The mistake is thinking this comes from politicians. It comes from private people who want the governments to regulate in their favor. Making the products and services they have invested in mandatory or directly bought with public money, no questions asked.
It's coming from rich people, who seek more wealth and to entrench their power. They use wokeness and similar issues like the environment in a manipulative way. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't be concerned about discrimination or the state of the ecosystem. That would be making a logical error
Exactly. His second mistake is assuming they have good intentions, but are simply misguided in what’s achievable. They do have a utopian vision, but it involves 90+% of humanity not existing, with the survivors being their slaves. Net Zero, Agenda 2030 and the rest of it are all just ruses. They’re a cover story for the problem they think needs addressing, their true intended destination and what they think must be done to get there.
It’s not “politicians” or “rich people”. It’s so far beyond both. It’s a desire to transcend human mortality and achieve blasphemous godhood. They’ve had money and power and they are bored with it. They want immortality.
@@TheMasonator777 Like any other way you try to categorize, it's never perfect in alignment, but the people seeking what you discuss are definitely mostly rich people. Politicians are different only in that they know who they serve, but both are seeking power. Very few, if any, rich people and politicians actually care about the future of this planet or the life that inhabits it. They are mentally ill and have programmed much of society into their very way of thinking.... narcissism, psychopathy, and the whole dark tetrad
The oldest rule in the book... everyone gets access to the watering hole. Except in this "modern advanced" state of humanity where some think they should have private watering holes while dictating when and where others are allowed to drink 🤨
What book are you referring to? Because throughout history access to scarce resources has been closely guarded. And in places where water is scarce, wells were not free for all to access but rather free for members of the community or those whom the community considered friendly to them. It's human nature to support your own group while denying access to resources to those whom you deem opposed to you.
I bet you're a dream. we are all Nightmares in our own way. But, such is the spice of life. The true morons are the ones who believe they have no room for improvement and who believe they're already perfect and have all their ideas completely correct. That's a dangerous way to think. You are on the right track.🙂
All animals are equal, some are just more/less equal as others. The revolution is over when the oppressed put on the clothes of the oppressors. We do this for the benefit off all but more for me and less for you. When we are in control, we will do what is in our interest.
Taking actions and decisions with a "utopia" in mind is LITTERALLY a FUTILE and USELESS effort... Is like trying to arrive at a place that everytime you are just near it, it moves far away of an additionaal 1 Km... We should not even TRY to do this...instead work for INCREMENTAL better things that are actually achieavable in a relatively short term... BRICKS actually build houses...a general idea of a "perfect house" will NEVER build a actual, usable house...
Reasonable derivability does not always imply univocality because reason requires definable assumptions whereas value and emotion does not. Any univocal moral issue is by definition not reasonable derivable (if we accept that morality cannot be objectively based).
I really enjoyed the video. It made me think about some things that have been on my mind for a while about the Republic, maybe this would be the time to ask about it. I read Plato’s Republic this past summer and really enjoyed it. I hear people say that the city which Plato creates with a philosopher-king at the head is his ideal city, however I’m not sure about this. In the second book Socrates begins describing the city and gets to a point where it seems he is satisfied, then Glaucon states that the city needs luxuries, and Socrates then described the city as one which has a “fever”. It’s from this point that the bulk of the city's description is made. It seems to me that it’s only after the decision to make the city luxurious that you get much of the structure of his “ideal” city. Perhaps the ideal city was the one before the luxuries were introduced? Thoughts?
