View single post by Jee-Host[gm]
 Posted: Tue Apr 9th, 2013 06:43 am
PM Quote Reply Full Topic


Now, I am on my 2nd time thru of your words, and I still don't understand. I am laughing inside as I find it very funny that I am having to expand my brain again. I appreciate your words to me and I will work at understanding.

Commendable. However, the root of the problem (at least partially) might lie in my inability to express myself in English. I try to follow the basic rules of the language, but as you can imagine I think in different terms and construct sentences in different fashion than native English speaker. Then I find myself needing to reconstruct them to suit language specifics. So certain degree of misunderstandings could and should certainly be attributed to that fact. Seeing as you say you don't understand what I am saying I must admit that you did a decent job on following through on what I asked - elaborating on term limits. Although I am slightly disappointed those are not your personal thoughts, but mere links (or so your response indicates), I get the basic gist of what you meant - and that should suffice for now.

When you say you advise against 20th Century Russian History as a book topic do you mean that people would not take your presentation as credible because it is so far outside the norm of the politically correct understanding?

First of all - me and political correctness don't mix together. Political correctness is a way of justifying a lie with fancy words - not my cup of tea. My presentation as I write it is a translation-compilation of certain sources. Even I cannot attest to it being historically accurate more than "as far as I can tell", which is a big stretch when versions differ so heavily. But If I were to write things blatantly it would sound like as if I called Ben Franklin an actual vampire who fried little children to perform dark rituals and get more power over universe. Does that sound like an epigraph to a book you would take seriously and take your time reading thoroughly? I kinda sorta doubt that. But the book should reflect an educated opinion, right? So how to convey an educated opinion that cover things vast majority never heard about, never even conceived existing? Take for instance the way human beings perceive information. Does it occur to you that at this stage it is impossible for us to prove existense of completely different way to perceive it? We cannot do it exactly because the way we perceive it. Only way we can mess around in that area is by using logic. But logic has nothing to do with things existing or not. Is it logical to think there are different way to perceive reality? Yes. Is it logical to think that our own perception probably doesn't account for the reality in it's fullest? Yes. Now of course the subject of history I talk about is not this level of alien, but anyway - what if I say that 200-300 years ago who knows who nuked half of the planet? Does that sound preposterous? Then imagine how it would sound for anyone less open-minded. I'm trying to make exceptionally obvious examples to express what I meant.

Last edited on Tue Apr 9th, 2013 07:08 am by