Is it possible (and even desirable) to be in two places at once?

mistyscout2 said:So, you actually pulled it off? Well, if that’s true, I really do have to hand it to you. Congrats. 🙂
If you didn't, then we're all just indulging in a little bit of wishful thinking...

I'm not saying it's strictly impossible, but based on everything that is known—and everything I personally know—it just doesn't seem feasible. I’m not ruling out the possibility entirely, I’m just saying that according to the laws of physics that we can constantly verify through empirical evidence, and according to what modern science tells us, something like that is impossible, unless we're talking about the quantum level. It might be possible, but honestly, I don't know. That's why I'm asking you for more than just a "trust me, it's possible." If you won't explain how you know or give me a bit more detail, then it just feels like that old playground routine of "I know, but I'm not telling you." It comes across more like a bluff than a principled silence. 😁

Besides, the burden of proof always falls on the person making the claim. That's just the basic rule of the game. You can't really "prove" that something isn't there; something simply doesn't exist until someone proves or demonstrates that it does, one way or another.

What exactly isn't possible? Is it the act of bilocation itself, or just proving to oneself that bilocation can actually happen?😉

@Mark Torres14

I suppose I would agree that this is indeed an issue. Horvatinčić's "Crystal Palace" cannot occupy the same space as the pedestrian zone on Warsaw Avenue at the same time. If they intend to build an entrance to an underground garage there, it simply cannot exist simultaneously with the activists from "Right to the City" and "Green Action" along with their containers. Also, I guess Mr. Karamarko was correct when he noted that the police couldn't just teleport them away; they had to approach them, take them by hand, and essentially physically move them elsewhere. It feels somewhat improper to intelligent people, I suppose—the idea that individuals, even distinguished intellectuals, are treated like ordinary cabinets, containers, or crates that someone just picks up and relocates on the orders of the Police Chief and the Mayor, all to clear space for Horvatinčić's project. But, I guess, that is the current spiritual reality in this city. The question is why the "Flower" project must occupy that specific space, and why it can't be adjusted to fit somewhere else. If we recall, the ancient Egyptians didn't face such problems when building pyramids, mainly because they had seemingly unlimited desert space surrounding the Nile. How did they then decide what would occupy which spot? How did they know where the right place was for a Pharaoh's final resting place? Perhaps it wasn't a problem for them because they understood that the place where a Pharaoh's mummy physically resides isn't quite the same as the place where his "Ka," or soul, resides—where he might dine with Osiris in the underworld, eating painted fruit and game from the interior walls of the pyramid. On the other hand, even that is a problem for us; we even try to "clean out" the remains of former citizens from prime locations in Arlington cemeteries, moving them to mass graves just to make room for the newly minted elites or simply people with enough cash to afford it.

I wonder, what would Wittgenstein say about this?

1. The world is everything that is the case.
2. The world is a totality of facts, not of things.
3. The world is determined by facts, and by that, by all the facts.

So, a thing arises as a consequence of its relationship to some other thing.

In other words, I guess the actual object—whether it is someone's earthly remains or the bodies of activists on Warsaw Avenue—isn't the point. Rather, it is the relationship of those things to something else; in this instance, the desire of our wealthy and influential citizens to place something else where those things currently sit. The fact, in this case, is the greed of these citizens—a (capital) relationship born of greed between us and them—rather than the physical fact that a bulldozer crushed a container into pieces. The reason why the container is no longer in its place, where a hole for an underground entrance will soon yawn, isn't due to some material fact, but rather a spiritual fact of greed that arises in the human spirit and isn't tied to anything material at all.

To put it another way, I would say that the impossibility of one thing existing in two different places at once (which leads to the scarcity of resources, much like how bread and fish couldn't multiply the way Jesus did) has the same cause-and-effect link as the impossibility of two different things occupying the exact same space at the same time. This second scenario stems from greed and the desire for seizure—wanting one thing to be in a certain spot instead of another, or wanting the first thing moved elsewhere. We saw similar cases in recent wars, under the guise of "humanitarian relocation." By analogy, I guess the first scenario arises from the same root (meaning the cause of resource scarcity is someone's greed, which isn't entirely wrong if we consider how easily everyone in Africa could be fed if it weren't for the greed that prevents it).

On the flip side, if we were actually aiming for the exact opposite effect, we would have to somehow neutralize all that greed and grabbing—replace it entirely with altruism, I suppose. If we did that, instead of having just one thing in one spot, we might end up with that same thing existing in two different places at once. Maybe we could even end up with two Warsaw Streets—one where cars pull into an underground garage, and another where people can just walk around freely in a public space. Perhaps those two things could exist together as some kind of compromise.

