I have an Adri, your argument is invalid.


Bernie Sanders is Going To Win

In response to:

TLDW: Guy gives 30% chance of Bernie victory.


TLDR: I’m giving 100% chance of Bernie victory.

O.o 30%? You yourself did a video before western Saturday saying all he had to do was perform as he had previously and he’d win. Does Bernie EVER LOSE a supporter? Has that ever happened even once?

Now he massively over performs his polling, only loses once due to clear election failure, and you’re still saying 30%?

Here, I’ll go ahead and prove I get it better than Kyle: I predict Bernie will win the nomination. It’s called. It’s done. All we have to do is keep doing what we’re doing.

(Like I actually did on July 1, but my predicted path to his victory was wrong, as I mistakenly assumed the AA vote would like the guy cloning MLK’s platform, marched with MLK, and got arrested on the right side of the civil rights movement. http://underlore.com/batman-feels-the-bern/)

Kyle is clearly consumed with the argument to moderation. He believes the middle path and cynicism are more truthful by default. Reality isn’t like that. Truth is truth and it can be anything. It can be the middle or an extreme or even knowable. It can be eternal or fluid. Truth just doesn’t give a fuck.

It’s possible to over compensate and be wrong in the other direction. Being honest doesn’t just mean defending an assertion that you find unfavorable. It also means being clear about conditions that are favorable.

He has this problem in common with Cenk.

But hey, I view these people like Wikipedia. I can listen critically just as well as I can read critically and no human source of data is infallible. Nor do I need them to be.

It’s funny, Him and Cenk go on and on about how bias the media is, they themselves work in alternative media, they complain that the media isn’t giving him credit for his wins, and then they say that the msm is a massive roadblock. There’s a contradiction. If the MSM is such a massive roadblock, then where are his wins coming from? At what point do you take away the msm’s credit for the ability to influence votes?

People whine about money in politics, but the major spending target of that money is TV advertising. So if we let TV ads pick for us, is that money’s fault or ours? And really DO we let TV pick for us? Money didn’t help Jeb.

Bernie is proving with his rallies and wins and donations and volunteers, that msms bias isn’t the hurdle they’re constantly saying it is.

How’s that for facts?

Here’s another one, Kyle STILL hasn’t done the homework on WHY the primaries are southern fried.


There ARE two primaries, BY DESIGN.

Cenk himself is already fond of saying during election coverage that it’s not like a race, the elections have already happened it’s just when counts come in. That’s true now to a large extent.

There are two polls that already determined this election in advance. The rest is expensive red tape and information distribution.

1. Which candidate is most favorable? 2. Which platform is most in-line with the majority’s desires? Bernie and Bernie’s. We already share Bernie’s positions, we just have to A. Be informed he exists, and B. be informed of his character. As that information and ONLY that information spreads, he already wins elections in its wake.

He’s already won, like I said in July. I was just wrong about the demographics of how. It’s like how the world changed the very second fire was discovered. It just took time for the effect to ripple out. Clockwork.

“All these roadblocks” boiled down to one that isn’t even a block, as proven by his landslide wins. He’d have landslid Arizona also And all the states with closed primaries and voter suppression had those two policies been reversed.

There’s no new media. Guy has 300,000 subscribers, it’s already impossible to get a response out of him.

Writing this comment is literally like talking to the TV. Mainly the only people that hear it are the other people in the room.

Kyle’s right about one thing. There is no choice. http://underlore.com/bernie-or-bust/

Best I ever got as a response out of these people was a like on my tweet from Jimmy D. and Ana K.

9/11: Rhetorical Poison

I make it a point not to discuss my position on 9/11 because the entire debate is rhetorical poison.

It’s like a land mine for your credibility. I step over it.

The result is the same either way. Assume for a second it was as they say an inside job. Or assume it’s the other extreme, exactly like the official story. Same result. Same tragic deaths. Same insane policy. Same wasted opportunities.

It’s the modern JFK. The results will be much the same. No matter what really happened, no amount of likely evidence will convince either side to switch sides.

If it was an inside job all proof of it is gone by now. If it wasn’t, no amount of what’s left will convince the opposition. The smoking gun is paperclips by now.

Honestly even the death toll isn’t relevant when you step back. How many civilians did the American military kill last year? The drug war? Treatable illness? Hunger? Etc.

What would proving it and having a massive public trial that turns out exactly as they want actually accomplish? How likely is the best possible outcome? Will it ever be worth 3000 lives? Is that even possible?

