People are strange aren't they? Ask someone why they hate (and it's always hate isn't it) Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin and they haven't ever got an answer. With Putin it's always "well, he's mad" and with Trump it's "well, he's a wicked, crooked, mysoginist who is orange". They never have any real reason for their hatred because the media have never given them any hard, factual evidence for the hatred. I know people who still hate Margaret Thatcher but at least they can say why. I am very concerned about what happens if the Democrats win because they want a world war. They seem to think it would be some sort of WWII replay with lots of money to be made, no bombs falling on the USA and the destruction of "the enemy" (apparently it's Russia this time). Except, if they start letting Zelensky bomb Russia, it will be a war which the Chinese, Iranians, Turks, Indians, Saudis and most of Africa will side with Russia because the West is no longer the land of the free. I don't think the Europeans would fight but the stupid British government is already up to its neck in it all. I don't believe Donald Trump wants war - you can't put a golf course on a bomb site!
The very optics were rigged: Harris' wide-eyed, staring right at the camera; Trump looking downward so we rarely saw the colour of his eyes. I couldn't watch beyond the first twenty minutes.
The whole debate was rigged. She spoke much longer than he did and never got interrupted; on the contrary he was never able to finish his answers. Trump seemed unprepared while she seemed to have all the answers and more. I would not be surprised if she had an earpiece in her right ear in order to get the answers. She always looked to the right with her hair hiding the ear while her left ear was visible with her earring. At time she seemed to be listening to get some “instructions” and looking down at her desk as she was taking note.
You are both right. Every aspect o& it was rigged. But it’s the template for the election itself. Rigged event, one side helped by the people supposedly moderating it, cheating, and the media declare the winner the way they were always going to declare it. That# exactly what will happen election night.
That's one of the best articles I've ever read. Thank you - it's so cathartic to have one's own thoughts laid out so precisely and expertly and the opposing madness nailed so succinctly. Upgrading to paid now.
It wasn’t a debate it was a prepared shit-show where Trump made intelligent responses while she faked her way through on insults and lies. Anyone who believes she won was looking for gladiatorial blows from Trump. Had he done so he’d have gotten hell for weeks for being mean to a female. Trump won, if you don’t think so listen again and listen for his brilliance.
Actually, first time ever I disagree with your take. I mean I feel your emotion, we're all angry now, but we can't allow our emotion to blur our mind, not now especially.
Again, debate is an essential part of democracy. Saying that there's no point to 'debate with evil' is essentially the same as Leftist saying 'there's no point to give a free speech to 'right-wing' Nazis'.
So, how exactly are we different from them? They propose to censor our free speech because we're 'fascists'. Now we propose to cancel debate because they're evil? The difference? That we are right and they're wrong? But we both are spitting on the free speech now.
Yeah, this debate was extremely biased and unfair. Then we need to demand more fair debate say on Fox News. But not to avoid debates. That would look as weakness, and most people would perceive it as Trump being afraid to debate Harris again because he 'lost the first debate'.
You think debate won't open anyone's eyes? Even if that was the case, we still ought to try. But I don't think it's the case though.
Staunch blue voters are maybe indeed too far gone that nothing would move them, no amount of evidence. But swing voters can be moved though, including by a debate.
Also, don't forget the true purpose of the debate. It's not to actually 'debate the evil'. It's to expose evil for what it really is for all to see.
Perfectly fine to disagree. One question-would we be better off now if we had treated communism like Nazism and treated it as too dangerous to allow it to be in charge of anything?
Once you get these totalitarian visions, your tolerance is your doom. I don’t extend the full protection of free speech to those who won’t extend it to me, or to those who want to destroy everything I cherish. I don’t want to protect the rights of or politely discuss things with people who want me dead. As far as I’m concerned ‘exposing them to the light’ is not going to get to a decent standard now because they don’t give a damn about that. They will laugh at the lightness of touch that allows them to get away with treason and insanity, just like jihadis do.
I’m far more interested in speaking to decent people and defending them.
Plus you might not have noticed but it’s totally fruitless whenever we talk to the other side now. There’s no common ground at all. In many cases, you might as well negotiate and debate with a brick wall.
