...life can be translucent

Menu

What should be my attitude concerning the election of Trump? 56.6 - 62

rosada

visitor
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
9,890
Reaction score
3,169
I was reading some posts on Facebook from people supportive of Trump and I just wanted to puke and post nasty comments but thankfully stopped myself from wasting anymore time in that nonsense. Then I got to feeling annoyed by those urging that everyone should just calm down and give the nice man a chance - didn't we already try that with Hitler? Again, was able to control myself from posting but being conscious of how caught up I'd become in this Trump thing I consulted IC asking what my attitude should be. Should I be a vocal protester or ignore it all or what?

I received 56.6 which I think more describes my opinion of Trump without necessarily saying what I should do about it. So is IC affirming my opinion as the correct one? Or is it simply saying that given who I am it's appropriate that I should have this opinion, not so much because this is the way it really is, but that everyone's entitled to an opinion and it's okay and right that this is mine? Like this is some epic drama and we all have our roles and my role is to see how Trump as an uninvited guest ruining the party - and perhaps others may be cast in the role of seeing Trump as a good guy and that's okay too?

What would 62 as the resulting hexagram indicate? That I'm addicted to this and going to be spending the next four years paying Attention to every Detail? Arrrugh.
 
Last edited:

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Should I be a vocal protester or ignore it all or what?

Thank you for this important post Rosada. It's a great question and to my mind the real purpose of consulting Yi on politics. Asking what our own role is, what we can do, not just asking for predictions. I've been asking myself the same thing. What can I do ? I'd be ready to do something because this man in the position of power that he is in is like some crazy nightmare and I don't think anyone can afford to be complacent that it will all be okay. I'm in the UK so what can I do ? I was in a very busy supermarket today watching thousands of people all around me and I thought together all these people are powerful, collectively people are powerful. Yet half of America voted Trump in :confused: I don't know how any one can vote for a man who says the things he has said. I hear people talk about financial reasons as if the racism and the misogyny didn't matter. But it's paramount, can't be pushed aside. Anyway like you I realise there's no point just arguing on the internet so what do we do ?

You asked whether to protest or ignore and had 56.6>16. Well someone I was talking to today said Trump is just a showman making all those promises just to get elected he's not going to really do any of them. That reminds me of the 16 here. I also tend to think the 56.6 describes what will happen to him just because it sounds like what could happen to him. This may answer your question in a roundabout way because if he topples soon you won't need to protest about him. He doesn't belong in the position he is in. He is unable to conduct political business. Pure 56.6. I don't think he can last. I don't know how it would come about that he won't take power for long but that is what I hope and that's how I could see your answer.

The problem is with that view is can we all afford to sit back and hope that happens ? But what can be done ? I can't think of anything. I said today I've never marched for anything but I'd march against him taking office and the person I was talking to laughed, naturally, and said 'so what, what would that achieve ?' :rolleyes:. Here in the UK his election is viewed with great dismay on the media and on the street. It's a disaster you have this man as a president.

Like this is some epic drama and we all have our roles and my role is to see how Trump as an uninvited guest ruining the party - and perhaps others may be cast in the role of seeing Trump as a good guy and that's okay too?

But he's not a good guy he's a danger to the whole world.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
There are protests in the US aren't there ? I'm afraid I'm not great on keeping up with current affairs but like many people I just cannot bear to even look at anything with Trump in I have to switch the TV over. But what is happening there, what are people doing now to protest ? Would you join them in whatever way you can ?
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
Then I got to feeling annoyed by those urging that everyone should just calm down and give the nice man a chance - didn't we already try that with Hitler?

Yes and comparison with Hitler is not far fetched IMO except as some say Trump just spouted what he thought people wanted to hear (16) he doesn't really have a very strong overarching vision to sustain him.
 
D

diamanda

Guest
Yet half of America voted Trump in. I don't know how any one can vote for a man who says the things he has said.

I believe that people didn't exactly vote for a man who made racist and misogynistic comments.
Instead they voted against someone who has already done horrible things, and against a party harmful to the country.