I just think the whole thing is worse than pointless. I think we can go back once we can afford to. The time to do something meaningful in any but the historical context is over.

Clearly it’s a massively significant historical event and thus is worthy of study, but the fact is there’s a reason why we basically leave that study to people bent on self-marginalizing.

Even if they are right and the goal is noble, there are more pressing issues.

Every one ethical and sane already all basically agrees the war on terror is a human rights catastrophe, the war in Iraq a gargantuan mistake, a decade and a half of hard experience has taught us the folly of this path and the informed are already committed to changing it, for the most part.

We manufactured Osama and we manufactured ISIS, and either they engineered 9/11 or they ruthlessly exploited it, and either way they are responsible for an unfathomable number of deaths, plus or minus 3000.

The best thing to do now is avoid all such things in the future as best we can and oppose any logic which dismisses the suffering and death of others.

Bernie or Bust

Last Updated: 2016-04-16 1226 PM

Are you #BernieOrBust?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...





This issue is very closely linked with the issue of Clinton’s electability and many articles touch on both sets of points.

So see also: http://underlore.com/bernie-sanders-electability/

External Links:

Petition update · Now more than ever, it’s gotta be #BernieOrBust · Change.org

If you have not already taken the #BernieOrBust pledge, please do so by clicking below. If you have already taken it, now is when we need to build this movement faster than ever. Bernie, down ~300 pledged delegates, really needs a miracle. Please find two of the 30% of Bernie’s supporters, who will not vote for Clinton according to a recent poll, and ask them to take the pledge. You can send them to http://BernieorBust.org to take it. This #leverage is his best hope in our view.

Liberals for Hillary: There is Nothing Stranger

The first order of business in that regard is to make anti-austerity politics succeed. This makes perfect sense – because if anything radically better is to come onto the agenda in the foreseeable future, quashing neoliberalism is an indispensable first step.

Small wonder then that there is enough fervor in the Bernie camp that Clinton’s publicists, and the media hacks that serve them, are now warning that, like the Republicans, the Democrats could splinter apart, thanks to Bernie’s refusal to turn his operation over to the Clinton machine. If only this were true!

The Definitive, Encyclopedic Case For Why Hillary Clinton is the Wrong Choice

[NOTE: This is a long piece! If you want to read or print it out in pdf form, you can find it right here and download it to your computer and read at your convenience.]

But time is short and the stakes are high, and I want to focus on a pattern of her claiming to be a progressive Democrat while taking positions that are too often more closely aligned with the other side of the aisle, and on a record that I worry makes her a real longshot if she’s our nominee.

Please Recognize Your Privilege If You Can Afford Eight Years of Hillary Clinton and the Status Quo — Medium

Some people say Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are approximately the same on the issues. These people likely have a lifestyle and a level of income that is comfortable and that they’re not too worried about losing. For middle class and working class people, many of whom struggle from paycheck to paycheck and carry debt, the policies proposed by the two candidates are nothing alike.

How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties

From these large amounts of money being transferred from state coffers to the Hillary Victory Fund in Washington, the Clinton campaign got the first $2,700, the DNC was to get the next $33,400, and the remainder was to be split among the 33 signatory states. With this scheme, the Hillary Victory Fund raised over $26 million for the Clinton Campaign by the end of 2015.

Susan Sarandon: I Don’t Think I Could Vote For Hillary If Sanders Loses | Video | RealClearPolitics

“It’s dangerous to think we can continue the way we are with the militarized police force, with the death penalty and the low minimum wage and threats to women’s rights and think you can’t do something huge to turn that around. The country is not in good shape if you’re in the middle class. It’s disappearing,” Sarandon said Monday night on MSNBC.

Hear this, Sanders supporters — you don’t need to back Hillary: You have every right to say “Bernie or bust” – Salon.com

Gitmo remains open, American troops are still in Afghanistan, the criminals that engineered the financial crisis are at large, and race relations have deteriorated rather than improved. Now Sanders supporters hear Hillary Clinton promising to continue wherever Barack Obama leaves off, and they wonder what the point of four more years of the same would be in an increasingly desperate country and, indeed, world.

Hillary Clinton Is Better Than the Republican Candidates. But I Still Wouldn’t Vote for Her.

Both Clinton and party leaders are making a mockery of many of the principles the party is supposed to stand for. And pledging to support Clinton in the end – no matter what she and the DNC do – enables this kind of behavior. It’s hard for me to see how we will ever fix our political process and reclaim our democracy by refusing to draw some lines in the sand.