But US actually did monitor Communist activities, at least prior to USSR fall. The problem was that Commies disguised and rebranded themselves as Wokeists, and many people still can't recognize actual Commies in their Woke guise. So it wasn't about being too light on Communism, it's about Commies disguising themselves too well.
Again, debate isn't about 'talking to other side', it's about exposing the other side for who they really are. For example in June on debate with Biden Trump exposed his dementia and neither Mainstream Misledia not DemoNratix establishment were able to cover up for it. That was a win.
Current debate disaster happened partially because Trump didn't prepare well for it, let us be honest. He expected an easy won over the 'dumb Cackler' but Kamala and her handlers prepared well in the contrary and were able to successfully provoke, bait and play him as violin. He should have been expecting that and better prepared. If he didn't let them to provoke himself and grilled the Cackler on countless her faults (many if which like fascist COVID vax mandates and Afghanistan terrible withdrawal) he did not even mention, it would have been an easy win for him.
Again, it's not talking to blue voters. It's talking to swing ones who could actually be swayed by debate. And now they got an unfavorable picture of Trump.
As to your point of not extending the freedom of speech to those who don't extend it to you, how are you better than them then? Even Nazis deserve a fair trial and defense. To simply shut people up is what tyrants do.
But your point there contradicts itself. Wouldn’t Trump have been better served by not debating Kamala?
I don’t depend on being better than them merely by being weak enough to politely let them destroy my nation. Being better than them rests on a lot more than ‘oh I must let them talk evil bollocks’. It rests on moral foundations like me not supporting Hamas, me not wanting babies murdered in the womb, me not trafficking kids as sex slaves, me not letting murderers and rapists into the country, me not corruptly stealing huge amounts of money, me not genitally mutilating kids for profit etc etc.
Worth is in a lot more than whether you’re prepared to debate with evil. It’s more shown by your knowledge of what is evil and what isn’t, and your actions following an accurate assessment of that.
P. S. Again, in my experience and during human history people calling to censor free speech were NEVER on the right side of history, no matter how they spin it. That's why I was so shocked to hear this sentiment from you.
This was the beginning of Woke tyranny too when they began to censor speech which they considered evil, by the way.
I’m also reminded of a recent quote from RFKJ in his Tucker interview when he basically said it’s more dangerous to try and engage these people because they are so brainwashed, they will merely double down with their insanity - you actually have to deprogram them before you try talking to them. I think he’s on to something, but I do not have the tools to do it. Would love to learn them.
The reaction I’m seeing from people in regard to the animal cruelty in Springfield has honestly taken my aback, and I think is proof of this phenomenon. They would rather believe it’s not true and have a laugh at how “crazy” we are than be genuinely concerned for their countrymen. I think this is even less nuanced than the willful blindness during covid and they can’t even grasp this one - that the country is being seeded with people who will bring their culture past the point of no return.
Then we need to gather more proofs, photos and videos of animal abuse by Haitian illegals in Springfield to have more than unproven claims, and to expose them.
Again, debate isn't necessarily to actually talk to them. It can be also to expose them like Trump exposed Biden dementia in June.
No, avoiding debate wouldn't have served Trump better - it would have been seen as a weakness, as him being afraid to debate Harris, and turned people away from him as such. He should have prepared for the debate better for a change realizing which huge responsibility not just for America but for the whole world lies on him, instead of simply being Trump, sigh.
Letting opponents speak isn't the same as let them 'destroy the country'. If you're unwilling to let them speak, you're afraid of what they might say. That's classic for all tyrants again. Again, truth isn't afraid of lies but lie is afraid truth being said. Also classic.
And nope you're not gonna defeat Nazis by becoming one of them, sorry, never. In the contrary, your unwillingness to give a free speech right for them annihilates all the good agenda you have completely, and it makes people wonder - is your agenda as good one as you claim if you need to force others to accept it?
Also, it's a classic weakness. Again, winners aren't afraid of debates - losers are. Truth isn't afraid of liars talking, but lies is afraid of truth being told. Hence, it's ALWAYS tyrants, Commies and Nazis who censor free speech or cancel debate, and never good guys.