I read that under Obama US poverty has increased, housing and health care costs have soared.
Under Obama, the US has sold more weapons than ever before, and is constantly involved in wars.
Clinton supported the ridiculous Iraq war, was one of the protagonists of the Libya US massacre, supports the Syria war (while making lucrative deals with the misogynistic and brutal saudis via Clinton foundation on the side), and she'd also be ready to start a war with Russia. Not to mention the more minor detail that her entourage are content to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry...

It's not much wonder really that the people preferred something else to all that. At least Trump is not pro-war (or so he says...).

Regardless of all that...

What should be my attitude concerning the election of Trump? 56.6 > 62

I got this line once for a tricky situation. I was told that my (often renewed) work contract would be terminated, which was something quite unfair which I hadn't expected. I had the option to end it sooner rather than a bit later - this would mean that I took my revenge on them, as leaving sooner would plunge them into a mini chaos. However, if I did do that, it would mean quite a substantial financial loss to me, plus my friends in there would most possibly end up being my enemies. I asked, "result if I do leave sooner?" and I got 56.6 > 62. I took that to mean that in doing so, I would be harming my own self. So I didn't in the end, I just stayed a bit longer, sorted them out, got paid that bit extra, and left on good terms with everyone.

In your question, and although I do believe in people having the right to protest whenever they strongly disagree with something, it sounds to me like it wouldn't be to your own advantage to protest. I don't know how exactly you'd be burning your nest and losing your cow if you did protest... but for me 56.6 advises to not go on the offensive, and 62 advises to just lay low.

I repeat, this wouldn't be my personal advise - my personal advise would be go ahead and protest since that's how you feel. But I really don't think that 56.6 > 62 is supporting that view.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,849
Reaction score
2,388
[Edited - I see Diamanda already said a lot of this - I agree with her about the reading...I dilly-dally while writing posts which I think is a lot of my cross-posting problem... :bag:]

Rosada, is your reading 56.6 > 62? Relating hexagram 62, not 16? I used the report button to ask someone to edit the title, for possibly the sake of hexagram search but also just not to confuse readers. I should have checked with you first to make sure it really is 56.6 > 62 but it seemed clear from the rest of what you wrote.

A straightforward way to interpret your reading as an direct answer might be Yi's forewarning you that engagement with Trump supporters will do more harm to you than it will help anything. You'd be the "traveller," the stranger - the anti-Trump person wading into a crowd of Trump supporters, from what you wrote. You'd "burn your nest" - you might lose friends and strain relationships, or, internally, give yourself stress and high blood pressure.

Plus, I don't think 56.6 says "the harm to yourself is worth it because the cause is important and you can make a difference." I think it just means it will harm you, period. King Hai, the protagonist in this hexagram, was executed.

And 62, "Small Overstepping," usually means "lie low" - be very careful and cautious when crossing lines. Cross them only in small ways. Perhaps share your opinions, but in understated ways. Perhaps pretend to be more neutral than you really are, and express your views more subtly than not?

[Added] Hm, 62 and the idea of neutrality...62's about the "small overstepping" of a line. Someone standing on a boundary line is in neutral territory, so 62 might be advice not to stray terribly far from a neutral zone?

Maybe...trying to think...disguise your points of view as questions, rather than statements? "What do you think about <some Trump position you don't like> - do you think it might have x and y consequence?" might get better results than "This Trump position is utterly mad and will destroy the country."

The Wikileaks thing - I read what you linked to, Diamanda, and my interpretation of it is that the sender's point (someone named Bill Ivey wrote that to Podesta) is an "unaware and compliant citizenry" is a widespread problem that needs attention, not a goal of the Clinton campaign. When he says "we've all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry" I think "we" meant the entire nation, including the citizens themselves. "We" avoid seriousness in favor of fluff. He also said, "Secretary Clinton is not an entertainer, and not a celebrity in the Trump, Kardashian mold; what can she do to offset this?"
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
I wondered where I got 16 from...must have been the title now changed. Yup 56.6 goes to 62, stay small or 56.6 happens ?
 