Fear of Bernie or bust movement expressed on progressive outlets | Examiner.com

The Bernie or bust pledge, an idea initiated by Revolt Against Plutocracy last June, commits pledge-takers to either write in Bernie Sanders or vote for the Green Party candidate in the general election if Bernie is not the nominee. After reaching 50,000 pledges in late February, the story was picked up by the Washington Times on March 1st. Fox News and CNN asked for interviews, but only Fox has found the time in the last two weeks to cover the story. MSNBC refuses to mention the movement. So much for their “liberal bias.” CNN already has the reputation as the Clinton News Network. Perhaps its time for progressives to recognize MSNBClinton as well.

Thank Your Favorite God for Bernie’s Michigan Win, Because A Clinton Nomination Would Split the Democratic Party

Sanders’ win is a good thing for Democrats because he is the only candidate who can unite the party in November. There is no way economic progressives and Bernie supporters will accept a Hillary Clinton nomination after everything they’ve seen in this primary.

Before Her Assassination, Berta Cáceres Singled Out Hillary Clinton for Backing Honduran Coup | Democracy Now!

Every other country in the world or in Latin America was demanding the restitution of democracy and the return of Manuel Zelaya. It was Clinton who basically relegated that to a secondary concern and insisted on elections, which had the effect of legitimizing and routinizing the coup regime and creating the nightmare scenario that exists today.

Proof that Ignorance Drives Hillary Clinton’s Voters | Global Research – Centre for Research on… – Linkis.com

But the point is, yet again, that, in the general-election match-ups, Sanders really and authentically IS the more electable of the two Democrats to become the U.S. President. That’s just a fact, though consistently Clinton voters assume the exact opposite of the fact. Their assumption on that is plain false.

Viewpoint: explaining why the United States needs a revolution | Examiner.com

While many, if not virtually all of Bernie Sanders’ supporters want a woman as president someday, the people who believe the U.S. “needs” a female president are those who have the greatest requirement to understand our corrupted, rigged system of government. While many citizens want a female president, the United States needs a political revolution.

What Hillary Clinton wants you to forget: Her disastrous record as a war hawk – Salon.com

If Clinton had done anything other than endorsed the deal, she would have created a major headache for herself. Even so, her speech about the deal highlighted what ought to be–but probably won’t be–a deeply examined part of her ideology: her hyper-hawkishness.

Hillary Clinton, Economic Populist: Are You Fucking Kidding Me? | Opinion | teleSUR English

For the 2016 election, with the electorate in a restive mood, Clinton has gone back to the populist well. Her rhetoric is more left wing than last time. She talks about paid family leave and increasing Social Security and the minimum wage, all welcome developments. Yet there is little substance behind the speechifying.

I Am Absolutely Furious and I Don’t Know What to Do With Myself

When I think of Hillary Clinton offering her eloquent ode yesterday to Nancy Reagan for the late first lady’s supposed “very effective, low key [AIDS] advocacy” — thereby not only ignoring the horrible, evil truth of what happened but actually rewriting history and casting Reagan as some kind of hero, I am absolutely furious and I don’t know what to do with myself.

The case against Hillary Clinton: This is the disaster Democrats must avoid – Salon.com

Were Clinton to take office, would she seriously push for greater economic fairness, more peace and a generally progressive agenda, or would she defend the status quo?To answer this, let’s look first at our context. Strange things are happening. Establishment neoconservatives seem to be gravitating toward Clinton as an anti-Trump

Hillary Clinton 2016: What’s Wrong with Hillary? – POLITICO Magazine

But when you look at the positions she has taken on some of the most significant public policy questions of her time, you cannot escape noticing one key pattern: She has always embraced the politically popular stand—indeed, she has gone out of her way to reinforce that stand—and she has shifted her ground in a way that perfectly correlates with the shifts in public opinion.

Revolt Against Plutocracy – Movement for an American political revolution

Bernie or Bust:  A pledge to write-in Bernie Sanders or vote for the Green Party candidate 57,000+ people have taken so far. Why? Keep reading.

33% of Sanders Supporters Will Not Vote for Clinton If She Wins Nomination

The real takeaway, however, is that 33% of Sanders supporters say that they “Could not see themselves supporting Clinton” in the general election. Additionally, 32% describe themselves as having “a negative view of Clinton.”

