• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I was wrong - and that makes me angry.

What Menschenbild (picture of man) is correct?

  • People are more evil than stupid.

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • People are more stupid than evil.

    Votes: 25 96.2%

  • Total voters
    26

an anarchist

Your local loco.
Do I understand you right that you say, the non-voters saw Trump and Harris as equally bad?
Well I can’t speak for everyone, but the attitude and idea that “They both suck! What’s the difference?” I’ve seen often echoed in my offline life.
But even if that is true, there are still more voters who can live with Trumps antics than there are who can live with Harris.
And? Let’s establish the fact that both Trump and Harris have served in the White House and have both contributed to deadly American imperialism/meddling in foreign affairs. Those “antics” cost lives. Like, you bring up that he had an affair… honestly I don’t care and it seems most of America doesn’t either. We are so desensitized to the fact that we are murderous imperialists that an affair pales in comparison. Once we as a nation have become complacent to our tax dollars funding needless war/murder, I don’t see us as having a moral standing in calling out someone having an affair.
 
Last edited:

an anarchist

Your local loco.
I was wrong - and that makes me angry.

My question/wonder is: will you hold to this anger? Or will you process it and let it go as soon as possible (which is probably possible now).
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I was wrong - and that makes me angry.

My question/wonder is: will you hold to this anger? Or will you process it and let it go as soon as possible (which is probably possible now).
The jury's still out. I don't like to be wrong. It means I misjudged the facts, in this case the psychology of the US voters, which, by extension, may be caused by my fundamental Menschenbild. Do I have to give up my notion that most people are good, most of the time? Or are they simple more stupid, more fearful and more lazy than I have thought?
 

Saint Frankenstein

Here for the ride
Premium Member
The jury's still out. I don't like to be wrong. It means I misjudged the facts, in this case the psychology of the US voters, which, by extension, may be caused by my fundamental Menschenbild. Do I have to give up my notion that most people are good, most of the time? Or are they simple more stupid, more fearful and more lazy than I have thought?
So we didn't vote for the candidate you prefer as a non-American and you want to get angry and insult us? That's not a winning formula. Maybe you need to go for a walk or something.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
The jury's still out. I don't like to be wrong. It means I misjudged the facts, in this case the psychology of the US voters, which, by extension, may be caused by my fundamental Menschenbild. Do I have to give up my notion that most people are good, most of the time? Or are they simple more stupid, more fearful and more lazy than I have thought?
The problem of the Democratic Party is its pointless, sterile anti-Trumpism.

I mean...admit it: if another candidate, let's say, Ramaswamy or Cruz had become president, there wouldn't have been such a reaction from the dems.

On the contrary, I believe democrat voters are all in good faith. The problem is an elitist cabal of warmongers who imposes a diabolical agenda on the Democratic Party. The voters are not to blame...because they have no idea of how serious it is.
And there is not just one among the dems cupola. They are many.

On the contrary...it seems to me that with this thread, you wanna blame the voters? Wondering whether they are stupid or evil?
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
So we didn't vote for the candidate you prefer as a non-American and you want to get angry and insult us? That's not a winning formula. Maybe you need to go for a walk or something.
I have not really a preference. In fact, I think that you having voted for Trump will turn out beneficial to the world in the long run, as I'm confident that he will ruin the US - and make the world a safer place.
 

Saint Frankenstein

Here for the ride
Premium Member
I have not really a preference. In fact, I think that you having voted for Trump will turn out beneficial to the world in the long run, as I'm confident that he will ruin the US - and make the world a safer place.
I didn't vote for him this time; I voted third party. I am glad he won, though, as he is more of my candidate out of the two realistic possibilities.

Keep your sadistic fantasies to yourself.
 

Mock Turtle

2025 Trumposphere began
Premium Member
I wasn't wrong since I didn't make any predictions, given that the polling seemed to be so even (although apparently not reflecting reality), but I was surprised as to how it turned out - and disappointed of course. Politics shouldn't really be like this - not in democracies at least. Too much wealth and wealth buying media influences these days in my view. :eek:
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Hi, nice to see you.
Can you help me restore my trust in humanity by answering the questions I asked in post #21?
It would really help.
(Remember that the election is over, no need to lie now.)
I could give a rat's *** about Trump's personal life unlike others who are just obsessed and deranged over it. All I care about and most of the country cares about is his policy. That's your answer and if you like it I'm happy, if not then you can totally ignore my post.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
I could give a rat's *** about Trump's personal life unlike others who are just obsessed and deranged over it. All I care about and most of the country cares about is his policy. That's your answer and if you like it I'm happy, if not then you can totally ignore my post.
There are still answers outstanding, so I will not make a judgement, yet. But I feel better now.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Yep, not a bad move -- easy to approve of.