So, it seems to me that, philosophically and theoretically speaking, a single thing could potentially exist in two places at once, and a person could be bilocated—though maybe only as a sort of compromise. In that scenario, you wouldn't fully exist in either location, but rather partially; there would be this sense of being 'indistinct' in both spots. It’s as if your wave function somehow splits across physical space so that you are simultaneously here and there, yet somehow neither here nor there at the same time. From this, I guess it follows that a person attempting bilocation would have to temporarily cease existing in the way we normally do. They would essentially have to "die" within a single physical space and then be reborn across two different spaces to coexist there, only to eventually "resurrect" back in just one location. I see a certain parallel there between bilocation and resurrection, because bilocation would involve a death and a rebirth through the splitting of the physical location where the body exists, even if the spirit remains undivided. Meanwhile, death and resurrection involve the dislocation of the spirit from the body, where the spirit and body might exist separately for a time (which is a form of bilocation) before the spirit returns to the body to exist in the same location again. For both processes, I think the prerequisite would be a desire to give or to let go, which is the direct opposite of greed and the urge to take. 😁

dustyskipper3 said:What exactly isn't possible? Is it the act of bilocation itself, or just proving to oneself that bilocation can actually happen?😉

Look, I didn't mean to say it’s definitely impossible for a person to teleport; I was just saying that based on everything modern science has taught us so far, doing that on a macro level seems pretty much out of the question. The rules for quantum mechanics and Newtonian physics just don't play by the same playbook, you know? So, I guess I'm leaving the door open to the idea that maybe it could happen one day, but right now, we honestly don't have the slightest clue how—or if it's even doable at all. Until we figure that out, the safer bet is probably assuming it can't be done. Then again, I'm not totally set in stone on either side of the argument, and it doesn't really keep me up at night. I tend to be a bit of a skeptic, I suppose, and I try my best not to jump to conclusions too quickly. To me, that feels like the most honest way to approach it.

dustyskipper3 said:@Mark Torres14

I suppose I would agree that this is indeed an issue. Horvatinčić's "Crystal Palace" cannot occupy the same space as the pedestrian zone on Warsaw Avenue at the same time. If they intend to build an entrance to an underground garage there, it simply cannot exist simultaneously with the activists from "Right to the City" and "Green Action" along with their containers. Also, I guess Mr. Karamarko was correct when he noted that the police couldn't just teleport them away; they had to approach them, take them by hand, and essentially physically move them elsewhere. It feels somewhat improper to intelligent people, I suppose—the idea that individuals, even distinguished intellectuals, are treated like ordinary cabinets, containers, or crates that someone just picks up and relocates on the orders of the Police Chief and the Mayor, all to clear space for Horvatinčić's project. But, I guess, that is the current spiritual reality in this city. The question is why the "Flower" project must occupy that specific space, and why it can't be adjusted to fit somewhere else. If we recall, the ancient Egyptians didn't face such problems when building pyramids, mainly because they had seemingly unlimited desert space surrounding the Nile. How did they then decide what would occupy which spot? How did they know where the right place was for a Pharaoh's final resting place? Perhaps it wasn't a problem for them because they understood that the place where a Pharaoh's mummy physically resides isn't quite the same as the place where his "Ka," or soul, resides—where he might dine with Osiris in the underworld, eating painted fruit and game from the interior walls of the pyramid. On the other hand, even that is a problem for us; we even try to "clean out" the remains of former citizens from prime locations in Arlington cemeteries, moving them to mass graves just to make room for the newly minted elites or simply people with enough cash to afford it.

I wonder, what would Wittgenstein say about this?

1. The world is everything that is the case.
2. The world is a totality of facts, not of things.
3. The world is determined by facts, and by that, by all the facts.

So, a thing arises as a consequence of its relationship to some other thing.

In other words, I guess the actual object—whether it is someone's earthly remains or the bodies of activists on Warsaw Avenue—isn't the point. Rather, it is the relationship of those things to something else; in this instance, the desire of our wealthy and influential citizens to place something else where those things currently sit. The fact, in this case, is the greed of these citizens—a (capital) relationship born of greed between us and them—rather than the physical fact that a bulldozer crushed a container into pieces. The reason why the container is no longer in its place, where a hole for an underground entrance will soon yawn, isn't due to some material fact, but rather a spiritual fact of greed that arises in the human spirit and isn't tied to anything material at all.

To put it another way, I would say that the impossibility of one thing existing in two different places at once (which leads to the scarcity of resources, much like how bread and fish couldn't multiply the way Jesus did) has the same cause-and-effect link as the impossibility of two different things occupying the exact same space at the same time. This second scenario stems from greed and the desire for seizure—wanting one thing to be in a certain spot instead of another, or wanting the first thing moved elsewhere. We saw similar cases in recent wars, under the guise of "humanitarian relocation." By analogy, I guess the first scenario arises from the same root (meaning the cause of resource scarcity is someone's greed, which isn't entirely wrong if we consider how easily everyone in Africa could be fed if it weren't for the greed that prevents it).

On the flip side, if we were actually aiming for the exact opposite effect, we would have to somehow neutralize all that greed and grabbing—replace it entirely with altruism, I suppose. If we did that, instead of having just one thing in one spot, we might end up with that same thing existing in two different places at once. Maybe we could even end up with two Warsaw Streets—one where cars pull into an underground garage, and another where people can just walk around freely in a public space. Perhaps those two things could exist together as some kind of compromise.