Huxley's "Ends and Means", great related to this conversation. Written in 1937 about the dichotomy and ideological natures of Facism and Communism (as well as that time Hitler's Nazism and Stalin's Soviet Communism). Sadly, it's very relatable to the partisanship and ideological mindsets of today... God help us, for we cannot help each other because we first help ourselves
Logos, the universal Truth and the imperfect human are the keys to this question. There’s no reasonable, purely rationale answer to this that works. There are mysteries that operate above human understanding. To pursue understanding and following the UT with humility and gratitude is the most noble human endeavor. We are all better off when this occurs. For where your treasure is, there your heart will also be. MT 6:21;
I agree with his anti-Utopianism, I think utopian thinking is one of the bigges problems for humanity. It is the basis of most if not all totalitarian ideologies. What I don't understand is how he can say all this as a Christian. Does he really not realise how utopian Christianity is? That both utopian and apocalyptic thinking in the west are in fact rooted in Christian culture? Christians need to come to terms with how much of what they oppose in modern political and cultural movements is actually rooted in Christianity. Marx was heavily influenced by Christianity, wokeism uses a lot of concepts that are rooted in Christianity.
Christianity removes the human utopian impulse to the hereafter. You cannot reach it in life, and anyone saying you can is unchristian. At the same time, that impulse is channeled into living rightly in an imperfect world in anticipation of the afterlife. Much more productive in my opinion and less likely to allow for the kinds of craziness utopians get up to, though obviously not infallible.
@@almathwasmywowusername9529 It sounds like you are ignoring the bulk of Christian eschatology. It's not just the afterlife. What about the Second Coming, the New World, etc.? It's still true that there is a central Christian belief that at least a certain portion of society needs to live a certain way, abide by certain rules, to reach a form of Utopia. And at least in the past, under Christian rulers those rules were enforced upon everyone. The fact that now thankfully, but only reluctantly, Christians have stopped enforcing Christianity through politics/the state, doesn't change this.
the UK can't speak for anywhere else this is where I live, is getting less inclusive the more they spout about DEI and more authoritarian, there is one way to think and everyone who deviates from it is vilified and inclusion is about happy clappy words not actions, and I see it everywhere, kids with ASD having their needs ignored at school because of this DEI idea that everyone is on the spectrum so no actual acknowledgement is done that someone is struggling let alone any practical help offered, we have new electric buses being rolled out that have clearly been designed by able bodied men with no thought for children, the elderly, disabled or even just those with heavy bags (lack of bars to hold on to at all hight levels, no handles on the back of seat to aid getting up, less support bars/banister rails at the stairs to the upper deck, lack of stop/bell buttons), then we have the men allowed in womens sports etc, its just everywhere I look its ideology trumping reality, there is no thought for the real world, real needs and how people live their lives, just this disjointed utopian thinking that is really just based on the self and blinkered.
Every issue has a technological solution. If it's not a technological solution, it's propaganda. You can logically (philosophy) and mathematically (science) come up with the formulae for society, but neglecting human nature and needs leads down paths of dogma and ideology that are exploited by those who understand, and act outside of, those known logical and mathematical solutions, i.e. "politics" I feel we are headed towards a need for an unfeeling, logical- mathematical calculator (AI) to propose THE solutions, and human executive to implement and execute the plans, taking human nature into account. Right now, it feels like the exact opposite: human nature proposing the plans in a biased nature, then attempting to use technological means to achieve their desired, ideologically derived ends.
Most correlate champagne with celebration …. It implies ‘have nots’ don’t have celebrations in their life because there’s nothing to celebrate and the ‘haves’ are always living it up…
Scientific driven decisions are not the equivalent of social models falsely based on science. Decisions made with specific technical purposes such as public health or safety of the power grid have nothing to do with utopia. I don't see any clear distinction in this discussion
Interesting subject, but I had to stop watching after the millionth "OK" at about 2 minutes. To the guest: I'm listening, you don't need to keep my attention every 2 seconds. I wish these speech "tricks" would go away, it just makes me tune out on everything you're trying to get across.
Na, you have a elite in the middle east, where everybody must live in sacrefice, except the rich. You have China, where everybody sacrefice for the state, except the members of the party. What they are talking about, is how it is human nature, to argue that other must sacrefice for "the greater good", by people who are not willing to sacrefice anything them self.