D

diamanda

Guest
The Wikileaks thing - I read what you linked to, and my interpretation of it is that the sender's point (someone named Bill Ivey wrote that to Podesta) is an "unaware and compliant citizenry" is a widespread problem that needs attention, not a goal of the Clinton campaign. When he says "we've all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry" I think "we" meant the entire nation, including the citizens themselves. "We" avoid seriousness in favor of fluff. He also said, "Secretary Clinton is not an entertainer, and not a celebrity in the Trump, Kardashian mold; what can she do to offset this?"

If this was the case, then the following sentence:
The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly. This problem (...)
should have been written as:
The compliance is obviously fading rapidly but unawareness remains strong. This problem (...)
or at least:
The unawareness remains strong but at least compliance is thankfully fading rapidly. This problem (...)

If he had written "but unawareness remains strong", then this would show that it's unawareness that they want to get rid off.
Just a detail - because all of what he has written is quite obvious and self explanatory.
Twisting it and spinning it here and there doesn't quite do the trick.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,849
Reaction score
2,388
Well...I think you're saying I'm spin-doctoring the email?

I don't know - I think I'd interpret "The unawareness remains strong but compliance is obviously fading rapidly" as saying we have a citizenry that's "unaware" (seeing things too much through a lens of fluff or whatever) but who - at the same time - is less and less compliant with what their leaders tell them. The latter isn't bad, per se, but it can be a problem when uncompliant people don't know what they're talking about.

I don't know a lot about it, but could that be how Brexit happened? People stopped "complying" with the notion that the E.U. was good for them - for reasons - but they also didn't understand the issues & possible consequences well enough?

A more mundane example - people who don't trust doctors and medications, possibly not entirely without reason, but if they don't have a good grasp on the facts ("unaware") they might stop taking medications they really need ("uncompliant") and do harm to themselves.

(And it can be very complicated - the vaccine controversy, for example. I also don't know much about that, but let's say the anti-vaccine side has a point. Okay, but no one wants polio back (etc.). So how do we navigate that?)
 
D

diamanda

Guest
I see what you mean Lisa about the danger of someone unaware and yet uncompliant at the same time.
But this is not what he writes, and he actually uses the word conspire:

And as I've mentioned, we've all been quite content to demean government, drop civics and in general conspire to produce an unaware and compliant citizenry.

He is not having a general chat about the general state of the US citizens - he is very specifically referring to the Clinton team and his whole email is about her election campaign, so the "we" he uses is not a philosophical "we the people of America", because he is not speaking generally and philosophically, but very very specifically.

As about the danger of people who are unaware and uncompliant;
everyone I personally know who voted for Brexit are very deeply aware of why they have done so.
Staying in an undemocratic EU felt so horrible to them that any possible bad consequences were worth the risk.
(I didn't have the right to vote in that referendum).
No comments on medications/vaccines, as I don't know much about that!
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,849
Reaction score
2,388
I wondered where I got 16 from...must have been the title now changed. Yup 56.6 goes to 62, stay small or 56.6 happens ?

Yes, I think there was a typo in the title, saying 16 instead of 62.

But I think you made a good point anyway, that there's probably a lot of just bluster to Trump. Right after the election I kept seeing headlines about how this-and-that position was now gone from his website, and how he was pulling back from some of the outlandish stuff in various ways. One example - in the campaign it was "we're going to round up 11 million people and deport them." :eek: Several days later on national television it was down to 3 million, and those would be known drug dealers and the like.

I mean, if someone who's (a) not a U.S. citizen and (b)actually a drug dealer, I don't have a huge problem with them not living here anymore...a question/problem would be how carefully it's done, so you're not hurting innocent people.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,849
Reaction score
2,388
he actually uses the word conspire:

Well, I thought he was using "conspire" in an ironic* way, given everything he'd said in the sentences preceding that part.

But I won't pretend I can interpret tone of voice and verbal shorthand between John Podesta and someone at a level to email John Podesta... so maybe we just see this in different ways and who really knows?


* or some such...am not good with literary terms...
 
Last edited:

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
But I think you made a good point anyway, that there's probably a lot of just bluster to Trump.

