These are the people who are now utterly confused that what they were told turns out to not be true.
These people being disbarred from flying, or taken into custody, thinking they were just returning home, are
When (if) the full story of Jan6 ever comes out I predict it will have multiple levels of intention and complicity.
Broadly
1/The "base" level of the mob reacting out of what they believe & has been taught & insinuated into them for years.
I think this chaos is the cover for
More details emerge. The goal of the January 6 terrorist attack was, in the screams of its perpetrators, to kill American elected officials.
— Eric Garland (@ericgarland) January 11, 2021
Prosecute every last co-conspirator. https://t.co/G2my10KdOM
These are the people who are now utterly confused that what they were told turns out to not be true.
These people being disbarred from flying, or taken into custody, thinking they were just returning home, are
They are the pawns. They are the Orcs in the Trumpian system...expendable. Useful. Necessary. But Expendable as the strategy & tactics require.
Who knows if these
And they will be used again and again as necessary for the other levels.
Using the mob action to cover their work.
This level is also there to be seen, but will need a great deal of clear, hard, investigation to actually understand fully.
It has been reported that they were on
This "mission" is congruent with the public statements made to the crowd by Gulliani and D.Trump.
This level are those who are committed to the cause at a much deeper level than just the mob, stirred up and
3/ The level above this is the strategic level. The Generals who execute the strategy. The captains who lead the troops. Broadly this could be the GOP Senate level. Some like Cruz, Hawley
4/ At the top level is the strategic "plan" development happen(ed). The setting of the objectives. Basically Trump and his inner circle.
The objective seems clear... At least the bits we can see.
Retain Trump in power
The abuse of the courts. The endless counter-factual accusations of fraud (very localized to only those districts
It didn’t work. The backroom calls to Sec's State by Graham, later Trump, are part of testing this battle front. Attacking the voting system and individuals another.
What is likely more pernicious is what we do not know yet.
Such a plan would require these levels of function to implement.
Who turns out to be a functionary at each of these levels is going to be the work of any investigations
a) whether there will be an investigation
b) if it will be tasked to follow all of the trails and evidence
c) no matter who is found to be implicated and complicit.
My suspicion is there are dark corners in this event that powerful people,
I think the question is far deeper than simple Republican vs Democrat. Right v Left.
At the highest levels I suspect are some of the most powerful concentrations of power. I wonder if this event will end up shining any
More from Michael Beaton
The assertion & question of unity, unifying the country, wondering what the hell the problem is, and why is all this happening is taking center stage. Dramatically.
As is the corollary question being tossed about, "How to heal the Nation?".
There is a #systems principle
that is a powerful insight into these, & related, questions.
"You cannot solve a problem at the same level it was created."
If the problem we were solving for were some detail, 'where to place a road; what $ to allocate to this or that project' sort of thing, then the way to
think about the problem, the impasse, is to appeal first to the functions of prior planning, history - meaning what did we do the last time, maybe pragmatics...Eventually, if the organization (whether business, community, or governance) may make a decision and that becomes the
decision. Often, typically, the decision is some sort of amalgam of the various ideas and 'camps' in the room. Rarely, but sometimes, the decision is made out of pure hierarchy..."What the boss says goes, I don't care what you think..." sort of thing. Largely that is old school
and is not the normal way of conflict resolution. Especially in the context of solving a problem.
But a decision is made, and typically people, and the various factions, come together and get to work in the context of the decision. Sometimes called 'teamwork'.
As is the corollary question being tossed about, "How to heal the Nation?".
There is a #systems principle
An excellent piece that raises a key question going forward:
— Bob Geiger (@GeigerNews) January 16, 2021
Should we ever "unify" with the worst among us?
"Unifying with those seeking white supremacy, voter suppression, and government overthrow seems like the very definition of madness."https://t.co/UgmPQfy05F
that is a powerful insight into these, & related, questions.
"You cannot solve a problem at the same level it was created."
If the problem we were solving for were some detail, 'where to place a road; what $ to allocate to this or that project' sort of thing, then the way to
think about the problem, the impasse, is to appeal first to the functions of prior planning, history - meaning what did we do the last time, maybe pragmatics...Eventually, if the organization (whether business, community, or governance) may make a decision and that becomes the
decision. Often, typically, the decision is some sort of amalgam of the various ideas and 'camps' in the room. Rarely, but sometimes, the decision is made out of pure hierarchy..."What the boss says goes, I don't care what you think..." sort of thing. Largely that is old school
and is not the normal way of conflict resolution. Especially in the context of solving a problem.
But a decision is made, and typically people, and the various factions, come together and get to work in the context of the decision. Sometimes called 'teamwork'.
It is not just wrong
& it is not just the epitome of historical ignorance,
& a comprehensive misunderstanding of the relationship of religious and civil society,
This is the declaration of a much deeper intention of instantiating an "American Fundamentalism".
Think "Gilead".
This is the low information ranting of fundamentalists who lay out the emotional, fact & history free, case for what is essentially an American Taliban.
There is no "compromise" or a sense of comity between differences. When you have "the truth" it is a violation to "compromise".
Others, like "The Grand Inquisitor" use the froth and confusion--and subsequent absolutist certainty of their "righteousness" generated by such as this. (and thus justification for killing/harming anyone who disagrees..In the name of God, of course)
It is useful demagoguery.
This battle has been raging for years. Perhaps forever.
One distinctive characteristic of America, has been keeping this level of fundamentalism out of secular power. Individuals, yes, but not the entire system.
