On the Political Philosophy of Time Travelers

Yeats

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
164
I do not for a moment believe that time travel is a present-day reality. Nor do I believe that it will become so anytime soon.

Even so, let us say that some kind of scientific miracle has indeed taken place, and that we do have access to a means of traveling back or forward in time. What kind of a person, politically speaking, would be better able to do so?

The past first. Who would be better able to cope with existing in a previous era, the conservative or the leftist? Obviously the conservative, for the following reasons.

First, the conservative generally has a better grasp of historical fact than the leftist. For proof of this, one need only read Mr. Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States. Although Mr. Zinn's book may well describe past events as they occurred in an alternate reality, he actually asserts that such things happened in our own past. This kind of historical revisionism is prevalent among the left. If one does not learn the lessons of the past... well... I'm sure many of you are already acquainted with Santayana, so I won't bother.

Add to this the crazed animosity shown by the left towards historical artifacts or statues. One cannot very well be a student of history while at the same time acting as a destroyer of it.

Secondly, and I think more importantly, the conservative is generally more of a self-reliant individual than the leftist. Most people have historically been the same. Those who were not tended not to survive. The leftist, dropped into an era where there were no government programs to assist him, would be at a loss as to how to carry on.

And what of the future? As always, our future depends upon the choices we make in the present.

If the future is a conservative one, then obviously the conservative would be equipped to handle it much better than the leftist, who would no doubt be driven mad by the course that history had taken. No death penalty for hate speech? No voting rights for animals? How awful!

No, I don't think the leftist would be able to cope with a conservative future.

What about a leftist future then? Surely the leftist would have the advantage there, would he not?

I do not believe he would. Neither would the conservative. You see, one cannot cope with a future when there is no future.
 

Einstein

Temporal Engineer
Joined
Dec 24, 2004
Messages
3,802
I do not believe that man is capable of being responsible with the technology of time travel. Yet somehow I believe the technology exists. Clues are everywhere. Perhaps the Mandela effect is the result of time tampering technology. And the left and the right both have access to the technology and are at constant war with each other.

We should not have been given freedom of choice. All it does is no good for all. I'm all for a telepathy virus that infects us all with a permanent genetic alteration of telepathy. Then we all would have a built in defense from each other.
 

OakFieldAlienz444

Active Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
659
I think we all do have a built in defense mechanism to an extent.
We read peoples auras and tend to shy away from people whose aura conflicts with us.
This is why some people hate each other instantly and others love each other instantly.
Words are limited they don't fully convey how we feel. Telepathy would improve this.
 

dimension-1hacker

Active Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2019
Messages
841
I do not believe that man is capable of being responsible with the technology of time travel. Yet somehow I believe the technology exists. Clues are everywhere. Perhaps the Mandela effect is the result of time tampering technology. And the left and the right both have access to the technology and are at constant war with each other.

We should not have been given freedom of choice. All it does is no good for all. I'm all for a telepathy virus that infects us all with a permanent genetic alteration of telepathy. Then we all would have a built in defense from each other.
who are you to say the left is better then the right or the right is better then the left?
 

dimension-1hacker

Active Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2019
Messages
841
"Add to this the crazed animosity shown by the left towards historical artifacts or statues. One cannot very well be a student of history while at the same time acting as a destroyer of it." Many polls show many conservatives are racist subconsciously and many others consciously which is the reason why pro slavery monuments are supported. Those people may not like the monument because it can be considered art which I do but it can represent a sign white superiority is still around; why keep something around that has no current value, that is taking up space, that you probally are not going to sell; if you want to see the statues do it in a museum and learn about history, read about it. People with darker skin are reminded every day that white supremacist culture is widely prevalent through out the us; legally there is a limit to freedom of speech, for freedom to act, why not get rid of representations of white supremisist statues to try to potentially remove the effect and the racist culture? People are not usually very logical, but democracy can stabalized via getting rid of the negative stimuli, either a bit less freedom, or losing the freedom. It might cause that but is less likely.

Secondly, and I think more importantly, the conservative is generally more of a self-reliant individual than the leftist. Most people have historically been the same. Those who were not tended not to survive. The leftist, dropped into an era where there were no government programs to assist him, would be at a loss as to how to carry on.

And what of the future? As always, our future depends upon the choices we make in the present.

