Why Mearsheimer gets it so wrong, from the people whose institute is based on the one person that got human motives and behaviors so wrong, her life was a living contradiction contrasting her own believes. 🙂
Just my kind of humor… 🙂
So apparently psychopaths (thats mostly the people that gravitate towards Rands teachings (I mean, she literally founded a cult, recruited her husband in it, … but thats nothing compared to the stuff she rationalized away, towards the end of her life.. 😉 ) in my experience) now are also anti Mearsheimer. Good to know.
Also arguments, well.. yeah, Arguments. First argument that is made up is that “distilled, realists think like mafia bosses!” (Oh, no! Emotionally charge their position, by false comparison to ridicule it based on the comparison, not on the actual position. Arthur Schopenhauer would have been proud!) they want constant fighting. Ehm.. ok, they also want neutral bufferstates. Now what…?
They just dont buy the entire “everyone can decide for themselves who they want to partner with, and get security guarantees by” because its obviously BS. But dont get caught on that part of the argument. Compare them to mafia Dons first, then, on step two, … 🙂
When you are inventing your arguments on the spot, chances are that one person next to you doing all the nodding affirmation stuff might not be enough…
Also the problem still persisting is “who is inventing the episteme” (so the pseudoscientific “mainstream interpretation”, of stuff they have no idea on if they are correct on, which they then spread with pomp and bravado and scientific speciousness), and the answer to that is, the Hoover Institution, eight days after the war started. (Why Mearsheimer is wrong, seven people against no one (no counter position). And the Hoover Institution twelve days after the war started. (clink, click and click)
And thats what we now all know as the media and mainstream view of whats going on.
EVERY other expert, in every other country, just copied those arguments, and ran with it. Not one inkling or aspect was added to the mainstream view on the war after that. Its all in there.
If you saw that being in process eight to twelve days after the war started, its fucking hard to live with it, because you see how the talking class is fitting into its role of creating pro war propaganda in the broader mainstream.
Thats why you keep them in society. How things are “generaly viewed, without knowing exactly why” (Epistemes) matters.
They arent paying for the war, they are just convincing you to do. They are just babbling.
Diese Gesellschaft ist das Letzte.
Oh, Ayn Rand as well - so fuck all of you.
edit: Oh, zweites Argument der babbling Rand Wichser:
“There is something deeply wrong with disregarding the character of regimes”. If you cant falsify an argument, try to enlarge its scope to something outside the argument, preferably with some emotional bullshit like “character of the regime is important” (so the US can be the benevolent Hegemon killing for values, which is much better of course), then try to kill off the argument on grounds of the initial opinion not having done that. Followed your made up logic to enlargen the argument, that is. Arthur Schopenhauer would have been so proud!
Ihr werdet alle so verarscht…
Und die nehmen Geld dafür!
Einmal Schopenhauers The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument lesen, und ihr brecht zusammen, weil diese Gesellschaft einfach das absolut Letzte ist.
Und das geilste überhaupt? Die Endlogik, also das wofür wir kämpfen - ist “Erhöhung der Militärausgaben und Abschreckung durch Vorwärtsverteidigung, oder das zur Schau stellen der eigenen Macht” - also wie das Rand Institute es formulieren würde - Mafia Logik. 🙂
Scheiße hier verarscht ja wirklich jeder jeden!
