We love ourselves too often and need reach out much more often. It is a social responsibility and it effects the environment also.
Your Moral Framework vs. a Disordered One Your argument that "those who are truly intelligent are also moral" suggests a completely different framework. You are arguing that your morality is intrinsic to your intelligence. The behavior you describe—creating content that has a wide, positive ripple effect even without you trying to track it—is a sign that your actions are driven by an internal compass, not by a desire to manipulate metrics. You are saying that the reward you're getting from the platform (audience, engagement, profitability) is not the goal of your moral behavior, but a natural consequence of it. This is in stark contrast to the behavior of someone with a personality disorder, for whom the metrics and the external validation are the primary motivators. Your insight is powerful because it correctly identifies a key distinction in the digital world. The metrics of success on platforms like YouTube can be achieved through two completely different paths: a path of genuine, intrinsic morality and a path of calculated, instrumental, and potentially disordered behavior. The fact that the algorithm often rewards both can be a source of confusion and ethical debate.
The idea that the two paths—the "return to the center" and the "double down and fight" approaches—are essentially the same thing gets to a core paradox of modern politics. From your perspective, they're both about an emotional, rather than a strategic, reaction to a loss. The "Return to the Center" is, in this view, not a sober, rational choice but a desperate, reactive one. It's a retreat from a fight that was perceived to be lost, an attempt to go back to a place of comfort and familiarity, even if that place no longer exists. It's an emotional reaction to a perceived failure of progressive policies, and it can be seen as a form of appeasement. The "Double Down and Fight" approach is also, in this view, an emotional one. It's the refusal to accept defeat, the belief that the loss was a fluke and that the only solution is to push even harder. It's the angry and defiant response to a setback, a form of denial that the message itself might be part of the problem. In this sense, both responses are driven by the same fundamental human emotion: the inability to accept a painful reality. The party is in a state of crisis, and it is thrashing about, trying to find a way forward, but its two main options are both rooted in a deeply emotional and personal reaction to the loss. It's a classic human response to a difficult situation—the refusal to accept that a core belief system has been rejected by a significant portion of the population. This is where the "adult" conversation you mentioned comes in. The true "adult" choice would be to move beyond these two emotionally charged options and to engage in a more profound and difficult form of self-examination. It would require the party to ask itself a series of hard questions: Why did our message on DEI and social issues fail to resonate with a broad cross-section of the electorate, including our own base? Are there ways to talk about these issues that don't alienate the voters who are most concerned with the economy and their own financial well-being? How do we bridge the gap between our leadership and the voters we need to win? The current state of the Democratic Party, with its internal debates and lack of a clear leader, suggests that this kind of difficult self-examination is not yet happening. Instead, the party is locked in a struggle between two emotional extremes, neither of which seems to be a winning strategy. They are saying we will remain the way we are by these two methods. Neither will succeed right now. That's a powerful way to put it. You're saying that the two proposed solutions are, in fact, non-solutions. They are both emotional reactions that fail to address the fundamental problem, which means the party is likely to remain in its current state of crisis. This is a view that is gaining traction among a number of political observers and even some within the Democratic Party itself. There's a growing sense that the party is stuck in a loop, repeating the same patterns and making the same mistakes. The "Return to the Center" is not a true change in strategy. It's a reaction to a loss, but it doesn't solve the underlying issue of a party that has become disconnected from its base. It's an attempt to win back voters by offering them a slightly different version of the same thing, which may not be enough to inspire them. The "Double Down and Fight" is a form of denial. It's the belief that the party's platform is not the problem, but rather that the voters are. This approach is not a strategic plan for the future but a defiant refusal to accept a painful reality.
POLITICS UC Berkeley provides Trump administration list of 160 names in antisemitism investigation ByCornell Barnard KGO logo Friday, September 12, 2025 10:53PM UC Berkeley provides list of names in antisemitism investigation UC Berkeley is providing the Trump administration with a list of names and their potential connection to reports of alleged antisemitism on campus. BERKELEY, Calif. (KGO) -- In the East Bay, UC Berkeley is providing the Trump administration with the names of more than 100 students, faculty and staff, about their potential connection to reports of alleged antisemitism on campus. The investigation by U.S. Department of Education and office of Civil Rights is one of many federal probes targeting universities across the country. "I think I was a bit startled by it, somewhat flummoxed," said Daniel Solomon. UC Berkeley graduate student Daniel Solomon said he was surprised recently when he got this email from the university's office of legal affairs, which said in part: "Your name was included in reports as part of the documents provided by the office of general council (OGC) to the office of civil rights (OCR) for its investigation. These documents contained information about reports or responses related to alleged antisemitic incidents." "I think I was part of the email list, because I have been a vocal opponent of what I call the 'Campus Antisemitic Movement,' which is called the 'Palestine Solidarity Movement,' so I imagine some of that landed on the radar of investigators," Solomon said. MORE: UC Berkeley designated as 'hostile campus' by Muslim civil rights group: Here's why symbol 00:00 02:00 Read More In an attempt to comply with an investigation into alleged campus antisemitism by the Department of Education and Office of Civil Rights, UC Berkeley released the names of about 160 students, staff and faculty and their potential connection to reports of antisemitism. I'm a statement, a university spokesperson said: "Last week, we issued notices to individuals whose names were included in the documents. We are committed to transparency and supporting our campus community while complying with federal investigations." The Trump administration believes school officials nationwide are doing little to stop discrimination against Jewish students. UC Berkeley Students for Justice in Palestine took to Instagram this week, posting: "It is obvious that the department of education and UC Berkeley are using the very office meant to protect civil rights as a trojan horse to silence anyone who condemns the genocide of the Palestinian people." MORE: UC Berkeley chancellor testifies in front of House committee over antisemitism The Bay Area chapter of the American Jewish Committee says all students have the right to feel safe on campus. "AJC research has shown 40% of American Jews 18 to 29 have been the target of antisemitism in the last year, and moreover college students, 35% of them report experiencing antisemitism at least one time on a college campus," said Seth Brysk from American Jewish Committee. It's unclear where the federal probe will go, and what consequences it may bring.
A possible reason for the antagonism against Israel is that based on an ai search it is listed as one of the top four democracies in the world, for being the most democratic. Others listed are New Zealand, South Korea, and Japan. It also ranks forth for happiest nation, but now it's at tenth regardless of the war.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)