My G+ UKRAINE [Ongoing], & Men V Women, & Socrates 'Thinking' Comments

140310 My G+ UKRAINE & Men V Women & Socrates 'Thinking' Comments

UKRAINE Ongoings.....

+David Fillingham Pls stop referring to Hitler without acknowledging all we, esp., of the west, know about the plans Hitler, is incomplete?

The plans Hitler followed, were laid in the west [by the British elite], and he was out to kill not Judaism but christianity.

He, like many, realize christianity is the exact antithesis to the individual's sovereignty of their own soul.

Poland was/is under the influence of catholicism, and was in fact something both the nazis and the socialists STILL know as a devil of a culture.

You, of the west, immersed and steeped in christian culture, may find it impossible to accept, if only for the still alive activities of the extreme right christians, to go after anyone in the US who talks christianity down.

But aside from that, you gotto also admit that the whiteguy western, judeo-christian peoples, have been off the Path for millennia, so all the wars of recorded history are results of all sides being 'lost'.

As the OT tells us about our supposed ancestors, we're 'fallen' since the supposed 'fall from Eden'.

'Irrational', 'egoistic', unwise, rahrahrah...

But..., Alexey did take.his interpretation of both sides, a bit too laughably far?!

The 'Collective Mind' though, is far too underestimated by the egoistic vest.

The 'vest' fails there, to the world's egomaniacal demise.

+David Fillingham If Chechnya and Dagestan, et al, are Muslim-dominated, and if Turkey is their only option for support, then they are not as informed as they need to be to make a 'safe' decision, if it came to separation from the Russian protective umbrella.

Turkey is not nearly as stable internally, and in terms of falling pro-Islamic population, and, in it's parliament, to be any useful backer of those south-east Russian 'claimed' states.

And, as Turkey is vying for a place in the terribly unstable, politically faltering and flawed, - ie., terminally corrupt - EU, Chechnya and the others would be crazy siding with or looking for protection from Turkey.

In the end, Russia is the far safer, more egalitarian 'culture' than the increasingly anti-Muslim EU.

If Turkey decided, stupidly to 'invade those areas', against Russia, it would be relying on the EU, aka NATOs firepower as backup, if only in the knowledge they're together, which would incite the non-EU mobs, Russia and others, to be a bit pissed-off, and also annoy the Chechnyans and other Muslim micro-states.

A broader view, for the Chechnyans and the rest of the Muslims, is that Russia is the better bet.

Besides, as usual, a majority are not terrorism-inclined, so it's likely, a majority of Chechnyans would not want to cause another war against Russia?

And, in the end, Russia is better than the EU, for Muslims and for that general Caucasian region.

The Caucasus has surely to realize that every aspect of EU expansion[-ism], is totally centred around the EU super-elite's insatiable, and thus, quite insane grab for evermore power. Territorial power.

There is not one jot of them being in the slightest interested in the well-being of the Caucasian Peoples.

With Turkey craving [again, it's all 'an elite thing'] for EU membership, the Caucasus is mad to go that path.

And, who knows whether the expansionist USA has not got Turkey on it's list for destabilization and invasion, as they've done in Tunisia, Libya, Egypt, the Gulf States, Syria and now Ukraine?

Do you, David work in the US PentaCon?

Do Feminists Blame The Wrong People Thread on G+

Karan Dhingra
Versus (Ethics & morality) - Yesterday 12:41 PM

Do feminists blame the wrong people?

My opinion is that some aspects of feminism are a little stupid and require a bit more research.

In America, women earn 77c for every dollar a man earns. This is not taking into account the difference in occupations, the difference in the level of experience in the job. Not taking into account that women tend to study more arts degrees than more economically valuable degrees like engineering or commerce or accounting. Or anything that is actually required to have higher pay.

Look into the real research and you find that women who have similar levels of experience, similar levels of educational attainment as men and you find women earn 98c for every dollar ON AVERAGE. Some cases you find higher. Statistically speaking, that difference is insignificant.

And another thing, let’s assume that a woman is hired due to sexist reasons by the employer. The last thing you want is for a woman to earn the same amount as men, because if the employer IS actually sexist and has to pay the same amount for women AND men, then the employer is most likely going to hire the male. If you want the woman to get that job instead then shouldn't it be more costly for the employer to hire men? He should be charged for discriminating in his selection process.

So I highly disagree when the argument for things like the wage gap is because of discriminatory reasons.

Here's a link which kind of explains my view.

ME...! [THE BLOKE in this thread! Hohoho!]

From another commenters comment: "...although I suggested men are more chauvinistic when they are with other men in work related or powerful situations."

I'm a set misogynist, but only for ongoing experiences of maltreatment by a matriarchal cult, lifelong, so I admit my view is biased.