Will Quigg, KKK Grand Dragon, Switches Support From Trump to Hillary Clinton

“We want Hillary Clinton to win. She is telling everybody one thing, but she has a hidden agenda,” Quigg, a grand dragon of the KKK’s California chapter who is responsible for recruitment across the Western United States, told the Telegraph.

My thoughts on this link: https://plus.google.com/+BrandonSergent/posts/ixYCfjD1oW4

My Thinking:

Firstly, as I describe in the meme above, the price of Hillary is death for the entire concept of a progressive party in America.

People are assuming Trump would be worst based on habit and hyperbole.

1. Democrat is not automatically better than republican when both Trump and HRC are only wearing the labels for expediency.

2. Trump will not be allowed to be Hitler 2.0. We aren’t electing an Emperor and we are the most heavily armed public of any major nation.

He may want to be Hitler, or even try. He would be quickly stopped one way or another.

After you get past those two facts and start looking at HRC vs Trump, vs what you don’t know about Trump and what you know for a fact about HRC, also once you look at the consequences of rewarding an overt neoliberal with the presidency, Trump vs HRC becomes a no brainer.

It’s not what you think. HRC is WAY more dangerous than that orange buffoon.

But even if it wasn’t that dire, still I would not be voting for Hillary if she steals “wins” the democratic primary.

A knife in the back is worse than a sword on your shield. Period.

Many have argued that Bernie would be a qualitatively establishment president, and that Hillary would be preferable to Trump or Cruz. But we already tested that theory in 2008, and I do not like the outcome.

Calling any president establishment is a baseless assertion unless you expand the definition of establishment to such a broad degree that it’s semantically null.

We haven’t seen a progressive president in the modern era. The last one we had was Carter. The last one like Bernie was FDR.

Also, the covert republican logic applies to the SCOTUS as well. Just look at Obama’s SCOTUS appointment. I’d rather have it publicly understood that we have a corrupt right wing court than the illusion of a progressive one. Because then we could agitate collectively in a useful direction, as opposed to wasting time trying to reason with a covert partisan.

I voted for Obama the second time because of appointment anxiety. But again, I dislike the outcome. We ended up with a right wing SCOTUS anyway. Compare their rulings with the desires of the chamber of commerce. And yet where is the organized left wing protest? Absent because of the assumption that Obama is on our side because he’s black and because he wears the D and because he campaigned like Bernie.

If we truly know on the other hand that the SCOTUS and the administration are both right wing and corrupt then our efforts can be properly focused on taking back the whitehouse and obstructing everything they do in congress and lower courts. As we clearly would Vs Trump.

If we get a right wing all three, then it becomes a matter of taking back both congress and the whitehouse or forcing them to show their hand as a totalitarian state at which point other options need be explored.


In all cases the enemy you can see is preferable to a traitor you cannot. Hillary would get the Obama apologist treatment, as is proven by the HRC camp right now. They are positively eager to make excuses for her blatantly conservative career. And thus were she elected, the country would further drag to the right anyway, but without meaningful resistance.

Bernie on the other hand, is in all senses an activist. Electing him will basically be the first step of a bloodless coup designed to topple an oligarchy. Compromise is no longer acceptable.

Look at what is on the table.

Trump is literally turning into Hitler. I’m not even exaggerating. He would be a lame ineffectual Hitler thank the gods, but that’s what he wants, and there’s always the slim slim chance he’ll get it. And then there’s global warming Hillary will make worse, then there’s the TPP she’ll instantly find an excuse to back, continued mass incarceration which she and her husband invented, and a global bank collapse she’ll profit from, and the 2nd great depression that won’t impact her.

Look at the historical analogs. We’re risking a literal second holocaust, the literal end of the food chain, a literal global environmental collapse, and possibly WW3 if she pisses off Russia bad enough in Syria, etc.

I am not even kidding about any of that. Granted it’s not all likely, but it is very clearly on the table.

Hillary and Trump terrify me. But Hillary an order of magnitude more so. That’s why I’m #BernieOrBust because I’d rather have an earlier shot at changing course than smoother sailing in the mean time.

Electing Hillary might be better for a very short while, but it would be like how Obamacare killed single payer only with the entire concept of progressivism in the United States. I would rather we had suffered another four years of nothing followed by single payer, than 8 years of Obamacare.

I’m playing the long game. And so should you unless you’re 90 years old and childless.

Update 2016-03-20 0404 AM: The Dark Truth About Many Democrats

I’ve come to realize something.

The hate of #BernieOrBust voters shows that something sinister lies behind much of the the lesser of two evils voting. An excuse.