Some good points here, but one of the points I took from the original piece is that many in our society no longer have the tools to even understand evil it seems - much less the machinations in place to destroy their culture. I never thought I’d say it - I agree in principle with your argument that we must always demand free speech but I’ve never felt so defeatist about the capacity of westerners to understand it anymore. 😭
Again, as I said, telling the truth might wake up swing voters who are not do far gone as blue voters. Those ones need to be deprogramed indeed, and it's long and hard process.
I wish I could vote but I'm not a US citizen - not that it seems to be stopping some non- citizens ... If the Democrats win, the loonies will be running the asylum. I hope Vance and Kennedy can revitalise the race and help Trump to win 🙏
Best thing I've read in a long time, and touches many of the feelings and sentiments this piece has clarified for me and helped to define that I have not or could not have expressed. And, thank you for believing that there is much more than what and how things appear to be being molded within the fog of power, regardless how that may be being defined these days. Brilliant!
Trump is a senile delinquent - he's a bully, and here in Scotland he is persona non-grata after his disgusting treatment of decent people living next to his new golf course at Menie, - a foul-mouthed tyrant who cut off the water supply of an 80 year old cottage lady and described her sons house as a 'pigsty'.
I understand that in Scotland many people are very brainwashed in unthinking leftist positions. You went from Labour to the SNP and back to Labour. Meanwhile Scottish police will now arrest you and Scottish courts send you to prison for 7 years based on calling a man dressed as a woman a man. And Scotland strangely enough hasn’t boomed or flourished for a very long time.
So when somebody responds to my article with knee jerk Trump hatred from Scotland, I tend to regard it as pretty uninformed fare.
Trump wanted to build gold courses in Scotland because he’s of Scottish descent and he builds things that provide jobs and generate positive economic impacts. Scotland rather stupidly rejected this attempted help.
All very sad when Scots were once the most brilliant engineers and thinkers in the world.
Nobody has been charged or arrested under that law, actually , after thousands of people phoned the hotline to complain about our First Minister's (Humza Yousaf's) absurd and notorious 'white, white, all white' speech being an anti white, racist rant. As for brainwashing, we only have to consider the massive difference in gun violence to see that US citizens are irrationally obsessed with gun ownership.
JK Rowling, author of the Harry Potter books, and a billionaire author has shown that Scots still lead the world in plain speaking (as well as being a superb entrepreneur) - she is outspoken and definitely not 'brainwashed'. And as for engineering, we have a few good tricks up our sleeves, and one of the most advanced sustainable energy industries in the world - with our offshore and onshore wind turbines generating an astonishing amount of cheap and clean electricity - something that Trump tried to demean and stop because they 'spoiled the view'.
Let's take a look at the differences in murder rates between Scotland and the USA based on the most recent data available for 2024.
Murder Rates Overview
Scotland:
In the 2022-2023 reporting year, there were 58 recorded murder and culpable homicide cases in Scotland.
This translates to a murder rate of approximately 1.08 per 100,000 people (based on a population of about 5.4 million).
USA:
The homicide rate in the USA has seen fluctuations, but as of the first half of 2024, it was reported that the homicide rate was about 6.9 per 100,000 people.
This indicates a significant number of homicides, with the total number of murders being much higher than in Scotland, reflecting a larger population and different social dynamics.
As of the latest statistics, the rate of personal insolvencies in Scotland is about 419 per million adults.
Obviously we have a free National Health Service, so almost nobody gets into debt due to medical bills. If that's socialism, we love it!
USA:
In the USA, the bankruptcy filing rate has seen fluctuations, with recent reports indicating a total of 434,064 non-business bankruptcy filings in a recent year. Given a population of approximately 331 million, this results in a rate of about 1,310 per million people.
Main causes are:
Medical expenses, loss of income, divorce, credit card debt
People are strange aren't they? Ask someone why they hate (and it's always hate isn't it) Donald Trump or Vladimir Putin and they haven't ever got an answer. With Putin it's always "well, he's mad" and with Trump it's "well, he's a wicked, crooked, mysoginist who is orange". They never have any real reason for their hatred because the media have never given them any hard, factual evidence for the hatred. I know people who still hate Margaret Thatcher but at least they can say why. I am very concerned about what happens if the Democrats win because they want a world war. They seem to think it would be some sort of WWII replay with lots of money to be made, no bombs falling on the USA and the destruction of "the enemy" (apparently it's Russia this time). Except, if they start letting Zelensky bomb Russia, it will be a war which the Chinese, Iranians, Turks, Indians, Saudis and most of Africa will side with Russia because the West is no longer the land of the free. I don't think the Europeans would fight but the stupid British government is already up to its neck in it all. I don't believe Donald Trump wants war - you can't put a golf course on a bomb site!
