LOL… if bait this be then baited I am. A well written piece, more than a bit astute, and shamelessly offered and argued from a podium flying the proper flag. Many good points well taken on a thesis I find quite plausible. A debateable piece that does not assume to mind numbing repetitive propaganda by innuendo. Nice, thanks. So, down the line on the various points to challenge… with the intent of perhaps providing a bit of a Rosetta stone to facilitate understanding across the cultural divide.
The second para opens with a classic… the idea that it is possible to have a winner without a loser. The two words are mutually defined as the inverse of each other, neither has meaning without the other, ergo, anyone who would incorporate such a claim in a political argument is instantly dismissed as an obvious and blatant liar hustling what CAN NOT be true. Say gain-gain and you have not contradicted reality, gain is a subjective comparison to the prior state of a thing. The only way win-win holds water is in the minds of those who grant more authority to the pontifications of Academia than is given to the evidence provided by reality.
I will full agree with “Fortresses” as a valid descriptor of attitude in a much, MUCH larger demographic than simply Mr. Trump. It accurately describes everything from the fossil influence of cold war propaganda all the way over to those defending lives deeply damaged by the cognitive dissonances of attempting to navigate reality using the multitude of contradictory symbol sets offered by the various kingdoms within Empire Academia.
The question not asked is this: Exactly what threat are those fortresses built to repel? I will assert those forts are built to defend the right to base personal and ethical decisions on the authority of causal reality rather than the proven unreliable assertions of Empire Academia’s campaign to replace Religion as the ultimate vendor of social certification of acceptably moral behavior! Fortresses are a thing of warfare, and the fight between Religion and Academia (for AUTHORITARIAN) dominance is most certainly a war, a covert war fought with weapons of cultural control!
War is, in one regard, a most binary thing: one side is the aggressor, the other on the defensive.. Religion is far the older, Academia the younger aggressively challenging the elder… the cultures built on the precepts of religion are clearly fighting defense. It only makes sense that they would be building Fortresses, forts are a thing of defense!
A HUGE part of the current hoopla around Donald Trump’s second term is nothing more than Empire Academia’s painfully public admission that they overestimated the success of their campaign and as a consequence must now build Fortresses of their own…. Fort Harvard first standing according to recent article on this site.
I won’t belabor the points above by pointing out the obvious comparisons between the fight between Religion and Academia and the sadly ongoing fight between Russia and Ukraine… other than to say we here in the west still base our attitudes about people who live in that part of the world on the USSR in WW2, and in those days Ukraine was (now obviously) providing the USSR with every bit as much tough as were the ethnic Russians! Wars fought for cultural reasons are always the grimmer fights… a point BOTH SIDES of the Religion vs Axademia fight need to fully and publicly acknowledge to the American people!
To any who have entertained this comment I offer my thanks, and I invite a reply.
![James Carville Slams Bill Maher As ‘Supremely Naive Man’ Over Trump Meeting | [not what he says but does marks the man]](https://extragoodshit.phlap.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/6801a889180000250086e496-scaled-394x330.jpeg "James Carville Slams Bill Maher As ‘Supremely Naive Man’ Over Trump Meeting | [not what he says but does marks the man]")
April 19, 2025 @ 2:11 pm
LOL… if bait this be then baited I am. A well written piece, more than a bit astute, and shamelessly offered and argued from a podium flying the proper flag. Many good points well taken on a thesis I find quite plausible. A debateable piece that does not assume to mind numbing repetitive propaganda by innuendo. Nice, thanks. So, down the line on the various points to challenge… with the intent of perhaps providing a bit of a Rosetta stone to facilitate understanding across the cultural divide.
The second para opens with a classic… the idea that it is possible to have a winner without a loser. The two words are mutually defined as the inverse of each other, neither has meaning without the other, ergo, anyone who would incorporate such a claim in a political argument is instantly dismissed as an obvious and blatant liar hustling what CAN NOT be true. Say gain-gain and you have not contradicted reality, gain is a subjective comparison to the prior state of a thing. The only way win-win holds water is in the minds of those who grant more authority to the pontifications of Academia than is given to the evidence provided by reality.
I will full agree with “Fortresses” as a valid descriptor of attitude in a much, MUCH larger demographic than simply Mr. Trump. It accurately describes everything from the fossil influence of cold war propaganda all the way over to those defending lives deeply damaged by the cognitive dissonances of attempting to navigate reality using the multitude of contradictory symbol sets offered by the various kingdoms within Empire Academia.
The question not asked is this: Exactly what threat are those fortresses built to repel? I will assert those forts are built to defend the right to base personal and ethical decisions on the authority of causal reality rather than the proven unreliable assertions of Empire Academia’s campaign to replace Religion as the ultimate vendor of social certification of acceptably moral behavior! Fortresses are a thing of warfare, and the fight between Religion and Academia (for AUTHORITARIAN) dominance is most certainly a war, a covert war fought with weapons of cultural control!
War is, in one regard, a most binary thing: one side is the aggressor, the other on the defensive.. Religion is far the older, Academia the younger aggressively challenging the elder… the cultures built on the precepts of religion are clearly fighting defense. It only makes sense that they would be building Fortresses, forts are a thing of defense!
A HUGE part of the current hoopla around Donald Trump’s second term is nothing more than Empire Academia’s painfully public admission that they overestimated the success of their campaign and as a consequence must now build Fortresses of their own…. Fort Harvard first standing according to recent article on this site.
I won’t belabor the points above by pointing out the obvious comparisons between the fight between Religion and Academia and the sadly ongoing fight between Russia and Ukraine… other than to say we here in the west still base our attitudes about people who live in that part of the world on the USSR in WW2, and in those days Ukraine was (now obviously) providing the USSR with every bit as much tough as were the ethnic Russians! Wars fought for cultural reasons are always the grimmer fights… a point BOTH SIDES of the Religion vs Axademia fight need to fully and publicly acknowledge to the American people!
To any who have entertained this comment I offer my thanks, and I invite a reply.