buried reference to vaccines can get deleted.
Nice, that covered a lot of interesting subjects! Yeah, I also feel that the Weinbergs are too self-regarding and not for real, though I am not yet willing to drop Dougie Murray and Jordie Peterson - have you tried getting the former on your show?
No! It has to be the patronising 65-year-old version of her who was recently calling the majority of Americans "un-educated" because they voted "the wrong way".
that was seriously sad, was it not? the Hollywood folks are just way too self-important. I mean come on, that woman hasn't even made a movie worth a shit in decades...
(but even sadder that my own sister has the same attitude.)
if I had time to waste (which I don't), I wonder if I could go back 20 odd years and find something out-of-date that nobody really agrees with anymore, that Johnny said or wrote. would it be okay if I called him 'stupid' then? heck, I believed stuff 5-6 yrs ago that I now know to have been slanted or untrue, so I guess I'm stupid too. oh dear, I wouldn't pass Johnny's 'purity of beliefs test'.
but wait... I knew that the vaccine narrative was total BS, a good 18+ years ago so I guess then I can call all those who didn't yet know, 'stupid'. but I wouldn't because I don't/won't judge people who are not in the same place in their 'awakening' journey as me or who may have some different opinions or perspectives. I simply cannot respect the 'holier than thou' cuz I'm more 'awake' than thou, regardless of whatever other worthwhile things may have been said.
so thumbs down on Mr. Vedmore. criticism of specific points is absolutely fine, but I found his glee at putting down & name-calling others in the wider 'dissident space', a turn-off.
And let's look at some logical fallacies, shall we? When Johnny says 'we' would he substitute 'I' or does he really just mean 'all of you'? For instance, 'I'm a dick.' 'I'm more negative than positive.' 'I have an ego' (no, I got rid of my ego and that's why I'm smarter than all of you) or 'I don't like being challenged.' Or does that make us nagging bots that would want him to pick up his socks rather than just having sex and shutting up?
The 5G warfare is a Malone trope. I didn't hear anything different that Johnny meant by it, so here's my critique of Malone's version: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/malone-and-the-cull-de-sac.
It seems to me that schools do a fine job of destroying kids' egos. Isn't that how they indoctrinate them?
Yes, the subtext of this convo, by the end, was 'everything would be fine if all men were like us.' But no ego there. Thanks for giving a mom's perspective.
thanks back at ya, Tereza! maybe we should call it 'woman's perspective' ;) maybe some convos in the 'man cave' should stay there, lol.
what you are saying isn't really even pointing out subtext; it was pretty up front. ;) personally, I just have a visceral reaction to name-calling. careful thinkers/speakers can criticize an opinion or behavior, without slapping a label on the person. I make a conscious effort at that so maybe that's why it always stands out to me and makes it difficult to respect whatever of value the person might otherwise say.
Yes! I define my stack as "a woman's pov on global economics, geopolitics, history, psyops, socio-spirituality, metaphysics, sexual dynamics & community sovereignty." There are women who are public speakers, but they're not really speaking as women, which means speaking as moms.
The Doc and I have an interview scheduled later this month and I'm mulling over what I want my question to be. Although I cover many different topics, it all comes back to the process of how to think. Like you, I've put a lot of conscious effort into critiquing an opinion or behavior without attacking the character of the person. I think there are step and rules, that I've outlined. But that's never as sexy as launching into labels and -isms. What do you think?
I think that you are 100% spot on. the minute I hear name-calling, labels, certainty of motivations, guilt by association, judgements based on decades-old info and the like, my respect for the speaker goes way down. what makes my respect for someone go way up? admitting when they're wrong and detailing when and why they changed their minds.
very much looking forward to your chat with Doc. :)
You do my heart good, Warrior Mom ;-)
(PS: if Malone was 'at' Rescue the Republic, he was NOT one of the speakers. I was there and didn't hear his name even mentioned)
I’m half an hour in and loving it. Johnny is one of my favourites (you too Doc): Great perspective from JV. I recommend everyone looks at his website and Newspaste articles. The one on Gates is particularly interesting and his read through makes it even better. Why oh why did good Queen Bess (Elizabeth I) not keep his family close after they were pall bearers at her father’s funeral? Why did they appear to escape to the ‘New World’ of America?
Regarding THE VOICE of the posh who have to explain things to us slowly and clearly and condescendingly from on high - there is no one worse than Chrystia Freeland - the convoy bank-account freezing Canadian Finance Minister now running to be our next prime minister. If you don't believe me just have a listen (and then scream).
So interesting about purging the left in Britain, and the good politician who conveniently died of a heart attack at the right time. The same thing happened in Canada. We had a good left party (the NDP) led by an inspiring leader who was attacked for opposing Canada's participation in the Afghan War. He won an absolutely unprecedented NDP sweep to official opposition in the election of 2011, and then died suddenly and very conveniently of cancer in August of the same year. From that point on the NDP has been a globalist front led by plants from the WEF "young global leader" set.
I suddenly thought the same, poor old John Smith’s convenient demise. Literally have to go back and revisit every early death…
Another great listen. Thanks Ahmed and Jonny.
Do tell more about this retreat you are planning. Sounds amazing. Sending love to you and your family xx
Johnny is speaking my language with looking at logical fallacies, which was in the title of my recent post on Eisenstein: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/charles-eisenstein-follies-and-fallacies. It's how I determine whether someone is who they say they are, by examining the discrepancies. And I think that someone who admits they're wrong is the one who 'wins': https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/when-did-you-stop-being-wrong?
But I think that Johnny's mistaken about Rumble & YT, although I'm no fan of Peter Thiel. I post on both and there's no checkbox asking if your video is on YT. It asks if you've signed any proprietary agreement, but that's all. The boxes at the top ask if you want Rumble to also post your video on YT. So I think that's what Johnny must have clicked inadvertently, that reposted it.
But I've had videos on Malone, specifically, taken down by YT a year after I'd posted them, and another two years later. It's gotten me up to two strikes at one time, which means the next one would take down the whole channel with no recourse. It doesn't change what I post, but they are capable of taking old videos and running them through new speech recognition AI so that a buried reference to vaccines can get deleted.
Johnny, you are one of my favourite commentators on life, Doc, just epic as usual, love to you both 💖
Nice, that covered a lot of interesting subjects! Yeah, I also feel that the Weinbergs are too self-regarding and not for real, though I am not yet willing to drop Dougie Murray and Jordie Peterson - have you tried getting the former on your show?
Weinsteins, sorry.
Can my FemBot be Sharon Stone from Total Recall ?
No! It has to be the patronising 65-year-old version of her who was recently calling the majority of Americans "un-educated" because they voted "the wrong way".
I'll stick with my dog then, he never complains
that was seriously sad, was it not? the Hollywood folks are just way too self-important. I mean come on, that woman hasn't even made a movie worth a shit in decades...
(but even sadder that my own sister has the same attitude.)