It’s disastrous for the US and the world if Kamala wins. Like you say, World War Three is fairly likely as a result.
The very optics were rigged: Harris' wide-eyed, staring right at the camera; Trump looking downward so we rarely saw the colour of his eyes. I couldn't watch beyond the first twenty minutes.
The whole debate was rigged. She spoke much longer than he did and never got interrupted; on the contrary he was never able to finish his answers. Trump seemed unprepared while she seemed to have all the answers and more. I would not be surprised if she had an earpiece in her right ear in order to get the answers. She always looked to the right with her hair hiding the ear while her left ear was visible with her earring. At time she seemed to be listening to get some “instructions” and looking down at her desk as she was taking note.
You are both right. Every aspect o& it was rigged. But it’s the template for the election itself. Rigged event, one side helped by the people supposedly moderating it, cheating, and the media declare the winner the way they were always going to declare it. That# exactly what will happen election night.
That's one of the best articles I've ever read. Thank you - it's so cathartic to have one's own thoughts laid out so precisely and expertly and the opposing madness nailed so succinctly. Upgrading to paid now.
Thanks very much, glad you liked it and I really appreciate the upgrade. 😀😀
It wasn’t a debate it was a prepared shit-show where Trump made intelligent responses while she faked her way through on insults and lies. Anyone who believes she won was looking for gladiatorial blows from Trump. Had he done so he’d have gotten hell for weeks for being mean to a female. Trump won, if you don’t think so listen again and listen for his brilliance.
Perfect analysis.
Bloody hell, this is exactly what I needed after suffering through this shit-show. Thank you.
You’re welcome. 😀
Actually, first time ever I disagree with your take. I mean I feel your emotion, we're all angry now, but we can't allow our emotion to blur our mind, not now especially.
Again, debate is an essential part of democracy. Saying that there's no point to 'debate with evil' is essentially the same as Leftist saying 'there's no point to give a free speech to 'right-wing' Nazis'.
So, how exactly are we different from them? They propose to censor our free speech because we're 'fascists'. Now we propose to cancel debate because they're evil? The difference? That we are right and they're wrong? But we both are spitting on the free speech now.
Yeah, this debate was extremely biased and unfair. Then we need to demand more fair debate say on Fox News. But not to avoid debates. That would look as weakness, and most people would perceive it as Trump being afraid to debate Harris again because he 'lost the first debate'.
You think debate won't open anyone's eyes? Even if that was the case, we still ought to try. But I don't think it's the case though.
Staunch blue voters are maybe indeed too far gone that nothing would move them, no amount of evidence. But swing voters can be moved though, including by a debate.
Also, don't forget the true purpose of the debate. It's not to actually 'debate the evil'. It's to expose evil for what it really is for all to see.
Perfectly fine to disagree. One question-would we be better off now if we had treated communism like Nazism and treated it as too dangerous to allow it to be in charge of anything?
Once you get these totalitarian visions, your tolerance is your doom. I don’t extend the full protection of free speech to those who won’t extend it to me, or to those who want to destroy everything I cherish. I don’t want to protect the rights of or politely discuss things with people who want me dead. As far as I’m concerned ‘exposing them to the light’ is not going to get to a decent standard now because they don’t give a damn about that. They will laugh at the lightness of touch that allows them to get away with treason and insanity, just like jihadis do.
I’m far more interested in speaking to decent people and defending them.
Plus you might not have noticed but it’s totally fruitless whenever we talk to the other side now. There’s no common ground at all. In many cases, you might as well negotiate and debate with a brick wall.
But US actually did monitor Communist activities, at least prior to USSR fall. The problem was that Commies disguised and rebranded themselves as Wokeists, and many people still can't recognize actual Commies in their Woke guise. So it wasn't about being too light on Communism, it's about Commies disguising themselves too well.