Well someone made that point to me today BUT I don't think it's something to be sure of. The way Trump talks reminds me of Hitler and people didn't fully grasp what was happening when that all started up.

But going back to Rosada's question



Should I be a vocal protester or ignore it all or what?

I received 56.6 which I think more describes my opinion of Trump without necessarily saying what I should do about it. So is IC affirming my opinion as the correct one? Or is it simply saying that given who I am it's appropriate that I should have this opinion, not so much because this is the way it really is, but that everyone's entitled to an opinion and it's okay and right that this is mine? Like this is some epic drama and we all have our roles and my role is to see how Trump as an uninvited guest ruining the party - and perhaps others may be cast in the role of seeing Trump as a good guy and that's okay too?

What would 62 as the resulting hexagram indicate? That I'm addicted to this and going to be spending the next four years paying Attention to every Detail? Arrrugh.

I think if this is a direct answer to you then it appears you can't afford to be more vocal. Perhaps this would be too much of a strain on your health or your emotions ? I know you are an older person and maybe you did enough fighting in your life already ?

Not sure how you meant 'be a vocal protester' though. Did you mean arguing on social media and so on or did you mean something more organised and actual, not over the internet ? The reason I ask is that other questions about the different kinds of protest you might make may cast further light on what to do. This question is quite general and could apply to Trump because it sounds like him but also if about you it's hardly saying 'go for it Rosada' because for some reason you can't afford to do it, too much for you, would burn you out by the look of it.

But apart from arguing with people kind of protesting what else can be done ? I don't know. You could join a protest group and support them in practical ways whilst not being in the front line so to speak ?
 

rosada

visitor
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Messages
9,890
Reaction score
3,169
So ironic isn't it how one can project on to others what they are themselves? Like how each time Trump called Clinton a liar the next day the press would point out his latest falsehood. Or a picture that was circling the internet the other day of a woman waving a Confederate flag and carrying a sign saying, "You lost, get over it!" (Uh Lady, the South lost the war, remember?)

Anyway, I can see the I Ching's answer both ways. It can be saying, "Your attitude towards Trump should be to think of him as "a wanderer. If he lets himself go, laughing and jesting, and forgets that he is a wanderer, he will later have cause to weep and lament. for if through carelessness a man loses his modesty and adaptability evil will result"

But maybe I am the one projecting. Now I can also see the IC as saying, "Remember YOU are a wanderer. If you let yourself go, laughing and jesting [at other people's political beliefs] YOU will have cause to weep and lament."

(Hmm...just realized there is that bit about the bird burning up his nest. Trump is scheduled to open about 50 new hotels over the course of the next couple of years. I wonder how his being President will effect that business? Protesters destroying rooms?)

I guess both interpretations have merit. Certainly I think that it's good advice for me to not go blasting my political insights over the airwaves uninvited. Booorrring. It occurs to me that the Attention to Detail part - and yes, I got 62. Thank for catching that, Lise, although interesting how Trogina got so much insight from my 'typo'.. - could be referring as to how one could protest the Trump presidency without making enemies. As you suggest, asking for details would be non-confrontational. Also I've noticed how the press when printing his outrageous acts will then print the simple facts/details. Like yesterday "Trump tweeted he'd saved thousands of jobs from being shipped off to Japan by the Ford Motor Company. [detail:]When asked for a comment the Ford Motor representative said they had no record of any such conversation." (or something like that) So knowing and keeping the facts straight could be my form of protest if I ever do get into a conversation with a Trump supporter.

Also I've taken to wearing a large safety pin on my shirt when I go out. It's part of a movement to say, "You are safe with me. If you are black, Hispanic, white, gay, Christian, Muslim, Jew. female, male, young, old whatever and feeling in anyway bullied I will stand by you." I live in Northern California so it's not a very daring act (not a lot of Tumpettes around here, everyone I know was heart broken when Bernie dropped out) but ya gotta do something...
 
D

diamanda

Guest
Also I've taken to wearing a large safety pin on my shirt when I go out. It's part of a movement to say, "You are safe with me. If you are black, Hispanic, white, gay, Christian, Muslim, Jew. female, male, young, old whatever and feeling in anyway bullied I will stand by you." I live in Northern California so it's not a very daring act (not a lot of Tumpettes around here, everyone I know was heart broken when Bernie dropped out) but ya gotta do something...