But John, leaving the rest of the comments out, your last one isn't correct. 'Chauvinism' may be male, but the same biases are rampant amongst women when they're in a group, in workplaces or social. You must know that?

Women, with thousands of years of built up [understandable] antipathy to dominating males, no less egoistic than us, and when embittered ["Hell hath no fury, like a woman scorned!" Shakespeare] which seems always to be held-in, just beneath the surface, and grouping-up, manifest a bond like nothing 90% of men do, and it becomes utterly ruthless, especially when they also acquire some amount of power, especially financial.

It's these reasons I'm adamant in politics, against any rise of say, Hillary Clinton, to such an important chair, as President of the USA. I have a lot of Respect for her, as a person. But I've already witnessed the anger in women when the Dem's in the US were choosing between her and Obama.

As said, with women, with the rise and rise of the 'feminist movement' deem it their right to push and put men down, when men can simply be assuming a 'friendly' demeanor.

[The 'feminist movement' isn't something I'm so fully against, but that unloosed power soon becomes out of control with them, until, as we witness all the time, they're waiting and baiting for men to be men, and take that risk of 'saying a wrongy', thus being accused of....! etc. Agreed, lots of males are sexist, and of the school which assumes too much in terms of sexual advances and the kind. But women are so often bitter, and become merciless when the opportunity arises for them to be able to strike, especially at 'innocent' pray.

But blah, now, for my own experiences, I'll never trust them again.

Physically and sexually [Derrr?], I think they're gorgeous!

But there's heaps inside them which is venomous and very very ruthless.

A dick chimed in merely so it could get above the shit it dwells beneath [30 seconds of fame], so I included it's stupid comment, to make clear what I replied for...

sim ost Yesterday 6:13 PM

+Max Cook That is sexism. What I find a bit strange is that you are sexist because women are "venomous and very very ruthless." For a start, "thousands of years of built up (understandable) antipathy to dominating males" how can people hold a grudge for that long?! And a lot of things you have described are true in men as well.


+si ost Ooowh? Bitchy!
Trying to label me with the 'sexism' bit, ignores what I said about being victim to a matriarchal cult.
You're clearly a softcock spoiled catholic [?], [with a bitch - are you gay?] deploying the typical denigration against someone who recognizes 'Politically Correct' [PC] terminologies as dangerous to REALPolitiks.

Your "What I find a bit strange is that you are sexist because women are "venomous and very very ruthless" is not what I wrote.

You're a dick, for deliberately reading what YOU WANTED TO READ [stomp stomp, MUMMY? HE WUZ ..... rah rah rah]

As is evident, or does your mind not function correctly, I wrote:
"I'm a set misogynist, but only for ongoing experiences of maltreatment by a matriarchal cult, lifelong, so I admit my view is biased.'

So, please, piss off and find another honest person to shit on.

There ya go, willy! A reply from a monarch! D'you feel taller?

[Ooowh? I didn't know he was a king!]

It came back, actually apologizing [yeah] but I couldn't be bothered. Typically, again, he didn't refer to what I did say, but merely sought to grab some more of my airspace. So - conclusion about si ost - 'a piss weak creep”.

More ME - THE Bloke!

I think the 'equality' debate is more egoism [who started it, another Q?], and solves nothing.

There's differences in each of us, and within each gender. Trying to 'win' such a debate shows the shallow and troubled psychology of those who enter the debate with the desire to 'prove' they or the others, are 'equal' or superior.

This is puerile, typically white, western, 'liberated' bullshit.

There's no question that other cultures had the male-domination factor, and that it often became excessive.

But there are also, or were also, cultures where there was a well-founded, deeply ingrained and entirely mature and wise acceptance that there ARE vital differences between the genders, and that yes, in 'primitive' cultures, so, more Pure Cultures, it was a given that the two had places and roles perfectly suited to each.

That we bicker about the 'sameness' or not, now, shows more that our culture is severally off the Path, and rooted.

Therefore, while we avoid THAT far more pertinent and fundamental issue - getting to the core of the cultural maladies - this type of chatter only ads to the air-and-cyber pollution, and, as so often results, further disharmony less resolution and more warlike attitudes.

Examples 'why I became a misogynist'. Arrogant, unreasonable, 'faith' [read witchcraft] full women, with perverse secreted 'feminist' religious agendas, and my intelligent refusal to acquiesce.

AND another topic/thread/conversation on G+

Maya Lara
Thinkers (Discussion) - Yesterday 10:15 PM

agree or disagree ...


More than ever since everyone reckons they're really clever witches!
Gee! Thanks Harry!

And another ME...

What too many don't recognize, perhaps, nay-usually because they're too self-absorbed in their own morass of thoughts, that 'Listening' really is an Art.