Again, debate isn't about 'talking to other side', it's about exposing the other side for who they really are. For example in June on debate with Biden Trump exposed his dementia and neither Mainstream Misledia not DemoNratix establishment were able to cover up for it. That was a win.
Current debate disaster happened partially because Trump didn't prepare well for it, let us be honest. He expected an easy won over the 'dumb Cackler' but Kamala and her handlers prepared well in the contrary and were able to successfully provoke, bait and play him as violin. He should have been expecting that and better prepared. If he didn't let them to provoke himself and grilled the Cackler on countless her faults (many if which like fascist COVID vax mandates and Afghanistan terrible withdrawal) he did not even mention, it would have been an easy win for him.
Again, it's not talking to blue voters. It's talking to swing ones who could actually be swayed by debate. And now they got an unfavorable picture of Trump.
As to your point of not extending the freedom of speech to those who don't extend it to you, how are you better than them then? Even Nazis deserve a fair trial and defense. To simply shut people up is what tyrants do.
Trump never prepares. He’s a terrible debater.
But your point there contradicts itself. Wouldn’t Trump have been better served by not debating Kamala?
I don’t depend on being better than them merely by being weak enough to politely let them destroy my nation. Being better than them rests on a lot more than ‘oh I must let them talk evil bollocks’. It rests on moral foundations like me not supporting Hamas, me not wanting babies murdered in the womb, me not trafficking kids as sex slaves, me not letting murderers and rapists into the country, me not corruptly stealing huge amounts of money, me not genitally mutilating kids for profit etc etc.
Worth is in a lot more than whether you’re prepared to debate with evil. It’s more shown by your knowledge of what is evil and what isn’t, and your actions following an accurate assessment of that.
P. S. Again, in my experience and during human history people calling to censor free speech were NEVER on the right side of history, no matter how they spin it. That's why I was so shocked to hear this sentiment from you.
This was the beginning of Woke tyranny too when they began to censor speech which they considered evil, by the way.
I’m also reminded of a recent quote from RFKJ in his Tucker interview when he basically said it’s more dangerous to try and engage these people because they are so brainwashed, they will merely double down with their insanity - you actually have to deprogram them before you try talking to them. I think he’s on to something, but I do not have the tools to do it. Would love to learn them.
The reaction I’m seeing from people in regard to the animal cruelty in Springfield has honestly taken my aback, and I think is proof of this phenomenon. They would rather believe it’s not true and have a laugh at how “crazy” we are than be genuinely concerned for their countrymen. I think this is even less nuanced than the willful blindness during covid and they can’t even grasp this one - that the country is being seeded with people who will bring their culture past the point of no return.
Then we need to gather more proofs, photos and videos of animal abuse by Haitian illegals in Springfield to have more than unproven claims, and to expose them.
Again, debate isn't necessarily to actually talk to them. It can be also to expose them like Trump exposed Biden dementia in June.
No, avoiding debate wouldn't have served Trump better - it would have been seen as a weakness, as him being afraid to debate Harris, and turned people away from him as such. He should have prepared for the debate better for a change realizing which huge responsibility not just for America but for the whole world lies on him, instead of simply being Trump, sigh.
Letting opponents speak isn't the same as let them 'destroy the country'. If you're unwilling to let them speak, you're afraid of what they might say. That's classic for all tyrants again. Again, truth isn't afraid of lies but lie is afraid truth being said. Also classic.
And nope you're not gonna defeat Nazis by becoming one of them, sorry, never. In the contrary, your unwillingness to give a free speech right for them annihilates all the good agenda you have completely, and it makes people wonder - is your agenda as good one as you claim if you need to force others to accept it?
Also, it's a classic weakness. Again, winners aren't afraid of debates - losers are. Truth isn't afraid of liars talking, but lies is afraid of truth being told. Hence, it's ALWAYS tyrants, Commies and Nazis who censor free speech or cancel debate, and never good guys.
Some good points here, but one of the points I took from the original piece is that many in our society no longer have the tools to even understand evil it seems - much less the machinations in place to destroy their culture. I never thought I’d say it - I agree in principle with your argument that we must always demand free speech but I’ve never felt so defeatist about the capacity of westerners to understand it anymore. 😭
Again, as I said, telling the truth might wake up swing voters who are not do far gone as blue voters. Those ones need to be deprogramed indeed, and it's long and hard process.
