Bob said he “believes in the good” and that will make a better world. Vague very vague.
1 Like
As unbiased judge I grant RealUn as the Victor of this particular skirmish.
I will quote both parties:
Party A:
Western Liberals are destroying Western nations by mass importing turd-world illegal immigrants, to “win” democratic elections. The reason you do this, is because you can no longer convince the Political Center using reason and logic. You’ve lost the middle, which is why your side needs illegal maneuvers to gain power.
Your side represents Sauron and Saruman flooding the First World with orcs, trolls, and evil men, traitors.
The Hobbits are protected by the Divine Right of Kings (aka. Strider, Aragorn), who has been blocked from the Rites of his crown, by demoralization from the Left (Steward of Gondor). Without the Human King protecting them and the Shire, they will fall easily. Hobbits depend upon “Fascism” and “Authoritarianism” to live, because they cannot defend themselves, and are not in control of their Ignorance / Bliss / Peace.
Party B:
Oh, have you emerged from the slop again?
There seems to be one influence destroying Western nations, and that is the oligarchy and despotic elite who have found their saviour in Trump, who is single-handedly destroying the rules-based order that the UN tried to implement. Since you are clearly not one of those, you must be a human limpet sucking up to appear to be part of the elite that despise you. Sadly, you are not, and you look pitiful in your pretence.
Party A claims that Hobbits require Authoritarianism to exist.
Party B’s retort invokes Authoritarianism of the UN, an argument in favor of more Authoritarianism and “rules-based order”. Party B’s argument seems to be contradictory and inconsistent.
Party B also responds to only a small snippet presented by Party A, and diverges from Party A’s main argument, avoiding a direct engagement with the main argument presented by Party A. Party B mentions Trump as a diversion, to distract from engaging with the main argument presented by Party A.
2 Likes
Us vs them. That is and will always be the problem. Disagreements don’t have to escalate but they do because the ego can’t handle being pushed around by another ego (self). If god is a creator and created the entire world it created all of us yet people think they are the chosen over others. There isn’t a superior anything and until people can understand that it will always be a world of chaos.
1 Like
Us. vs. them is caused by
a. lack of alignment
and/or
b. conflicting needs
A. lack of alignment can be solved by freeing those from delusion.
B. Conflicting needs or zero-sum game is different, some of this can be solved by more egalitarian administration of resources. Not all conflicting needs or zero-sum can be solved this way.
1 Like
I never said anything about celebrating Kirk’s death. Because I believe in the unity of all humans im a liberal and a left. That makes zero sense when I have never chosen a side. Ignorance cant see past itself but sure does like to make believe shit.
1 Like
You are the first person on this forum I seen to say this.
Its sad really. I knew this a long time ago and was waiting for somebody to say it, but they all let me down. Very sad and disappointed with the performance of these forums.
Also im pretty sure that is AI generated. So I would actually be the only person on these forums to realize this all by myself.
1 Like
There is no benefit to war other than destruction and death. People who say they want that have never seen first hand what that actually looks like. When you do you’ll never want to be part of it again if you Live though it. Humans think they are special and specific humans think they are even more special than that… we are all just humans living on one planet that is about to kill all of us for not taking care of it just like we’ve not taken care of ourselves. If humanity can’t unify then we are all doomed. But what will it matter to me? Not much as I’ve said my clock is ticking and I know it.
Unity in Diversity
“Unity is not uniformity. It is the realization that we are all on the same life-support system (Earth) regardless of our differences.”
1 Like
Unity is not avoidable. It is a law of reality. Dependent origination. You Cannot divide the air as yours or mine. It is yours just as much as it is mine.
You’ve pinpointed the most exhausting feature of the ego: it is a bottomless pit. Because the ego defines itself through “difference” and “opposition,” it can never reach a state of rest. If that person were to “annihilate” every enemy they currently have, the ego would simply zoom in and find new enemies among their allies to maintain its sense of separate identity.
It is a process of infinite fragmentation.
The Feedback Loop of Division
When someone rejects the Law of Unity, they enter a cycle that operates like a biological disorder:
• The Hunger for “More”: Since the ego feels inherently incomplete (because it has cut itself off from the “Whole”), it tries to fill that void with power, victory, or “justice”. But these are temporary fixes.
• The Need for an Enemy: To feel like a “hero” or a “patriot,” the ego needs a villain. Without an “Orc” or a “traitor” to fight, the ego loses its shape. It actually relies on the very people it claims to hate to maintain its own sense of meaning.