That's a beautiful symbolism and gesture Rosada! Looking after each other is crucial in any society.
 

radiofreewill

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Jul 20, 2015
Messages
563
Reaction score
186
I really like Hilary's take on 56.6:

Line 6 'The bird burns its nest
Traveling people first laugh, afterwards cry out and weep.
Lose cattle in Yi.
Pitfall.'

King Hai put on feathers and danced ~ and burned his nest.
You are accepted, even welcomed, but your relationships here are far more fragile than you realize. You can easily become over-confident, go too far, and destroy them ~ and then you lose everything.
Hai danced his own dance at Yi. This is authentic self-expression, heedless of your environment, not connecting with other people or considering their expectations. When you do things your own way and on your own terms, and assume (or demand) that others will adapt, this is satisfying at first, and utterly disastrous in the end.

---

The traveling people are us ~ and President-elect Trump is King Hai ~ whom, Yi tells us, burned his nest by playing with the fire of immorality ~ and lost everything.

While we might be tempted to laugh at this Icarus of Power taking flight, we really need our leaders to be successful for our own sakes.

62 is a symbol for a partial solar eclipse ~ only small successes can be had during this period of darkness.

In the meantime, I say:

Accept what is given,
Do the right thing,
Make nothing of it.

[wash, rinse, repeat]

Our challenge is to stay principled, and rally to the Constitution...instead of devolving into the barbarian hordes...as we fly into the future...knowing that we can never go back to the same old home again.
 
Last edited:

Granma

visitor
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
OP Rosada wrote:
"Also I've noticed how the press when printing his outrageous acts will then print the simple facts/details. Like yesterday "Trump tweeted he'd saved thousands of jobs from being shipped off to Japan by the Ford Motor Company. [detail:]When asked for a comment the Ford Motor representative said they had no record of any such conversation." (or something like that) So knowing and keeping the facts straight could be my form of protest if I ever do get into a conversation with a Trump supporter."

Well,the fact is Trump did not tweet about the number of jobs saved. He said he spoke to his friend CEO of Ford motor and that Ford would not be sending manufacturing from their Kentucky plant to Mexico. (Japan was not ever mentioned by anyone.) Trump caused a minor confusion in his tweet about what model cars would not be getting manufactured in Mexico but stay in Kentucky. Trump does not write all his tweets so who knows who made the error. However it wasn't an error affecting the essence of the story.
And Ford has also confirmed that "they" spoke to Trump on Thursday
Trumps tweet:
"I worked hard with Bill Ford to keep the Lincoln plant in Kentucky. I owed it to the great State of Kentucky for their confidence in me!"
"Ford confirmed that Ford Executive Chairman Bill Ford spoke with Trump on Thursday and informed the president-elect of the Lincoln decision. But also Ford pushed back on Trump's tweet with a tweet of its own Friday afternoon."
"Louisville plant wasn’t moving; MKC was. Pres-elect’s econ policy will help boost US competitiveness, keep MKC here"
From the Detroit Free Press

So I would not label Trumps statement outrageous in the negative sense. I would say it was essentially accurate statement.
 

Trojina

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
26,921
Reaction score
4,426
What would 62 as the resulting hexagram indicate? That I'm addicted to this and going to be spending the next four years paying Attention to every Detail? Arrrugh.

Another thought based on the 62 and your best actions re this matter. Remember the bird in 62 has a message to carry. He's carrying the message of his own inner truth in 61 out into the big world where it can get lost, stomped on and gunned down. So that is why he stays close to the ground where his message can be heard and carried and delivered safely . I agree this does mean for you paying attention to details as an effective way of getting points across but perhaps you shouldn't feel this means not carrying your message across as much as you'd like. You are still carrying your message only with great care and forethought. You can't waste energy and lose the message as in 56.6 but that doesn't mean you cannot make progress. Can't recall which translation uses the words 'the small bird flies low so his song can be heard'....I seem to have got that line in my head but not be able to find it...You fly low so your message, your own truth can be delivered exactly where it matters. Maybe that is all most of us can do. Deliver our message where possible, where it may most matter ?
 