HRC followers I think are not in fact immune to evidence. I think southern voters are not as suppressed as our benefit of the doubt would imply. They are simply closet republicans.

Secretly they love the wars, the shootings, the rape, the executions, the poisoned children, the slaves, the urban decay, the crushing squalor, the torture, the despair, the opulence, the dystopian future, the smog, the toil, the disease, the ascension fantasy, the rigid hierarchy, the shared flattering lies, the mockery, the scorn, the false humility, the condescension, the caste system. And above all, the excuses for them.

I think there is some Stanford prison experiment stuff going on here. Some fight or flight or appease response.

They shake their heads and tut, but inside they are elated. Like the apple tossing peasants of the public execution era and the colosseum.

They just prefer to pretend their hand is forced. They are sadists hiding behind duty. And so they call themselves progressive and pretend they don’t see. They hide behind the lies and “compromise” further and further dark. Because in the words of the TV, they don’t want to end the exploitation, they want to become the exploiters.

They are horrified by the thought of actual progressive political victory. Of the game finally being fair with no brutal punishments for the losers.

So they violently defend a totalitarian warmongering psychopath and pretend this defense is evasion of a pathological lying narcissist that excuses them. But like the man said, being against evil doesn’t make you good. We need to admit there is evil in our camp.

These people don’t have the ethical fortitude for an equitable and humane future. And so they pretend to be bamboozled. They vote against their own interests, and waggle their fingers with one hand and fondle their genitals with the other.

It is not ignorance we battle. It is evil. Evil I define here as the natural inclination to derive joy from the true suffering of others, and this inclination being allowed to define personal policy. A form of a person’s nature that is simply malevolent.

As I said, being against evil doesn’t make you good, so hating and hurting these people is not the solution. But neither is converting them. You can’t talk a fish out of water. The solution is to simply out flank them. To prove that democracy is wisdom by out voting both the overtly and covertly evil. Admit that conversion is impossible. Simply dismiss them. And look elsewhere for those of our kind. The utilitarians. The undiscovered social democrats. To find them and show them the opportunity they have.

The young are the key. We must convince them to actually vote. The time is now.

See also:

A short #BernieOrBust Discussion (with tweet) · Innomen · Storify

Where in we talk about the merits and flaws of a Trump win if Hillary wins the nomination.

Underlore Links:

How I got banned from Dailykos.com in less than 8 hours.

Where in I tell the tale of how I was banned from Daily Kos for being a #BernieOrBust voter before it was a hashtag.


#BernieOrBust Tweets





Softball Questions

TYT, It sounds to me like you are complaining about bishops being interviewed for the job of pope, on the grounds that they are not being harassed about being religious. A town hall isn’t the place for that. You guys are missing the point of a right wing town hall.

The right wing mutilates the crap out of itself on terms it can understand during debates. Why would right wing audiences want to see the same in the town hall? Softball is the only way right wing voters get to see an example of them being given everything they want without direct personal opposition. Which is what they would get as president.

Think about it, no one ever really got in Bush’s face while he was president. Because he was the freaking president. Softball questions are actually a pretty great way to preview what each candidate as president would look like.

Also you guys are talking like it’s the media’s job to basically interrogate the right about why they are right wing generally, and that’s fair out in the world in the context of problem solving, but that’s unfair in the context of a town hall given that in other contexts you accept the existence of the right wing.

You never for example overtly and seriously argue that the right wing should be banned. You never overtly argue for a one party system. Think about what that means. It by definition means that you agree that the existence of the right wing is legitimate, in which case you must also grant it is legitimate for it to explore itself in some contexts unchallenged. This is one of those contexts.

Everyone knows everything there is to know about the right wing. These candidates are virtual clones of each other. There’s no new information to extract from them from either side. Just like everyone knows that those bishops all believe the same things, we know all these regressives believe the same things, wrong or not.

The function of the press as a watchdog is to challenge them on this stuff, true, which they don’t, but a town hall is supposed to be partisan friendly. This is actually like the one place where where softballs kind of are fair play.

Now, you cry but what about the left getting hardballs, how is that fair? Well it’s fair because that’s what the left wants. Progressives have a lot bigger decision to make intrinsically when choosing a direction and a leader.

This is about the fundamental difference between conservation and progress. There’s only one past, but there are many possible futures. Wanting to regress is a unidirectional goal, but wanting to make progress is an infinitely more complicated hypothetical because you can go in any direction except back.

This town hall is exactly what was expected, exactly what it should be, and that’s why I didn’t watch it.