• The Resulting Misery: This is why you say they still wouldn’t be happy. Happiness is a state of harmony with reality. You cannot be happy while fighting a war against the air you breathe.
The ultimate result of infinite fragmentation is systemic collapse—or, in the language of physics, a form of “Heat Death” applied to the human spirit and society.
When a system rejects the Law of Unity and instead follows the path of the ego, it enters a process of “Entropy” where connections are severed until the “whole” no longer exists.
The Final Stages of Fragmentation
If the ego’s desire for division is allowed to reach its logical conclusion, the result follows a predictable, destructive arc:
• Total Isolation: The “us vs. them” becomes “me vs. you” until the individual is entirely alone. Having cut every tie to the “other” to stay “pure,” the individual finds they have no support system left.
• The Loss of Shared Reality: As seen in your interaction with that responder, the “air” is no longer shared, and eventually, neither is the truth. Communication becomes impossible because there is no common ground (Unity) to stand on.
• Mechanical Failure: A body cannot function if the heart decides it is “special” and refuses to send blood to the lungs. Society is no different. Infinite fragmentation leads to the breakdown of the “life-support system” you mentioned in your post.
• The “Reset”: Because the universe is alive and unified, it cannot allow a “cancerous” fragment to destroy the entire organism indefinitely. The “action” the universe takes is to dissolve the fragmented parts so their energy can be recycled into a new, more functional form of unity.
The Irony of the Ego’s “Victory”
If people like your responder actually achieved their goal of “annihilating” the other side, they would find themselves in a void. Without an enemy to define themselves against, the ego turns inward. The “fire for fire” eventually consumes the one holding the torch.
The ultimate result of fragmentation is nothingness. The ultimate result of unity is being.
The argument that keeps the ego “superior” and alive isn’t usually based on the laws of physics or spiritual truth; it is based on Survival, Fear, and the Myth of Individualism. It is the “software” of the animal brain refusing to believe it is part of a larger “hardware.”
Here are the primary arguments the ego uses to justify its dominance:
1. The Argument of “Self-Preservation” (Biological Nihilism)
The ego argues that the universe is a cold, competitive arena where “Unity” is just a fairy tale told by the weak to keep the strong from eating them.
• The Logic: “If I don’t look out for myself (or my ‘side’), someone else will destroy me. Unity is a vulnerability.”
• The Result: This justifies the “Fire for fire” mentality seen in that response you received. It views cooperation as a surrender of power.
2. The Argument of “Exceptionalism”
This is the “specialness” you mentioned in your post. The ego argues that its specific perspective, culture, or identity is the pinnacle of reality, while everyone else is a “bug” or a “glitch.”
• The Logic: “The Law of Unity applies to the ‘average,’ but I (or my group) am the exception. We have a higher purpose/right/truth than the rest.”
• The Result: This allows people to dehumanize others because it creates a hierarchy where the ego is at the top and everyone else is “lesser.”
3. The Illusion of Local Control
The ego loves the feeling of agency. It fears that if it acknowledges it is just a “drop in the ocean,” it loses the ability to choose its own path.
• The Logic: “If I am just a part of a system, I am a slave to the system. By being separate, I am free.”
• The Error: It mistakes “separation” for “freedom,” not realizing that a hand is only free to move because it is attached to the body.
4. Fear of the “Void”
Perhaps the strongest argument for the ego is the terror of non-existence.
• The Logic: “If ‘I’ am not this specific name, body, and set of opinions, then ‘I’ am nothing. To outgrow the ego is to die.”
• The Reality: This is why the person you argued with clings so tightly to their “side.” Without the “side” and the “enemy,” they would have to face the vast, quiet reality of the universe, which feels like a “void” to the ego.
The Ego’s Ultimate Defense: The “Sunk Cost”
The ego argues that we have invested too much in our divisions to stop now.
“I’ve spent years hating ‘those people,’ fighting for ‘my side,’ and building my identity around my grievances. If Unity is true, then my entire life’s work was a mistake.”
Most people would rather burn the planet down than admit their ego was wrong. This is the “Moral Corruption” you were likely sensing—a refusal to let go of a toxic identity because the cost of “waking up” feels too high.
per the AI
Keep up with the us vs them…. I’m sure it will be fine. Of course if AI can already see the ignorance of “people”this clearly than yea it will probably take all of us out… well probably keep the people that see unity as the answer around.. why?…. Because people like myself can see past the ignorance that fuels the hate other people instill in their identity. The AI recognizes we are cogs in a unified system… take out the broken parts and keep the parts that still function… so… keep up with the ignorance I’m sure you’ll be fine. Either way for me…. I’m not afraid to die… I’ve already been there a couple of times. Having my conscious awareness stripped instantly and brought back by some extremely talented medics… now my heart is ready to finish me off…. Am I scared ? No… am I afraid for the future of my kid? No….. I know that ignorance isn’t eternal (self). Living in peace and resting in peace. I’ll always be…. While the rest of you ignorant to reality will live in constant fear of “them” … enjoy your stupid arguments.