If the future is a conservative one, then obviously the conservative would be equipped to handle it much better than the leftist, who would no doubt be driven mad by the course that history had taken. No death penalty for hate speech? No voting rights for animals? How aw
 

Yeats

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
164
Many polls show many conservatives are racist subconsciously and many others consciously which is the reason why pro slavery monuments are supported. Those people may not like the monument because it can be considered art which I do but it can represent a sign white superiority is still around; why keep something around that has no current value, that is taking up space, that you probally are not going to sell; if you want to see the statues do it in a museum and learn about history, read about it. People with darker skin are reminded every day that white supremacist culture is widely prevalent through out the us; legally there is a limit to freedom of speech, for freedom to act, why not get rid of representations of white supremisist statues to try to potentially remove the effect and the racist culture? People are not usually very logical, but democracy can stabalized via getting rid of the negative stimuli, either a bit less freedom, or losing the freedom. It might cause that but is less likely.
You asked Einstein...
who are you to say the left is better then the right or the right is better then the left?
Nowhere in his post did Einstein make either claim. However, I did and I stand by it. You may rightly ask who I am that I should say what I said. I can only answer that I am an American citizen who is guaranteed the right to express my opinion by the first amendment to the constitution of the United States. Who are you to say that I cannot do so?

Christopher Columbus, George Washington, Juan Ponce de Leon, Matthias Baldwin (an inventor who was anti-slavery), Philip Schuyler (Revolutionary War general), Thomas Jefferson, John Greenleaf Whittier (poet and anti-slavery advocate), Francis Scott Key, Ulysses Grant, Frederick Douglass, the Virgin Mary, Ronald Reagan. The list goes on and on of the statues that have recently been defaced or destroyed. Even animals are not safe. A statue of an elk in Oregon is also a casualty.

To say that these were all confederate statues is to err in the extreme, but even if they were it does not matter. They depict historical figures (except perhaps for the elk) and should be remembered. To destroy them is a victory for ignorance, not progress.

As for what "many polls show", if I took polling seriously then I would refer to Hillary Clinton as Madam President.
 
Last edited:

dimension-1hacker

Active Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2019
Messages
841
You asked Einstein...

Nowhere in his post did Einstein make either claim. However, I did and I stand by it. You may rightly ask who I am that I should say what I said. I can only answer that I am an American citizen who is guaranteed the right to express my opinion by the first amendment to the constitution of the United States. Who are you to say that I cannot do so?

Christopher Columbus, George Washington, Juan Ponce de Leon, Matthias Baldwin (an inventor who was anti-slavery), Philip Schuyler (Revolutionary War general), Thomas Jefferson, John Greenleaf Whittier (poet and anti-slavery advocate), Francis Scott Key, Ulysses Grant, Frederick Douglass, the Virgin Mary, Ronald Reagan. The list goes on and on of the statues that have recently been defaced or destroyed. Even animals are not safe. A statue of an elk in Oregon is also a casualty.

To say that these were all confederate statues is to err in the extreme, but even if they were it does not matter. They depict historical figures (except perhaps for the elk) and should be remembered. To destroy them is a victory for ignorance, not progress.

As for what "many polls show", if I took polling seriously then I would refer to Hillary Clinton as Madam President.
"Christopher Columbus, George Washington, Juan Ponce de Leon, Matthias Baldwin (an inventor who was anti-slavery), Philip Schuyler (Revolutionary War general), Thomas Jefferson, John Greenleaf Whittier (poet and anti-slavery advocate), Francis Scott Key, Ulysses Grant, Frederick Douglass, the Virgin Mary, Ronald Reagan. The list goes on and on of the statues that have recently been defaced or destroyed. Even animals are not safe. A statue of an elk in Oregon is also a casualty."

prove it

polling is seemingly the only way now to gain a high probability gauge of mass public opinion, if you do not think polls are accurate what is? How many people have you met out of perhaps around 8 billion, the world is a certain way but trillions and more different thinks can cause the same thing.

"To say that these were all confederate statues is to err in the extreme," when did I, it was conservative statues correct? Would democrats try to destroy a statue of grant? Do you think some Democratic's want to destroy statues?

'but even if they were it does not matter. They depict historical figures (except perhaps for the elk) and should be remembered. To destroy them is a victory for ignorance, not progress."