M

mirian

Guest
What should be my attitude concerning the election of Trump? I received 56.6
What would 62 as the resulting hexagram indicate?

I had a striking experience with this reading years ago related to something very important to me then. So my interpretation here is based on my personal experience more than anything else. I am not an American voter or a Trump supporter either.

56.6 > 62 You don't really understand what is happening around you on this particular subject. You think that you can rely on your knowledge, judgement, ideas and attitude, but that only serves to make your assessment of the situation even more distant from the reality. The way you are looking at this is really superficial and you are missing crucial aspects of the whole scenario. Unless you come down to earth and addopt a more humble attitude to learn and understand you will be truly and utterly disappointed.

As I said, based on personal experience. Might be useful for somebody.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,849
Reaction score
2,388
Anyway, I can see the I Ching's answer both ways.

So can I, now that you've explained it...

You yourself as the 56.6 person is more direct, but something like this could probably also work -

Q: "What should be my attitude...?" A: "Think about the other person in these terms, and form your attitude from there."

There must be a way to resolve this...ummm...if 56.6 is describing Trump, what do you think 62 might mean? But I suppose 56.6 could describe Trump and 62 still apply to you as the questioner...

I'd probably still pick "56.6 is you" just because it's simpler? Which of course doesn't mean it's correct.
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
19,149
Reaction score
3,418
Also I've taken to wearing a large safety pin on my shirt when I go out. It's part of a movement to say, "You are safe with me. If you are black, Hispanic, white, gay, Christian, Muslim, Jew. female, male, young, old whatever and feeling in anyway bullied I will stand by you." I live in Northern California so it's not a very daring act (not a lot of Tumpettes around here, everyone I know was heart broken when Bernie dropped out) but ya gotta do something...

Half a thought about this and 56.6. I came across one article on safety-pin-wearing saying, in a nutshell, 'Actually standing with us means facing physical violence. Are you sure you're ready for that? You might want to get some martial arts training, if only so you won't be easily physically intimidated.' And I notice that in a couple of stories I've read lately, the successful 'standing with' was done by big, brawny men whose sheer physical presence would give any attacker pause, and I wondered how the story would have ended with a small woman in their place.

OK, so wearing the pin is not dangerous in your own circles, but if you travel to the 'foreign country' of Trump voters (I imagine it must feel something like that) you shouldn't underestimate how foreign it is. Stay safe.

On a more prosaic, less dramatic level (though I'm no long sure what counts as over-dramatic), I agree it's about protesting without making enemies. To make a difference you would need to have conversations - actually that's something I can see you being able to do. More, 'So, tell me your hopes and dreams for a Trump presidency,' and less, 'So, tell me why you thought a racist misogynistic serial liar was a good choice for President.' Also, maybe you do have close friends or family who voted Trump, even if you don't know it, and you need to take care not to burn those relationships. In a way you're already in the foreign country.
 
B

butterfly spider

Guest
My son sent me a post on Jonathan Pie on facebook. It is quite rude (entitled F....) but it is actually very good indeed. It is about the election of Trump.

The main thrust is that we are all scared to say what we really feel. Rather than criticize someone with views that oppose your own, we should aim to bring them over to our opinions, by persuasion. In the end we are the ones who elected Trump because we are all too busy walking on egg shells, trying to pussy foot around people. I think it happened with Brexit actually. There was too little engagement, too little real conversation - either because no one thought it would actually happen, or because of ignorance. Working at a school in a large city just before the vote, there was a real thought that millions of foreigners would be shipped out on boats the day after the election. Had there been more people campaigning with facts, with opinions, maybe, just maybe, the real situation would have been known for what it was.....I am not eloquent with words, but others are.

Talking of Hitler. I have many books from the 1920s, political ones from Europe and the States. Original covers - which have a very religious almost biblical emphasis. Without fail, the publications, leaflets and journals seem to encourage appeasement, and even where there are obvious signs of Hitler's rise to power, there is a sense that such things would never happen again....how could it?