Except...Americans are complaining most about price. Move that manufacturing back to the US, and you have to pay US wages, which are much higher than the Chinese (or Pakistani, or Indonesian, or Bangladeshi) are being paid. Guess what?!? That gets added to the price of goods -- and thus prices go up. Exactly what Americans claim they DON'T want.
Canada will be perfect when you cease
producing anything.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
And during all that traffic today, I missed posting a 20,000th post OP, so belatedly ...

I was too optimistic. While I was prepared for a Trump win - the polls were close enough - I didn't expect such a decisive win.
But what's more is that it rattles at my Menschenbild. I know that people are lazy, fearful and dumb, but I believe that most people are good, most of the time.
Are they? While most on the left excuse the voters with being misled by the media and simply too dumb to know what they were doing, I question that position. And members on the right agree with me, they deliberately voted for Trump, insisting they knew what they were doing. Were they?

I'm torn between my positive Menschenbild and the fact that those with a negative Menschenbild had the better hypothesis, i.e. predicted the outcome of the election better.

What do you think?

What Menschenbild (picture of man) is correct?​

  • People are more evil than stupid.
  • People are more stupid than evil.
My POV:
"People are an incarnation of divinity"
"Divinity is that what Creates"
(it's beyond words)

Words have power, so I avoid saying:
"People are ... evil or stupid"
"I am ... (more or less) evil or stupid"
"You are ... (more or less) evil or stupid"

Or phrased differently:
"I play the ball not the man"

I would phrase it like:
* People act more evil than stupid
* People act more stupid than evil

My choice:
IF people act "evil" or "stupid"
THEN usually they lack understanding or Love
 

esmith

Veteran Member
May I test your knowledge?

Do you know that
- Trump had an affair with a porn actress while his wife was pregnant
- he paid her to keep quiet during his campaign in 2016
- he tried to hide the payment, illegally
- he is a habitual liar, far beyond that what is usual in politicians
- he stole secret documents and the FBI had to get them back
- he tried to interfere, most probably illegally, in the 2020 election
- his campaign promises, if enacted, will lead to increased deficit and higher prices, according to most leading economists
- he made misogynistic, xenophobic and racist remarks?

I assume you know all that, even you wouldn't put it in the same words - and you are OK with such a man becoming PotUS.
I may not totally agree with some of his actions, but I don't see anything that directly affects me, except for you opinion/assumption that his actions will cause higer prices that has not been proven.
But I will not have to put up with someone who I think would be a detriment to the country.
And honestly can not stand to listen to this person, I mute the TV anytime she is speaking and enable closed captions.
 

Mock Turtle

2025 Trumposphere began
Premium Member
I may not totally agree with some of his actions, but I don't see anything that directly affects me, except for you opinion/assumption that his actions will cause higer prices that has not been proven.
But I will not have to put up with someone who I think would be a detriment to the country.
And honestly can not stand to listen to this person, I mute the TV anytime she is speaking and enable closed captions.
Yeah, and some of us get the same urge when Trump or Putin are spewing forth. :grimacing:
 
The problem of the Democratic Party is its pointless, sterile anti-Trumpism.

I mean...admit it: if another candidate, let's say, Ramaswamy or Cruz had become president, there wouldn't have been such a reaction from the dems.

On the contrary, I believe democrat voters are all in good faith. The problem is an elitist cabal of warmongers who imposes a diabolical agenda on the Democratic Party. The voters are not to blame...because they have no idea of how serious it is.
And there is not just one among the dems cupola. They are many.

On the contrary...it seems to me that with this thread, you wanna blame the voters? Wondering whether they are stupid or evil?
There is a lot to unpack with this election, but I think the take-home lesson is that it didn't matter who was going to win in the end; both candidates have something to offer to the Establishment.

Harris has the liberal social views of wealthy New York/West Coast elites; and now that Ukraine is more or less a lost cause, Trump did a 180 from being non-interventionist and will throw his weight behind Israel 110%. Of course, Harris would have done the same, but it's very conceivable that Americans would have gotten tired of that had the Democrats still been in power. By convincing the American public that support for Israel is somehow a partisan issue - they can breathe new life for support to Israel.

For all the differences they claim to have on culture wars, identity politics, and so on the parties have common interests—especially business power, military interests, and foreign policy. They're outfits cut from the same cloth; not necessarily a clash of ideologies but rather a mutual competition in the same political space.

Let's say for a moment that the Democrats’ strategy this year seemed to hinge on one thing: They weren’t Republicans. But this would only apply to those more concerned with domestic issues than foreign policy. Democrats have portrayed themselves as anti-Trump, but that opposition has not translated into meaningful reform. The party level facilitates identity politics of blacks, gays, and so on while for Republicans it's the "dwindling white majority".