Excellent article.
I wish I could vote but I'm not a US citizen - not that it seems to be stopping some non- citizens ... If the Democrats win, the loonies will be running the asylum. I hope Vance and Kennedy can revitalise the race and help Trump to win 🙏
Excellent indeed, Daniel!! Sharing.
Best thing I've read in a long time, and touches many of the feelings and sentiments this piece has clarified for me and helped to define that I have not or could not have expressed. And, thank you for believing that there is much more than what and how things appear to be being molded within the fog of power, regardless how that may be being defined these days. Brilliant!
And it may have actually helped Trump
https://pjmedia.com/matt-margolis/2024/09/11/wait-a-second-trump-may-have-helped-himself-in-the-debate-n4932437
Trump is a senile delinquent - he's a bully, and here in Scotland he is persona non-grata after his disgusting treatment of decent people living next to his new golf course at Menie, - a foul-mouthed tyrant who cut off the water supply of an 80 year old cottage lady and described her sons house as a 'pigsty'.
I understand that in Scotland many people are very brainwashed in unthinking leftist positions. You went from Labour to the SNP and back to Labour. Meanwhile Scottish police will now arrest you and Scottish courts send you to prison for 7 years based on calling a man dressed as a woman a man. And Scotland strangely enough hasn’t boomed or flourished for a very long time.
So when somebody responds to my article with knee jerk Trump hatred from Scotland, I tend to regard it as pretty uninformed fare.
Trump wanted to build gold courses in Scotland because he’s of Scottish descent and he builds things that provide jobs and generate positive economic impacts. Scotland rather stupidly rejected this attempted help.
All very sad when Scots were once the most brilliant engineers and thinkers in the world.
Nobody has been charged or arrested under that law, actually , after thousands of people phoned the hotline to complain about our First Minister's (Humza Yousaf's) absurd and notorious 'white, white, all white' speech being an anti white, racist rant. As for brainwashing, we only have to consider the massive difference in gun violence to see that US citizens are irrationally obsessed with gun ownership.
JK Rowling, author of the Harry Potter books, and a billionaire author has shown that Scots still lead the world in plain speaking (as well as being a superb entrepreneur) - she is outspoken and definitely not 'brainwashed'. And as for engineering, we have a few good tricks up our sleeves, and one of the most advanced sustainable energy industries in the world - with our offshore and onshore wind turbines generating an astonishing amount of cheap and clean electricity - something that Trump tried to demean and stop because they 'spoiled the view'.
Let's take a look at the differences in murder rates between Scotland and the USA based on the most recent data available for 2024.
Murder Rates Overview
Scotland:
In the 2022-2023 reporting year, there were 58 recorded murder and culpable homicide cases in Scotland.
This translates to a murder rate of approximately 1.08 per 100,000 people (based on a population of about 5.4 million).
USA:
The homicide rate in the USA has seen fluctuations, but as of the first half of 2024, it was reported that the homicide rate was about 6.9 per 100,000 people.
This indicates a significant number of homicides, with the total number of murders being much higher than in Scotland, reflecting a larger population and different social dynamics.
As I said, Scots are no slouches when it comes to engineering.
So Trump tried to stop us like the whiny fat creep that he is, and we told him to get lost:
Clean Electric Energy Generation
Scotland:
In 2022, renewable technologies generated the equivalent of 113% of Scotland's overall electricity consumption.
USA:
In 2022, renewable energy sources accounted for about 20% of the total electricity generation in the USA.
see also my post here about pumped hydro storage - sort of like a huge battery, but using water power: https://substack.com/@robkay/p-146523826
Bankruptcy Rates per Million Population
Scotland:
As of the latest statistics, the rate of personal insolvencies in Scotland is about 419 per million adults.
Obviously we have a free National Health Service, so almost nobody gets into debt due to medical bills. If that's socialism, we love it!
USA:
In the USA, the bankruptcy filing rate has seen fluctuations, with recent reports indicating a total of 434,064 non-business bankruptcy filings in a recent year. Given a population of approximately 331 million, this results in a rate of about 1,310 per million people.
Main causes are:
Medical expenses, loss of income, divorce, credit card debt