The guest mentioned Agenda 2030. This came out of the UN, which is composed of unelected ultra-wealthy elites from across the world. They came up with a plan that reduces quality of life and promotes less people on earth. Western governments and corporations are using Agenda 2030 as a framework for DEI and “sustainability” laws, regs and policies. It’s not one elite, but a cabal of the most elite telling the rest of us to live with less.
Seriously, here's a guest talking about false Utopias yet believing in Christianity! Jesus, and I say this seriously, like Muhammad, like Allah, like Yahweh is a imagined superhero with all the superhero magic abilities to do anything. To do anything, everything all the time or sometimes or whenever needed. No one who wrote about him, Jesus or Muhammad, knew them but was 100 years or so afterwards, and these magic people are the superheroes and they don't exist that way. Yet this guy's talking about a Utopia that doesn't exist. I don't believe you can rationally believe in Jesus and then not believe in some kind of imagined Utopia.
The mistake is thinking this comes from politicians. It comes from private people who want the governments to regulate in their favor. Making the products and services they have invested in mandatory or directly bought with public money, no questions asked.
It's coming from rich people, who seek more wealth and to entrench their power.
They use wokeness and similar issues like the environment in a manipulative way.
This doesn't mean that we shouldn't be concerned about discrimination or the state of the ecosystem.
That would be making a logical error
Like Bill Gates (Microsoft) pretending to care about “Global Health” and poor people in third world countries?
Exactly. His second mistake is assuming they have good intentions, but are simply misguided in what’s achievable.
They do have a utopian vision, but it involves 90+% of humanity not existing, with the survivors being their slaves.
Net Zero, Agenda 2030 and the rest of it are all just ruses. They’re a cover story for the problem they think needs addressing, their true intended destination and what they think must be done to get there.
It’s not “politicians” or “rich people”. It’s so far beyond both. It’s a desire to transcend human mortality and achieve blasphemous godhood. They’ve had money and power and they are bored with it. They want immortality.
@@TheMasonator777 Like any other way you try to categorize, it's never perfect in alignment, but the people seeking what you discuss are definitely mostly rich people.
Politicians are different only in that they know who they serve, but both are seeking power.
Very few, if any, rich people and politicians actually care about the future of this planet or the life that inhabits it.
They are mentally ill and have programmed much of society into their very way of thinking.... narcissism, psychopathy, and the whole dark tetrad
back in the day we used to call it "hypocrisy"
The oldest rule in the book... everyone gets access to the watering hole. Except in this "modern advanced" state of humanity where some think they should have private watering holes while dictating when and where others are allowed to drink 🤨
Similarly old idea, I make my own new watering hole, you make something for me in return for the privilege of using it.
What book are you referring to? Because throughout history access to scarce resources has been closely guarded. And in places where water is scarce, wells were not free for all to access but rather free for members of the community or those whom the community considered friendly to them. It's human nature to support your own group while denying access to resources to those whom you deem opposed to you.
Thank you again for the work you do ……
This was a next level clear and precise explanation
Sharing
Are we awake now🕊
Thank you
10:12 buddhists don’t say suffering isn’t real, they say it is dependent on conditions, and can be overcome by finding the unconditioned.
The imposed shame of having a (long) warm shower is another significant factor of the utopia driver equation.
No. It’s “nothing for you, everything for us, you pay, we collect, and you will like it… or else.”
Again.. thanks Peter and Jan.. great to listen to intellectual conversations .
( Delete … “Is the full interview available?” found it)
Utopia is a nightmare. I’m a night mare myself, so I know what I mean by “nightmare “.
I bet you're a dream. we are all Nightmares in our own way. But, such is the spice of life. The true morons are the ones who believe they have no room for improvement and who believe they're already perfect and have all their ideas completely correct. That's a dangerous way to think. You are on the right track.🙂
All animals are equal, some are just more/less equal as others.
The revolution is over when the oppressed put on the clothes of the oppressors.