Another thing that sprang to mind yesterday about all this. In a very remote village, miles from anywhere, some lovely German ladies purchased a retreat home. This was next to my house. When the children were younger one of the ladies, a nurse and also a nun, used to tell stories them stories. They were really rather beautiful, and had been told to her by her Grandmother (she was 93 years old in 2002)
She had been a young girl in Dresden and used to talk of how beautiful the City was - toy shops that made beautiful carving moving dolls and clocks. One day, she came and had cake and tea with me and spoke about Dresden and her childhood. She said that her Father had been a soldier in the German Army but had been killed by the Nazis as his opinions were not liked by them. Her Mother had disappeared and her siblings had been subject to intimidation, which was why she was told to join a sister order as a nurse. She was in Dresden as a nurse in a hospital the night the allies bombed - with all its ghastliness. She said that when the bombs were dropping, killing many in the hospital, including the babies in the maternity wing, her one thought was that this would be the end. The world would stop all of this. The German people were paying the price for Hitler's deception and now it would end. She said that her one wish at the end of the war was that people would drop barriers and talk to each other. She said our hopes and dreams are all the same, wherever we were born. You see I told this to my Uncle, and some family, who said that this lovely lady should talk to my Great Gran (now deceased) who lost all her family when a doodlebug hit their house.......she hadnt done anything to hurt anybody.

I have thought about this often, and am still trying to come to terms with all of this. This poor lady's father had been executed because he spoke out against Hitler, and she herself had had to hide away in her life as a nun. She had then been subjected to immense horrors of bombing by allies. And yet, my family who lived in the East End - some were rear gunners on planes who died, others were air raid wardens in the docks, my Uncle was a funeral director who used to squeeze people into small coffins to save them money and my mother who was trapped in a tube when it caught fire and a father who used to have to sleep in cellars infested with rats. They suffered. All of them because we didnt speak out when perhaps we could have done.

I think wearing a safety pin, even in a safe area, is a mark of something. If we sit and do nothing, we only have ourselves to blame if things go pear shaped, if the Trumps of this world come to power.

there, the evening sermon has ended..

This is all long ago and far away, but the wearing of the pin, somehow made me think of this lovely lady called Elizabeth, who would not have hurt a fly.......
 
B

butterfly spider

Guest
My son also played the Walton Viola Concerto tonight, which really goes back to the 1930, propoganda, control thoughts.......
 

Granma

visitor
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Well from your comments I'd hazard a guess that you equate Trump with something "unsafe" for everyone.
Your reading is the stranger 56
The strange land is for you a Trump presidency.
I think the advice is not to join protest movements - "he must be cautious and reserved"
For the line 6 though says (Alfred Huang)
All the yang lines in this hexagram are not "auspicious because they tend to be willful and opinionated and difficult for others to deal with."
This line " indicates a person possessing a stubborn and proud character. When traveling this person is not at all welcome...he might be successful for a while...but he loses an important assistant (and) creates his own misfortune".
This reading does not sound like the I Ching is supporting your view about aTrump presidency- that everyone needs protection from him.
It seems to be cautioning you about your viewpoint, instead.
Trump is not perfect-but he has said he is not a globalist, he does not want to start wars of aggression.
I think diamanda made a very gentle and strong argument trying to explain why she (and I agree with her) found Clinton and Obama policies so frightening and dangerous for the US and the world.
Clinton is a female, Obama is black, Trump is a white man.
But Trump hasn't committed the crimes against humanity that that female and that black man has. I think there is a problem with people who think just because Clinton and Obama are more verbally pc and are not white men that they are better people. I think this is a dangerous point of view.

We don't know what we are going to get with Trump, but the only other choice was Hillary Clinton and she is a bigger war monger than Barack Obama and he didn't do too bad in the CIA sponsored war and mayhem department.
I'm wondering if you should perhaps ask another question. I'm not sure what but I wonder why you didn't get something line 5.5 if Trump is so dangerous or another line that supported your viewpoint. Maybe ask about the source of your information-is it reliable? Should you seek different sources?
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
19,149
Reaction score
3,418
Butterfly - bravo to your son! We were accompanying that just a week-and-a-bit ago, with the superb Tim Ridout playing a really magnificent viola. Great piece.