And, that it actually takes some lessons, to recognize the things [in the ever-active mind] which are always jumping in - to our ears - so stopping what is said by others from penetrating, and to actually still the mind, so the speaker is being heard.

Our culture, is so astray, kids are rarely given the correct directions about this, and it's crucial like most learning, to get it right from the very beginning.

'Short attention spans' root - the child's bad start.

Egomania - what "I'M" thinking is more valuable to MEMEME!


AND another.... from MEEEE!

I wrote at the top,

"More than ever since everyone reckons they're really clever witches!
Gee! Thanks Harry!"

'Magic', 'witchcraft', resorting to the occult, has more negatives to it than most today, of the west, realize.

There is no doubt that it does get in the way of, in this thread, 'listening' to another, but it seriously impedes learning too.

Once the occult is entered, a scary world we have always too be very awake and alert in, subtle energies are always on our psychic perimeters, ready to get into our mind, and really fuck things around.

And one 'way' for our mind to be vulnerable, is to be 'open' as-in receptive, [derr?] which is how we also gotto be to learn, take stuff in, even just to simply hear others, etc.

And, we're vulnerable too, if we are inconfident.

So this latest 'trend' or 'mode' [thanks Harry! But, he's not it. THANKS JUDEO-CHRISTIANITY, for hiding it all from us!!!] of how we march through the world, excessing in overconfidence, seems necessary to ward-off evil, etc., but it also blocks out what is being said by others.

In places of learning, or when dad says "no" even, we have to be secure in our minds to be able to 'open up', so the words and lessons can get in deep enough for the mind to lock it in, and we can both remember it, and learn.

But..., in a world totally off-the-scales of sanity, with bad juju exploding everywhere, being 'open' can be deadly, I assume?


[hohoho..., my little joke there... True, nevertheless!]

And the 'Socrates Thinking' Post

Thinkers (Discussion) - Mar 8, 2014

Socrates: I Cannot Teach Anybody Anything. I Can Only Make Them Think.

Jenny DepewMar 8, 2014

But can you really make them think either?

Max CookMar 8, 2014+1

Argh? What, indeed, IS 'thinking'???

Jenny DepewMar 8, 2014

Pondering thought burns calories so something is physically happening. Electrical signals between neurons are triggered by neurotransmitters released from one neuron and received by the other. A series of neurons interact like Dominoes. Where or what is the thinking though? Good question. I guess you did make me think. Question? There might be a clue there.

Max CookMar 8, 2014

Not claiming an original of course, but it might be the deepest question going...?

I've got 'guesses' about it, which send the ego mad with denials, but might get to thinking's essence?

At least.., I think I'm thinking, aka 'guessing' about it?

Far too hard to discuss on this poorly medium.

[Writing/typing, that-is.]

A veeeery deeeeeeeeep philosophical question, come to it!

And watch the egos jumping in?!!!

Jenny DepewMar 8, 2014

Deep end treading water, yeah.

'Question?' was partially in reference to the Socrates quote that I had challenged - How can he make them/anyone think? -Answer prompted by the conversation, perhaps by questioning.

I posted a question and you countered with a question - both represent some thinking or nerve signals had to have happened. Electric nerve signals are somewhat easier to consider than thought/spirit/mind but not much.

Max CookMar 8, 2014

Cool. Sorry 'bout answering a Q w a Q.

Only taking your Q to the next, deeper level, methought.

Your.., "Electric nerve signals are somewhat easier to consider than thought/spirit/mind but not much."

'Easier..,' only if the considerer wants to go only so deeeeep, and to stay in the 'tangible' 'electric nerve signals' type, arena/s.

Bloody Scientists! hoho.. =)

But, basically useless if we are asking questions as to the core, the root, of thinking.

And, whether it is actually necessary? Perhaps there are only answers? And we are merely ignorant of them - hence, of course, 'questions'.

But that's another distraction...!

The meaning of the root word for 'education' comes to mind.

'Educe' as I recall, means 'to draw forth, to bring out, from within'.

I think the suggestion is that all we can be educated to know, is already sitting waiting, within us, as if some fount of knowledge is at the very essence of our being, well within and beneath the more superficial, tangible' realms of the mind, where 'thought/thinking' happens.

Therefore, to sound academic [not!] were we, it may be said, in constant touch with our inner most 'core', 1st principle, that mysterious essence we get down to, once stripping all the shallower 'stuff' away, which may be our very own True Self, we would be in constant knowledge, of the answers to every possible question?


Thence, no need, ever, for question?

So, having studied Socrates and others in a Fine School [of Philosophy], and loving it, is that what he, and you allude to, in his line?

'Thinking' beyond what someone can implant in our mind, ie., 'Teach', and to educe the truth, or the scientific evidence, or the facts, the answer, which may always be inside of us, but [love it!] deeeeeeep inside of us, perhaps even until we know that we, as-in 'me', is not thinking at all.