We do this for the benefit off all but more for me and less for you.
When we are in control, we will do what is in our interest.
Taking actions and decisions with a "utopia" in mind is LITTERALLY a FUTILE and USELESS effort...
Is like trying to arrive at a place that everytime you are just near it, it moves far away of an additionaal 1 Km...
We should not even TRY to do this...instead work for INCREMENTAL better things that are actually achieavable in a relatively short term...
BRICKS actually build houses...a general idea of a "perfect house" will NEVER build a actual, usable house...
Sounds like a monarchy
Reasonable derivability does not always imply univocality because reason requires definable assumptions whereas value and emotion does not. Any univocal moral issue is by definition not reasonable derivable (if we accept that morality cannot be objectively based).
The elite define success as money with a pulpit.
When you can own everything, the only thing left is power and control.
I really enjoyed the video. It made me think about some things that have been on my mind for a while about the Republic, maybe this would be the time to ask about it. I read Plato’s Republic this past summer and really enjoyed it. I hear people say that the city which Plato creates with a philosopher-king at the head is his ideal city, however I’m not sure about this. In the second book Socrates begins describing the city and gets to a point where it seems he is satisfied, then Glaucon states that the city needs luxuries, and Socrates then described the city as one which has a “fever”. It’s from this point that the bulk of the city's description is made. It seems to me that it’s only after the decision to make the city luxurious that you get much of the structure of his “ideal” city. Perhaps the ideal city was the one before the luxuries were introduced? Thoughts?
Huxley's "Ends and Means", great related to this conversation. Written in 1937 about the dichotomy and ideological natures of Facism and Communism (as well as that time Hitler's Nazism and Stalin's Soviet Communism). Sadly, it's very relatable to the partisanship and ideological mindsets of today... God help us, for we cannot help each other because we first help ourselves
Logos, the universal Truth and the imperfect human are the keys to this question. There’s no reasonable, purely rationale answer to this that works. There are mysteries that operate above human understanding. To pursue understanding and following the UT with humility and gratitude is the most noble human endeavor. We are all better off when this occurs. For where your treasure is, there your heart will also be. MT 6:21;
"Moralon" vs "Moron"
"...politicians don't invite us to think they want us to vote for them..."!! I think I'm smarter after this episode or maybe I just believe it...🤣
I agree with his anti-Utopianism, I think utopian thinking is one of the bigges problems for humanity. It is the basis of most if not all totalitarian ideologies. What I don't understand is how he can say all this as a Christian. Does he really not realise how utopian Christianity is? That both utopian and apocalyptic thinking in the west are in fact rooted in Christian culture? Christians need to come to terms with how much of what they oppose in modern political and cultural movements is actually rooted in Christianity. Marx was heavily influenced by Christianity, wokeism uses a lot of concepts that are rooted in Christianity.
Christianity removes the human utopian impulse to the hereafter. You cannot reach it in life, and anyone saying you can is unchristian. At the same time, that impulse is channeled into living rightly in an imperfect world in anticipation of the afterlife. Much more productive in my opinion and less likely to allow for the kinds of craziness utopians get up to, though obviously not infallible.
@@almathwasmywowusername9529 It sounds like you are ignoring the bulk of Christian eschatology. It's not just the afterlife. What about the Second Coming, the New World, etc.?
It's still true that there is a central Christian belief that at least a certain portion of society needs to live a certain way, abide by certain rules, to reach a form of Utopia.
And at least in the past, under Christian rulers those rules were enforced upon everyone. The fact that now thankfully, but only reluctantly, Christians have stopped enforcing Christianity through politics/the state, doesn't change this.
Kinda' makes one nostalgic for the French Revolution.
If you had read Thoma More's Utopia you'd never think Utopia meant an ideal society. The world's he described was a dystopia, not a utopia.
I prefer water. If things collapse, they will feel a lot more relative loss than we will.
That loss won't be physical (personally)
Not the point.