Granma - I think there are a bunch of different things here. What we can safely say is true is that a) America's far right is emboldened and encouraged by Trump's win - their man won - and b) their targets are afraid. As I understand it, that's what Rosada is trying to respond to. She's not talking about politics, but about society.

It may be the case that both groups are completely mistaken about what Trump stands for, and in fact his presidency will infuriate his far right supporters by protecting minorities and representing no danger to anyone. And maybe a Clinton presidency would have been more dangerous for everyone. But those are both hypotheticals, not really relevant to Rosada's question now about what attitude she can take and how she can respond to things as they are now.

Answer from 56.6... with extreme care to stay safe and not damage relationships you need, I think. (I'm assuming, as I normally do, that the reading's a direct answer to the question.)
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
19,149
Reaction score
3,418
(In case it isn't obvious, I hope we can keep from setting fire to this particular nest.)
 

Granma

visitor
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I don't think we can safely assume that Trump is the far right candidate.
Hillary Clinton is far right- she is a globalist, she is a war monger, she supports Saudi Arabia and received many millions of dollars from that regime. She is supported by the big banks that keep merging into bigger banks, the media outlets that keep merging into bigger and fewer companies.
She asked what her attitude should be about the trump presidency which she said made her angry, wanting to puke about people who disagreed with her about him, comparing him to hitler and I think her answer 56.6 does not support her viewpoint. It's certainly not telling her to join a protest movement and overthrow his government. And why not?
I think there is a false narrative at play here.
 

hilary

Administrator
Joined
Apr 8, 1970
Messages
19,149
Reaction score
3,418
As I said, Trump may or may not in fact be a good representative for the far right - it's just that they think he is, and that's the reality that needs to be dealt with at present.

I agree that 56.6 isn't saying 'join a protest movement and overthrow the government.' Not that overthrowing the government was one of the options Rosada was personally considering afaik...
being conscious of how caught up I'd become in this Trump thing I consulted IC asking what my attitude should be. Should I be a vocal protester or ignore it all or what?

56.6 suggests having the attitude of a very cautious traveller in a foreign land, because of the danger of suffering a great and unforeseen loss. I agree with Diamanda - that's neither being a vocal protester nor ignoring it all.
 

Granma

visitor
Joined
Nov 9, 2016
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I don't know what you mean by far right. I gave my definition of it and they do not think Trump supports them.
I think diamanda gave a very good explanation of the anti - Clinton camp.
I think Mirian gave a very good warning about the reading.
I think the reading Might be saying to Rosada to check her assumptions. She might have her details ( facts) wrong.
But- truly the anti trump forces are very powerful- they do not like him.
He is not anti - minority. This is a false narrative. He doesn't say things as pc as most politicians and that may be a fault of his. but the press amplifies and distorts everything he says and does to reach a negative conclusion, while Clinton/Obama get almost zero scrutiny. I think that's called being propagandized.
Diamanda tried explaining this in her post about the podesta email.
 

Liselle

Supporter
Clarity Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 1970
Messages
12,849
Reaction score
2,388
It's getting my attention how sincerely afraid many of you seem to be. I've been one of those pretty much rolling my eyes at comparisons to Hitler, but none of you are wild-eyed crazies (so far as I know shhhhh), also those of you living in Europe are closer to where it happened and so probably know a lot more than we (I) do.

A question I have is how the German government was structured back then, compared to the U.S. now. We like to say that one of our strengths is our built-in checks and balances - the executive branch (President) is one branch of three, the other two being legislative (Congress) and judicial (Supreme Court). None of them can get too carried away because the other two are also involved. The Republicans do control Congress, but there were a number of congressional Republicans who actually dis-endorsed Trump before the election, which I think is really rare - I'm not sure Trump would have majority support in Congress if he tried anything too outlandish.

But anyway, were there any structural checks and balances on Hitler? Could that be a difference?
 

Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom

Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).

Top