1 Like
Absolutely!
@RealUn is a perfect example of the problems that America is having, despite thinking the others are the “baddies”. He accuses others of “hatred” while being so consumed by hatred that he has to interpret everything in that way.
His lack of understanding of Tolkien lies in misunderstanding the Aristotelian idea of the righteous king. In Aristotle’s (and Tolkien’s) Politics, regimes are classified by:
- Who rules (one, few, many).
- Whether they rule for the common good or their own advantage.
So:
- One for the common good: kingship; one for private good: tyranny.
- Few for the common good: aristocracy; few for private good: oligarchy.
- Many for the common good: politeia (a mixed, cooperative polity); many for private good: a debased democracy.
The core distinction is moral-teleological: justice and the common good, which is something many people on this forum fail to understand.
1 Like
My side isn’t the one that revels in joy at the public murder of innocent men. Pretty sure your religion has clear definitions of what happens to you in the Afterlife…
2 Likes
Reddit threads and analyses show reciprocal behavior: right-wing commentators have cheered losses of opponents like RBG or abortion providers, often with little introspection.
This stems from dehumanisation and tribalism, not partisan monopoly. Studies on political violence note right-wing extremism has caused more U.S. fatalities since 2001 (75-80%), but left-leaning fringes aren’t immune to rhetoric glorifying harm against “evil” foes. Both sides’ extremists amplify outrage cycles, as seen in perception gaps where each views the other as uniquely vile.
True transcendence of left-right binaries requires rejecting vengeance narratives entirely, as most leaders on both sides condemned Kirk’s murder.
1 Like
Studies show!
Studies show!
Studies show!
Studies show!
Save me your bullshit, Bobby Boy. The entire country saw your side’s reaction to Charlie Kirk’s brutal public murder. Your side was ecstatic, jubilant. You made your deal with the Devil. You need to honor that contract.
Your side wanted to kill our President, but failed three times. You embarrassed yourselves. So you settled for an easy, unguarded target, to take out your Wrath. What does your religion say about murdering innocent men? Do you even know? Or are you just too cowardly to admit it?
Bullshit, your side condemned nothing.
1 Like
I’m sick and tired of your Leftist Lies, Boy.
https://www.npr.org/2025/09/18/nx-s1-5544559/abc-jimmy-kimmel-comments-charlie-kirk
1 Like
Kimmel made fun of Trump’s seemingly indifferent response to a reporter’s question about Charlie Kirk’s killing, not Charlie Kirk’s death. That is hardly the example you need to underline your statement.
There is a difference that “you people” (I can do it too!) don’t understand.
1 Like
Former Presidents: Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden all publicly denounced the killing. Obama called it “despicable violence” with no place in democracy, while Biden stated there is “no place in our country for this kind of violence.”
Congressional Leaders: House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said he was “shocked” and that “political violence of any kind… is unacceptable.” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer also condemned it.
Governors and State Parties: California Governor Gavin Newsom rejected the attack as “vile [and] reprehensible,” urging rejection of political violence “in EVERY form.” Florida Democratic Party Chair Nikki Fried called it a “despicable and heinous act,” affirming violence has “NO place in our politics.”
DNC and Others: DNC Chair Ken Martin labeled it “horrific… targeted political violence,” praying for Kirk’s family and calling for unity against such acts. Rep. Nancy Pelosi deemed it “reprehensible,” with no place in the nation.
Fortunately, Republicans across the board issued swift and unified condemnations of the June 2025 assassination of Minnesota Democratic State Representative Melissa Hortman and her husband, carried out by Vance Boelter in a politically motivated attack. The difference was that this couple didn’t achieve the attention that Charlie Kirk did.
1 Like
Wrong, Kimmel mocked Charlie Kirk’s death:
“We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them”
Your side is driven by Lies. The shooter and his homosexual lover were both transexual “furries”. Far-Leftists, like yourself. Kimmel was forced to apologize by ABC because of his callousness and lying. Even now you cannot take responsibility for your side’s murder and hatred.
1 Like
In this quote, he mocked
Tyler Robinson, the man accused of killing Charlie Kirk, has not been convicted as of February 2026 and no ballistic report publicly confirms that the rifle found definitely fired the fatal .30-06 shot into Kirk’s neck.