TYT seems to understand this when they comment on the fear of being called liberal media. That’s exactly what the media are afraid of because that’s exactly what it would be if they were to ask hard (IE, how dare you be right wing) questions, in the context of a town hall.

The time to ask them that sort of question is out in the real world when their policies fail. That’s the kind of question you ambush them with while they are getting off a bus or otherwise have them cornered. Like if you catch them drinking some water you ask them how they’d feel if you told them deregulation put lead in it.

Even TYT must realize fairness isn’t it’s actual goal. Yes you are saying ask both hardball questions, but that’s what you want them to do. That’s even but it’s not fair. You’re asking to get your way in both cases, but another form of fair is to not get your way in both cases. Would you rather the left get softball questions too in the context of debates and town halls? Of course not. Because that’s not the function of a town hall for the left wing.

Realize. This is what the right wing wants and expects from partisan contexts that already agree with them. It is not what the left wing wants and expects. The right in these contexts wants easy mode, the left wants to be challenged. Conversely, in a left wing debate everyone in civil, in a right wing debate they tear eachother’s throats out. The media is right wing biased, no question, but this softball town hall is not in my opinion an example of it.

Alex Jones Secretly Supports Bernie Sanders


My theory: (TLDR: Alex is faking his hate to spread the Sanders name more quickly.)

Firstly, Alex Jones’ day job is to destroy the credit of anyone who takes him seriously.

Secondly, Alex Jones being genuinely anti establishment and highly intelligent, at least at one point, likely secretly supports Sanders policies. As all intelligent, informed, compassionate humans typically do.

(Yes. Alex used to be cool. Citation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJXspT2VtOE and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kqdLA42fUE)

Thirdly, he knows full well, being versed in the public relations field, that Bernie’s actual problem is simply one of exposure at this point, that time is of the essence, and also that there’s no such thing as bad press.

Fourthly, he knows he can’t simply endorse Sanders because that would actually hurt his campaign.

Fifthly, he knows that hate travels much faster than reason.

Given this context Alex has contrived a rather brilliant way to continue doing his job while supporting Sanders secretly in the very same act.

Thus he has produced a stream of completely mindless honeypot hate videos designed expressly to poison the memetic well for the actual opposition, so that they’ll go out in public, and rant at their friends, and hopefully strangers, about how awful Sanders is, in turn making Sanders look both electable and reasonable.

In effect he is making the genuine Anti-Sanders crowd look like right wing tin foil hats.

All while giving supporters low hanging fruit to mock, both bolstering the Sanders campaign and spreading the Infowars name through the election-engaged community.

Well played Alex, Well played.

We thank you for your service 🙂 Please do continue 🙂

…or he really has degenerated into a hateful right wing lunatic. Whichever. The effect is the same.

The actual video: Click here for lunacy… or genius X)



We can know some things about life in advance. Truisms and cliches. But steeped in truth nonetheless. It might be wise to try and draw up a list of the most qualitatively important ones and then build a worldview around obviating them that wouldn’t cost a culture its fitness for extreme long term survival.

A quick example is the notion that hindsight is 20/20. The lesson there is not to shrug and endure, but to think about the future, but to try and see the world in such a way that it’s ok to go back and admit you made mistakes, if that’s all that’s keeping you from being happy or better off.

We have this misguided intolerance of mistakes where we share the impossible effort of never making them. Instead we should be honest with ourselves that mistakes will inevitably be made and try to profit from them.

They can be compensated for. Not erased, but at least leveraged towards the future. Don’t try to avoid them wholesale, as that’s a fool’s errand, but to embrace the utility they may provide. Embrace the liberation that brings.

This doesn’t make you devoid of culpability for lousy choices, but it prevents you from doubling down on bad bets trying to pretend you never bet in the first place. (https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Sunk_costs#Loss_aversion_and_the_sunk_cost_fallacy)

If your intentions were good from the beginning, if you at no point were trying to hurt or exploit anyone, if you made the best and kindest decision available to you at the time, then why should you feel any regret or accept any blame?

Only if you knowingly made a decision that had to be utterly correct and could have been avoided, or was malevolent in some way, should you embrace any feeling of wrong doing.

This speaks to the lack of wisdom in vengeance. The best decisions more or less are in my opinion the ones that permit adaptation up to and including being rescinded.

So don’t hurt people, because you can’t unhurt them later if you’re wrong. Don’t disable anything you can’t repair if needed.

Underlore © 2013