Superficially, Trump’s rise was, from the layman's view, a political response to the failure of neoliberalism. Despite its many flaws, the anti-establishment campaign appealed to voters alienated from both parties. On the other hand, one must be blind not to see the deeply consistent with the consensus of the major parties that have governed America for decades.

The biggest shift since the election came after Nov. 7. The deep-seated animosity that has fueled political discourse for years has been dissolved, leaving many of Trump’s critics “willing to move on”. Maybe not within the Party Core of Democrats, but many of the corporate funders who felt the party did not support Israel enough during the Gaza crisis. Some believe a Republican government under Trump would align with their interests, especially on military and foreign policy issues.

A good example of this shift is Jacob Hellberg, a former Democrat who endorsed Pete Buttigieg and participated in a smear campaign on TikTok. Helberg, who has close ties to military intelligence companies like Planter Technologies, is frustrated with the direction of the Democratic Party. This contrasts with a broader group of positional individuals, regardless of party affiliation, who seek to maintain the status quo where military might, corporate profits, and global influence are at the forefront.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
There is a lot to unpack with this election, but I think the take-home lesson is that it didn't matter who was going to win in the end; both candidates have something to offer to the Establishment.

Harris has the liberal social views of wealthy New York/West Coast elites; and now that Ukraine is more or less a lost cause, Trump did a 180 from being non-interventionist and will throw his weight behind Israel 110%. Of course, Harris would have done the same, but it's very conceivable that Americans would have gotten tired of that had the Democrats still been in power. By convincing the American public that support for Israel is somehow a partisan issue - they can breathe new life for support to Israel.

For all the differences they claim to have on culture wars, identity politics, and so on the parties have common interests—especially business power, military interests, and foreign policy. They're outfits cut from the same cloth; not necessarily a clash of ideologies but rather a mutual competition in the same political space.

Let's say for a moment that the Democrats’ strategy this year seemed to hinge on one thing: They weren’t Republicans. But this would only apply to those more concerned with domestic issues than foreign policy. Democrats have portrayed themselves as anti-Trump, but that opposition has not translated into meaningful reform. The party level facilitates identity politics of blacks, gays, and so on while for Republicans it's the "dwindling white majority".

Superficially, Trump’s rise was, from the layman's view, a political response to the failure of neoliberalism. Despite its many flaws, the anti-establishment campaign appealed to voters alienated from both parties. On the other hand, one must be blind not to see the deeply consistent with the consensus of the major parties that have governed America for decades.

The biggest shift since the election came after Nov. 7. The deep-seated animosity that has fueled political discourse for years has been dissolved, leaving many of Trump’s critics “willing to move on”. Maybe not within the Party Core of Democrats, but many of the corporate funders who felt the party did not support Israel enough during the Gaza crisis. Some believe a Republican government under Trump would align with their interests, especially on military and foreign policy issues.

A good example of this shift is Jacob Hellberg, a former Democrat who endorsed Pete Buttigieg and participated in a smear campaign on TikTok. Helberg, who has close ties to military intelligence companies like Planter Technologies, is frustrated with the direction of the Democratic Party. This contrasts with a broader group of positional individuals, regardless of party affiliation, who seek to maintain the status quo where military might, corporate profits, and global influence are at the forefront.
I read the whole post with interest.

Honestly I believe that the world is becoming more and more multipolar. Meaning that the so called West is not a significant majority any more, considering the big numbers of population in China and in India.

In this multipolar world, peace is fundamental because wars damage the West enormously, both economically and socially.
And as a matter of fact, it's those wars which indirectly caused inflation in the U.S.

The Democratic Party is funded by speculators and warmongers...who couldn't care less about making some people's dream come true, like free healthcare. No...they have stakes in the Military Industry so all that they want is wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars, wars and wars.

So warfare is sold, and they gain billions. ;)
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Well I can’t speak for everyone, but the attitude and idea that “They both suck! What’s the difference?” I’ve seen often echoed in my offline life.

And? Let’s establish the fact that both Trump and Harris have served in the White House and have both contributed to deadly American imperialism/meddling in foreign affairs. Those “antics” cost lives. Like, you bring up that he had an affair… honestly I don’t care and it seems most of America doesn’t either. We are so desensitized to the fact that we are murderous imperialists that an affair pales in comparison. Once we as a nation have become complacent to our tax dollars funding needless war/murder, I don’t see us as having a moral standing in calling out someone having an affair.
One big difference about their serving in the White House
is that Harris wielded almost no power. The vice presidency
is essentially a servant / "lady in waiting" role, except for being
the tie breaker in the Senate (where she voted more than any
other in history). Anything she does is at the behest of the
President.
So we don't really know how she'd rule. But I'd expect
her to be a more left leaning version of Genocide Joe..
 
Top