@@marlow769 It's my point.
the UK can't speak for anywhere else this is where I live, is getting less inclusive the more they spout about DEI and more authoritarian, there is one way to think and everyone who deviates from it is vilified and inclusion is about happy clappy words not actions, and I see it everywhere, kids with ASD having their needs ignored at school because of this DEI idea that everyone is on the spectrum so no actual acknowledgement is done that someone is struggling let alone any practical help offered, we have new electric buses being rolled out that have clearly been designed by able bodied men with no thought for children, the elderly, disabled or even just those with heavy bags (lack of bars to hold on to at all hight levels, no handles on the back of seat to aid getting up, less support bars/banister rails at the stairs to the upper deck, lack of stop/bell buttons), then we have the men allowed in womens sports etc, its just everywhere I look its ideology trumping reality, there is no thought for the real world, real needs and how people live their lives, just this disjointed utopian thinking that is really just based on the self and blinkered.
The elites are fractured and competing . So which are group are you working for PB ?
With a hint of futuristianism
Every issue has a technological solution.
If it's not a technological solution, it's propaganda.
You can logically (philosophy) and mathematically (science) come up with the formulae for society, but neglecting human nature and needs leads down paths of dogma and ideology that are exploited by those who understand, and act outside of, those known logical and mathematical solutions, i.e. "politics"
I feel we are headed towards a need for an unfeeling, logical- mathematical calculator (AI) to propose THE solutions, and human executive to implement and execute the plans, taking human nature into account.
Right now, it feels like the exact opposite: human nature proposing the plans in a biased nature, then attempting to use technological means to achieve their desired, ideologically derived ends.
💃🏼💩🪣🏕💃🏼 I have not had a full body shower or bath since EARLY '18!
Why am I a Leftist?
Great video - but also, Water is better for you than Champagne (just saying)
Most correlate champagne with celebration …. It implies ‘have nots’ don’t have celebrations in their life because there’s nothing to celebrate and the ‘haves’ are always living it up…
Rationally derivable - you mean like democracy?
Scientific driven decisions are not the equivalent of social models falsely based on science. Decisions made with specific technical purposes such as public health or safety of the power grid have nothing to do with utopia. I don't see any clear distinction in this discussion
Thanks!
Thank you for your contribution!
Seriously?
Interesting subject, but I had to stop watching after the millionth "OK" at about 2 minutes. To the guest: I'm listening, you don't need to keep my attention every 2 seconds. I wish these speech "tricks" would go away, it just makes me tune out on everything you're trying to get across.
There is no single "elite" in the world. This discussion is mostly just about Western societies, not about what is going on in the world as a whole.
Na, you have a elite in the middle east, where everybody must live in sacrefice, except the rich.
You have China, where everybody sacrefice for the state, except the members of the party.
What they are talking about, is how it is human nature, to argue that other must sacrefice for "the greater good", by people who are not willing to sacrefice anything them self.
The elite/serf divide is even bigger outside the West. Take your pick.
You just keep living with your head in the sand.
The guest mentioned Agenda 2030. This came out of the UN, which is composed of unelected ultra-wealthy elites from across the world. They came up with a plan that reduces quality of life and promotes less people on earth. Western governments and corporations are using Agenda 2030 as a framework for DEI and “sustainability” laws, regs and policies. It’s not one elite, but a cabal of the most elite telling the rest of us to live with less.
Seriously, here's a guest talking about false Utopias yet believing in Christianity! Jesus, and I say this seriously, like Muhammad, like Allah, like Yahweh is a imagined superhero with all the superhero magic abilities to do anything. To do anything, everything all the time or sometimes or whenever needed. No one who wrote about him, Jesus or Muhammad, knew them but was 100 years or so afterwards, and these magic people are the superheroes and they don't exist that way. Yet this guy's talking about a Utopia that doesn't exist. I don't believe you can rationally believe in Jesus and then not believe in some kind of imagined Utopia.
a9