Ignorance in what way? History, do carvings of people that are perceived to be important represent to you being aware of perceived mistakes made in the past? One chain of events may cause that, or the opposite perhaps, perhaps a symptom, not the cause, to not know that is perhaps a sign of ignorance, perhaps it is to show ignorance or perhaps indifference to people that will make the same perceived mistakes anyways; perhaps it is a person having what that person considers fun. Think of every possibility.
 

Yeats

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
164
Just a few points concerning your post.

"Prove it" is not a refutation. It is an evasion. You have access to this information if you desire to take advantage of it. I am not required to prove these things to you. You are required to prove them to yourself, if proof is indeed what you seek.

"To say" is not the same as "you said". What you said, or rather what you implied, was that the statues had something to do with white supremacy. (At least you seem to have implied that. It is rather difficult to understand a great deal of what you post.) Perhaps you can explain the white supremacy of Frederick Douglass or the Virgin Mary. Or at least tell us why the elk was a racist.

Would Democrats try to destroy a statue of Grant? Apparently so, since leftists did indeed try to do so. Do I think some Democrats want to destroy statues? Again the answer is yes, unless one believes that they were somehow forced to act against their will. Are you implying that such was the case?

Your last paragraph is simply unintelligible and so I cannot comment on it except for the last sentence. "Think of every possibility" you say. This would take much more time and effort than the situation warrants. Leftists defaced and destroyed statues. They claim credit for doing do. They are proud to have done so. I do not have to consider the possibility that these crimes were committed by the CIA, or Russian bots, or time travelers or little green men when the criminals themselves admit to their crime.
 

dimension-1hacker

Active Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2019
Messages
841
Ignorance in what way? History, do carvings of people that are perceived to be important represent to you being aware of perceived mistakes made in the past? One chain of events may cause that, or the opposite perhaps, perhaps a symptom, not the cause, to not know that is perhaps a sign of ignorance, perhaps it is to show ignorance or perhaps indifference to people that will make the same perceived mistakes anyways; perhaps it is a person having what that person considers fun. Think of every possibility.

this is exactly what I mean.

how do you know they are leftists, why would leftists destroy exactly what they oppose by definition conceptually, hence if they did they are not leftists or just want to "deface" something or some other reason, leftists deface statues of confederate generals and so on; and are you sure the information you read is valid. If mine is, the oil companies control allot of the media that controls the right wing and most like probally alex jones and probally trump as he was a democrat and was friends with hillary are people out for profit; same in some ways for the democrats. This is just what people perhaps do, a few statues being defaced by a few teens and people over 18 does not inherently mean anything. If the information that I read online are correct the us is already a plutocracy and your lack of considering that they might claim to be but are they? Most people that are controlled by identity politics do not have the ideals of the concept, much less prove it, could be fake news, cnn could be fake news, fox news could be fake news, that rimes. The people could just be out for fun, what do statues influence or indicate when so much is already eroded perhaps, perhaps culture has changed perhaps not.
 

TimeFlipper

Senior Member
Premium
Joined
Feb 8, 2015
Messages
10,151
You asked Einstein...

Nowhere in his post did Einstein make either claim. However, I did and I stand by it. You may rightly ask who I am that I should say what I said. I can only answer that I am an American citizen who is guaranteed the right to express my opinion by the first amendment to the constitution of the United States. Who are you to say that I cannot do so?

Christopher Columbus, George Washington, Juan Ponce de Leon, Matthias Baldwin (an inventor who was anti-slavery), Philip Schuyler (Revolutionary War general), Thomas Jefferson, John Greenleaf Whittier (poet and anti-slavery advocate), Francis Scott Key, Ulysses Grant, Frederick Douglass, the Virgin Mary, Ronald Reagan. The list goes on and on of the statues that have recently been defaced or destroyed. Even animals are not safe. A statue of an elk in Oregon is also a casualty.

To say that these were all confederate statues is to err in the extreme, but even if they were it does not matter. They depict historical figures (except perhaps for the elk) and should be remembered. To destroy them is a victory for ignorance, not progress.

As for what "many polls show", if I took polling seriously then I would refer to Hillary Clinton as Madam President.
May I inform you our member the Juvenile Oppositionist, whose only desire is to constantly argue with Paranormalis members, simply cannot comprehend the fact that every member has the right to their OWN opinions...(Patriarchal Dominance To Blame-Maybe?)
But then again you have to bare in mind the Juvenile Oppositionist is, by his own written word, a "Genius"!! :ROFLMAO: (Stated in the thread, Sports and Betting with HDR Unit)
 

Top