One of the consequences of Trumpism is to equate patriotism w religion in a way that births what becomes a passionately ignorant fundamentalism, unmoored from fact or truth,wedded only to its own self as the measure & guide of truth.
It creates a condition of deep tribal devotion
& it is not just the epitome of historical ignorance,
& a comprehensive misunderstanding of the relationship of religious and civil society,
This is the declaration of a much deeper intention of instantiating an "American Fundamentalism".
Think "Gilead".
Georgia Republican candidate Kandiss Taylor goes full theocracy explaining her \u201cJesus, guns, and babies\u201d slogan:
— PatriotTakes \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8 (@patriottakes) April 9, 2022
\u201cDon't talk to me about separation of church and state.\u201d
\u201cWe are the church and we run the state.\u201d
\u201c[Jews, Muslims, and Buddhists] don't get to silence us.\u201d pic.twitter.com/9nkkn3JRbM
This is the low information ranting of fundamentalists who lay out the emotional, fact & history free, case for what is essentially an American Taliban.
There is no "compromise" or a sense of comity between differences. When you have "the truth" it is a violation to "compromise".
Others, like "The Grand Inquisitor" use the froth and confusion--and subsequent absolutist certainty of their "righteousness" generated by such as this. (and thus justification for killing/harming anyone who disagrees..In the name of God, of course)
It is useful demagoguery.
This battle has been raging for years. Perhaps forever.
One distinctive characteristic of America, has been keeping this level of fundamentalism out of secular power. Individuals, yes, but not the entire system.
One of the consequences of Trumpism is to equate patriotism w religion in a way that births what becomes a passionately ignorant fundamentalism, unmoored from fact or truth,wedded only to its own self as the measure & guide of truth.
It creates a condition of deep tribal devotion
More from Society
Sandbank Danger, A Thread
Controversy Has Been Caused By The Digging Of A Narrow Channel By A Resort On A Sandbank Near K. Hinmafushi.
Hinmafushi Council President Shan Ibrahim Stated To Sun That The Resort, Which Dug The Trench Creating A River On The Sandbank, Did Not Have Ownership Over The Sandbank.
Officials From The Island Of Hinmafushi Had Traveled To The Sandbank To Stop The Process Of Digging The Trench When They Became Aware Of It, Said Shan.
Officials Were Now Redepositing The Sand Removed From The Sandbank.
Controversy Has Been Caused By The Digging Of A Narrow Channel By A Resort On A Sandbank Near K. Hinmafushi.
Hinmafushi Council President Shan Ibrahim Stated To Sun That The Resort, Which Dug The Trench Creating A River On The Sandbank, Did Not Have Ownership Over The Sandbank.
Officials From The Island Of Hinmafushi Had Traveled To The Sandbank To Stop The Process Of Digging The Trench When They Became Aware Of It, Said Shan.
Officials Were Now Redepositing The Sand Removed From The Sandbank.
— Ahmed Aznil (@AhmedAznil) January 21, 2021
Like most movements, I have learned that the definition of feminism has expanded to include simply treating women like human beings.
(A thread for whoever feels like reading)
I have observed feminists on Twitter advocating for rape victims to be heard, rapists to be held accountable, for people to address the misogyny that is deeply rooted in our culture, and for women to be treated with respect.
To me, very easy things to get behind.
And the amount of pushback they receive for those very basic requests is appalling. I see men trip over themselves to defend rape and rapists and misogyny every chance they get. Some accounts are completely dedicated to harassing women on this site. It’s unhealthy.
Furthermore, I have observed how dedicated these misogynists are by how they treat other men that do not immediately side with them. There is an entire lexicon they have created for men who do not openly treat women with disrespect.
Ex: simp, cuck, white knight, beta
All examples of terms they use to demean a man who respects women.
To paraphrase what a wise man on this app said:
Some men hate women so much, they hate men who don’t hate women
(A thread for whoever feels like reading)
Neighborhood gents, what\u2019s something you\u2019ve learned about feminism (or gained a better understanding of) that you think other men should know?
— feminist next door (@emrazz) February 19, 2021
Note - the quoted is a friendly/good faith replier. https://t.co/048kuxxX6q
I have observed feminists on Twitter advocating for rape victims to be heard, rapists to be held accountable, for people to address the misogyny that is deeply rooted in our culture, and for women to be treated with respect.
To me, very easy things to get behind.
And the amount of pushback they receive for those very basic requests is appalling. I see men trip over themselves to defend rape and rapists and misogyny every chance they get. Some accounts are completely dedicated to harassing women on this site. It’s unhealthy.
Furthermore, I have observed how dedicated these misogynists are by how they treat other men that do not immediately side with them. There is an entire lexicon they have created for men who do not openly treat women with disrespect.
Ex: simp, cuck, white knight, beta
All examples of terms they use to demean a man who respects women.
To paraphrase what a wise man on this app said:
Some men hate women so much, they hate men who don’t hate women
You May Also Like
1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.
Please add your own.
2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you
3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.
“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”
“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”
4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:
“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”
“What’s end-game here?”
“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”
5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:
“What would the best version of yourself do”?
Please add your own.
2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you
1/\u201cWhat would need to be true for you to\u2026.X\u201d
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) December 4, 2018
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody: https://t.co/Yo6jHbSit9
3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.
“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”
“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”
4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:
“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”
“What’s end-game here?”
“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”
5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:
“What would the best version of yourself do”?
