"Trigger warning: the event conducted just beyond this sign may contain triggering and/or sensitive material. Sexual violence, sexual assault, and abuse are some of the topics mentioned within the event. If you feel triggered, please know there are resources to help you." @Hofstra University, posted at the doors of the auditorium....just before the first Presidential debate...last week
from Bloomberg...quoting Ding Shuang (who worked at IMF 1997-2010) --
"The consensus in policy-making circles was that more trade meant better economic growth, but the benefits weren’t shared equitably, so now we see a round of anti-globalization, anti-free trade...globalization will stall for the moment, until we can find a way to share those benefits."here's one more just to get things started --
"The scientific consensus is in and the argument is now over. If you do not believe in climate change, you do not believe in facts, or in science or empirical truths and therefore, in my humble opinion, should not be allowed to hold public office." actor Leonardo DiCaprio
so first of all -- regarding this "consensus"...this thing called a collective opinion, and such. Newsflash: there is none...and that goes for many, many things, Leonardo...and to all in your company of elitists, inside or outside Hollywood.
and regarding this thing called appeasement to all and to all a good night, a one-size, fits all, pacifier of offenses large and small....enough already. Even the University of Chicago agrees with me.
We had utopia, it was called The Garden of Eden.
And look how well that turned out ...being the fault of our own starry eyed humanity, we proved royally unfit; suddenly, where there was once only good to be found, now there were two. From then on, good would share the world with evil, and nothing would ever be the same again.
Pleasing everyone in the uber-sensitive environment we've made for ourselves is now next to impossible.
And trying to divvy up the world into equal portions of shared benefits -- as if the scope of wealth and resources, development and ambition, education and population, were all non-starters -- is futile, if not prelude to committing total fraud against the globe.
All things being equal, we're not all the same. But one thing's for certain -- this attempt to coddle everyone at the same time is ludicrous. And it's giving me heart palpitations.
Here's another good one (from the same Bloomberg piece, linked above);
...Louis Kuijs, head of Asia economics at Oxford Economics in Hong Kong and a former IMF official. “If we lose consensus on what kind of a world we want to have, the world will probably be worse off.”
What kind of world?
Looking at the current run of clashes and conflicts, recognizing the clear and present danger of a lack of consensus with the best interests for all, of course, in mind -- including, but not limited to -- ISIS in the Middle East (and lone wolves stationed throughout the world), Russian forces on the move, North Korea playing with fire, China testing the free world, free trade and free waters, liberals ridiculing conservative thought every single bloody day -- making every effort through the mainstream media and social media to shut down anything and everything that doesn't sound like leftist consensus....
This girl just has to wonder...hello! Consensus is in the eyes of the beholder of a pipe
What kind of world we want to have, he says....seriously, Louis Kuijs? (love the name, by the way)
We can't even get to an easy consensus at the PTA, and you guys think we should be taking this world, wide, web view of making economic equality for all? Economic opportunity is one thing, but trying to make it all even-steven -- are you nuts?
And you say, "if we lose consensus on what kind of world we want to have" -- as if we have it right now. Earth to wonder boy Kuijs -- that is one thing I can surely say we do not have in our possession. What consensus do you speak of? ...the one coming from you and the merry band of elitists who want to corrupt and control the world by pressing a button? Not sure you guys have the right temperament or authority to do so, as things stand now. Just sayin'.
I know, me likes to poke fun.
But it's not funny.
You know what I think is beautiful?
That we DO NOT have consensus on many, many things.
By lacking in consensus, we gain insight, knowledge, greater understanding of how someone else thinks -- whether right or wrong. It's at the point of reaching "a consensus" when all of us should stop and wonder, wait a minute...what are the consequences, what are we missing, what has history taught us thus far? Is this really what we want, where we want to go, what we should do? IS it?
And then -- in that moment of consensus-itus realize that the thing we should be doing may not actually be what the consensus of some believe at all; maybe political correctness does affect outcome; just maybe history has been here before, and lays the foundation for a better course of action.
And yes -- maybe the consensus on climate change is YES, there is climate change; but the real question is whether we all believe it is man-made....or just part of the masterpiece that is this world -- a kind of climate change carousing with mother earth since the beginning of time...indeed.
And here's another angle -- and in the news thanks to one Billy BadBoyClinton. Take Obamacare -- there was only "consensus" from the left; not one republican voted for it. Not one. And now look at it..."the craziest thing ever."
And just for the record -- from the beginning, this Obamacare was planned to fail. Oh yes, go ahead and hate me, call me a racist, whatever -- it was. It was planned to fail in order to eventually get to the single payer system, and thereby seal the bad deal into another debt for eternity, adding to the long list of government un-funded liabilities (currently hundreds of trillions in the fiery hole that is hell on hybrid wheels). Obamacare was designed to break America in two; consider it just another dimension of good and evil playing with the fundamentals, resting on the ultimate goal of total transformation.
Now, before I go for today -- someone near and dear to my heart sent me a link to an article by Victor Davis Hanson; and I'm thinking not only that I like how he thinks, but may even go so far as to admit consensus between two parties without prejudice (teehee).
The thing is: consensus can change with the winds of time and on a dime -- and we are talking all things being equally man-made this time around. So without further adieu, read this from Hanson: 2016 Mirrors years that sparked world wars...here's his final two cents:
"The problem is that there is no other “someone” (especially not the United Nations or the European Union) with the requisite power and authority except the United States. But for a long time America has done more than its fair share of international policing — and its people are tired of costly dragon-slaying abroad.
The result is that at this late date, the tough medicine of restoring long-term deterrence is as almost as dangerous as the disease of continual short-term appeasement."
All things are not equal on the world stage, if ever they ever could be! (and btw, the pink hilites was all G x)
America is constantly at work, correcting wrongs of our own making, and even the wrongs we had no business being part of, if only to protect what is good -- and it's a value no man can truly quantify. As a nation, America has always been a citizenship sensitive to the needs of others, foreign and domestic, even if the resolution was a long time in the making.
Trigger warnings abound. Safe places, there are none. In reality, we must deal with reality and that includes the workings of good and evil competing for world power, or our attention, all the live long day. Our reaction to such antics is what reveals who we are and how much we care about WHAT KIND OF WORLD WE WANT TO HAVE. And that kind of world is constantly in flux -- by hoodlums and globalists sometimes looking an awful lot alike.
What I DO KNOW -- regarding things like ISIS -- they will never ever never ever come to a consensus with the western world. Never, Did I say Never? yes. never. There is no consensus there.
Man-made climate change dwellers will never see eye to eye with the Mighty God Made All things of and around the Earth believers -- as climate change comes and goes for ever and a millennium. There is no consensus there.
And regarding the globalization equalization conundrum -- clearly, consensus has not been reached.
It's a moving target: how 'bout we aim for consensus, but keep an open mind. Almost anything can happen tomorrow, and this, too, shall change.
Make it a Good Day, G