Or, we ARE 'thinking' but that 'thinking' is but the shallower reactions ['electrical nerve signals'] to unknowns [unknown to the poorly indoctrinated mentality, not taught about what does lie deeeeeper within], by our less deeeeep mind, which has never been introduced to it's very own deeeeeper depths?

I think I can go with that!

Trying it on, with yer av'rage christians, is NOT recommended, however!

Jenny DepewYesterday 2:06 AM

Answering a Q with a Q can be helpful to redirect or clarify the first question.

*This comment got really long but it was fun to think about.

The idea of particles linked across time and space, quantum entanglement, fascinates me

And the way 6 quarks interact with each other to add up to a total positive or negative balance might be connected to the power of positive (or negative) thinking. The placebo and nocebo effects and positive effects of prayer on healing have been studied somewhat in academic research.

Quarks can be part of cosmic rays, as mesons, or part of the structure of a proton or neutron, as baryons.

/Just fun to think about/ Maybe old thoughts are still traveling around the cosmos in the form of loose mesons and they occasionally may get quantum entangled with a currently living person and shared as information somehow as prophecy/clairvoyance or channeling/ghost encounter- we don't know what we don't know. I personally believe more in some sort of collective unconscious, Jungian theory, than any one specific religion. Agnostic / open minded. Who knows, our atomic structure may be a source of some sort of ancestral instinctual information, or quarks plus our DNA. http://psychology.about.com/od/personalitydevelopment/tp/archetypes.htm

"Notice that the quarks all combine to make charges of -1, 0, or +1." from an overview article, "Elementary Particles":

Also an interesting pdf about quarks:

/Tangent/ Thinking regularly may help protect against symptoms of dementia later in life. History of more education was found protective even when there was physical damage associated with Alzheimer's disease.
Thinking about thinking now may help the brain think better twenty years in the future.

Max CookYesterday 9:12 AM

A? In Astrayliar, we call that 'taking the piss!

Sorry for being conceived.


[I had a 2nd look at Jenny's comments, and tried to come back. I'm not convinced I made sense though?]

Re-reading your comment, Mrs Depew, but not the links [I'm a v slow reader, and stuff with modality/field-specific language, like this science, is a waste for me - which really shits me - I'd love to have had better learning how to read faster as a kid], I accept you weren't quite so much 'taking the piss', [but expect you were],

and so..., your...,

"...Maybe old thoughts are still traveling around the cosmos in the form of loose mesons and they occasionally may get quantum entangled with a currently living person and shared as information somehow..."

is a scientific way of saying it. Which can be regarded by amateur 'cosmologists', aka, 'dreamers' [ha!] like meself, as how I have a pocket open to see the 'thought' phenomena does 'go 'round'?

But other 'dreamers' occultists, would coin it differently, aye?


"And the way 6 quarks interact with each other to add up to a total positive or negative balance might be connected to the power of positive (or ..........

.........or part of the structure of a proton or neutron, as baryons."

'might' figures a lot there, and in this field generally, no?

But, while I'd say it's healthy interpreting, something tells me that 'thought', or, at least some primal 'spark' still comes before all the particles you go to?

Being Atheist, it could be complicated?

Combinations of all the primal gook, obviously has evolved into the variations of then-to-now. So of or in all facets of what exists, thoughts, thinking, mechanisms for these, seem entirely natural.

But getting to the original, or root intelligence, is another Q?

I 'heard' it once, that there is a 'place' beneath [above] all things, where all knowledge and consciousness is 'seated'.

And that it also, is something [some NOT thing] that is a product of the processes of evolution, like a purification process where all knowledge accumulates.

A very NOT-THINKING realm, and, clearly, is what, or where, the theists label 'god', Allah, Brahma, et al.

But 'thinking' gets us only so far toward it, whence we must abandon thought altogether, to 'pass through' the metaphorical 'gates', into that inexpressible zone.

And, your last paragraph, on 'thinking improving us' etc, is Q'd?

Too much thinking, on falsities, as per whiteguy judeo-christian ideologies, AND, economics, I say, induces madness, especially in later years, like dementia, etc.

The west has failed us completely in recognizing and teaching us how 'delicate' and important tour mind, and it's ways and contents are.

We gotto keep it clean of bullshit, otherwise, I'm sure it is cumulative, and will mess us around later on.

There ya go! I rote to a sheila, and 'twas a deeeep one!


Still think you were takin' the piss though!

Brayakooloong Gunai Indigenous Outlaw

All Praise the Immortals!
All Praise the Warriors who have fallen
Fighting for a Just World!

from the Travelling 4x4 Tent of

General Blue Meanee
Commander Notorious
General War Pig


Bleck - Green - Red
Wisdom - Intelligence - Honor