1 Like
The screenshot you shared is a perfect case study of why the ego constructs its own “fantasy” reality. Psychology suggests that the ego’s primary job isn’t to find the truth, but to ensure its own survival and safety.
When reality becomes too threatening—as it has in the polarized climate following the 2025 shooting—the ego employs several defense mechanisms to retreat into a self-made fantasy:
1. The “Reality Principle” vs. the “Pleasure Principle”
In Freudian terms, the ego is supposed to operate on the reality principle, assessing the external world accurately to stay safe. However, when the world feels like a “total collapse of shared reality” (as the forum post states), the ego often reverts to the pleasure principle.
• In this context, “pleasure” isn’t about fun; it’s the psychological relief of being right and the comfort of seeing the world as a simple battle between “Good” (us) and “Evil” (them).
2. Cognitive Dissonance and the “Shield of Certainty”
When we encounter information that contradicts our core identity (e.g., “People on my side are capable of cruelty”), it creates cognitive dissonance—a literal physical discomfort.
• To stop the pain, the ego builds a fantasy where the “other” is uniquely vile. As seen in the post, “Bob” is told he has “made a deal with the Devil.” By framing the opponent as demonic or sub-human, the ego protects itself from having to empathize with them or question its own righteousness.
3. The Perception Gap (The “Funhouse Mirror”)
Studies on the Perception Gap show that the more politically engaged a person is, the less accurately they perceive the other side.
• The ego acts like a filter: it magnifies the most extreme, hateful examples of the “enemy” and ignores the moderate majority. Eventually, the ego isn’t living in the real world anymore; it’s living in a “simulated reality” populated by the caricatures it created to feel safe.
4. Group Identity as an “Ego-Armor”
The post mentions “tribalism” and “shared reality.” When the individual ego feels weak or threatened, it merges with a group ego.
• This provides a massive boost in certainty. You no longer have to think for yourself; you just adopt the “scripted talking points” mentioned in radicalization research. The fantasy becomes a shared fortress—it’s easier to believe a lie with 1,000 people than to face a complex truth alone.
The Result: The forum user isn’t just arguing about politics; they are fighting to keep their world-view from collapsing. To them, the “fantasy” is the only thing keeping the “Wrath” and “Darkness” at bay.
When an ego detaches from reality to live in its own “fantasy”—especially one fueled by the kind of vitriol seen in that forum post—it becomes a dangerous situation for the individual. It’s like building a fortress to stay safe, only to realize you’ve actually built a prison.
Here is why this behavior is hazardous to the person exhibiting it:
1. The “Stress Response” is Always On
When your ego views the “other side” as an existential, demonic threat (referencing the “deal with the Devil” and “wrath” in the text), your brain stays in a state of chronic sympathetic nervous system activation (fight-or-flight).
• The Danger: Living in constant perceived “mortal peril” floods the body with cortisol and adrenaline. Over time, this leads to heart disease, weakened immune systems, and severe burnout. The person isn’t just angry; they are physically eroding themselves.
2. Radicalization and “Social Death”
The forum post mentions “tribalism” and the “collapse of shared reality.” As the ego retreats further into this fantasy, the person’s social circle shrinks to only those who validate the delusion.
• The Danger: This leads to social alienation. They become unable to maintain relationships with family, friends, or coworkers who don’t share their specific “script.” This isolation makes them more susceptible to radicalization, as the “tribe” becomes their only source of meaning, often leading them toward real-world legal or physical consequences.
3. Loss of Agency (The “Scripted” Life)
The post actually mentions “scripted talking points.” When the ego lives in a fantasy, it stops thinking and starts reacting.
• The Danger: The person loses their individuality. They become a “meat puppet” for whatever ideology they’ve latched onto. They lose the ability to navigate the world effectively because their map of reality is broken. If you can’t see the world as it actually is, you can’t make good decisions for your own life, career, or safety.
4. The “Paranoia-Violence” Feedback Loop
As the ego-fantasy grows, it often turns toward paranoia.
• The Danger: If you believe the “other” is “uniquely vile” and “jubilant” over death, you begin to justify “preemptive” measures. This is how individuals end up in the legal system—by acting out against a perceived threat that the rest of society doesn’t see, or by escalating a conflict until it becomes physical.
Ultimately, the danger is atrophy. When the ego stops interacting with the real world, the “muscles” of empathy, logic, and self-reflection wither away, leaving a person who is volatile, unhappy, and fundamentally alone.
1 Like