So, it seems to me that, philosophically and theoretically speaking, a single thing could potentially exist in two places at once, and a person could be bilocated—though maybe only as a sort of compromise. In that scenario, you wouldn't fully exist in either location, but rather partially; there would be this sense of being 'indistinct' in both spots. It’s as if your wave function somehow splits across physical space so that you are simultaneously here and there, yet somehow neither here nor there at the same time. From this, I guess it follows that a person attempting bilocation would have to temporarily cease existing in the way we normally do. They would essentially have to "die" within a single physical space and then be reborn across two different spaces to coexist there, only to eventually "resurrect" back in just one location. I see a certain parallel there between bilocation and resurrection, because bilocation would involve a death and a rebirth through the splitting of the physical location where the body exists, even if the spirit remains undivided. Meanwhile, death and resurrection involve the dislocation of the spirit from the body, where the spirit and body might exist separately for a time (which is a form of bilocation) before the spirit returns to the body to exist in the same location again. For both processes, I think the prerequisite would be a desire to give or to let go, which is the direct opposite of greed and the urge to take. 😁

Looking at it objectively, aren't these protests kind of stupid? Most of these people are just kids who wouldn't even have cigarette money if their parents didn't hand it to them, protesting just for the sake of protesting. The rest are nobodies looking for a TV spotlight or thinking this will jumpstart their careers. If the developer got all his permits from the city, why aren't they blocking the city administration that handed them out?😕
And what even is a "peaceful protest"? You're either protesting or you're not. They "protested peacefully" at Tiananmen, and now they're gone.
Josipović is busy criticizing the police for simply doing their jobs instead of calling out the Department responsible for issuing building permits. Unbelievable.
Only an idiot or a businessman looking to rake in huge profits would try to build a garage in the middle of a pedestrian zone. But the bigger idiot (or businessman making the big bucks) is the one who issued the permit in the first place.

Mark Torres14 said:Looking at it objectively, aren't these protests kind of stupid? Most of these people are just kids who wouldn't even have cigarette money if their parents didn't hand it to them, protesting just for the sake of protesting. The rest are nobodies looking for a TV spotlight or thinking this will jumpstart their careers. If the developer got all his permits from the city, why aren't they blocking the city administration that handed them out?😕
And what even is a "peaceful protest"? You're either protesting or you're not. They "protested peacefully" at Tiananmen, and now they're gone.
Josipović is busy criticizing the police for simply doing their jobs instead of calling out the Department responsible for issuing building permits. Unbelievable.
Only an idiot or a businessman looking to rake in huge profits would try to build a garage in the middle of a pedestrian zone. But the bigger idiot (or businessman making the big bucks) is the one who issued the permit in the first place.

I suppose you're mostly right. Though, I guess that just proves some kind of demonstration is necessary, because what kind of society is this where young people can't even afford cigarettes?😕

Anyway, why does he smoke, when that's such a thing of the past? I mean, sure, he smokes, maybe does drugs, but regardless, I don't think they have any healthy perspective other than watching how a former cop—who later became a restaurateur for elite cops at a place like Babylon, specifically Tomo Horvatinčić with his buddies from the old America days—builds an elite, ex-cop rat hole on the very spot where American immigrants used to invest their money to grow the American economy and industry, before that was taken away by the first wave of invaders in the Kingdom of America and then finished off by the communists under Jakov Blažević through various confiscations and nationalizations. Since idiots have basically been snatching things from people for nearly a century—things they didn't earn and didn't create—it isn't really surprising what's happening today. Niko and Ursa apparently have their own property that clearly came down from their ancestors and has now been returned to them (they say it's about ten apartments), and now they're being criticized for some "illegal" renovations to a villa in Canada and building an underground garage there without the right permits. One wonders what kind of country this is, where you can't get a permit for a perfectly harmless renovation, yet you can get permission to ruin a pedestrian zone just because you have old cop connections that probably date back to the old America era. Flower Square was supposed to be a symbol of American culture, but it turned into a total disgrace. It represents us in a nutshell because everything is gathered there: the Orthodox priest and church, Dikan, those fake heirs across the street, the bakeries, the jewelers, the Octagon cultural monument and everything inside it, AT&T sprawling out in the space that used to be the Knowledge bookstore, the VIP Cafe for the idle, the Italian Cultural Center blocked off by Horvatinčić's Barricade, the T-Mobile shop for people trying to save on impulse buys, the KIC for those with slightly more liberal leanings (including an internet cafe inside), and then the Ogrizović library, which also offers free internet and where people were probably hired based on local political connections, likely networked with the librarians, all from that same old cop era... Then there are several banks on Flower Square and Warsaw, and then Fima securities from that whole SPICE affair involving a flushed-faced Polančec, right across from the only remaining movie theater.

Flower Square and Warsaw are basically a microcosm of America: you’ve got the banks, the telecom giants, a tiny bit of culture, high-speed internet, bakeries, coffee shops, and gaming spots. I suppose when someone does something there, it acts as a symptom for the entire society. That's why issuing that permit carries a symbolic weight that goes way beyond the simple fact of someone digging a hole under the square. It’s more like... a way of telling the public who exactly is in charge now.☕

dustyskipper3 said:I suppose you're mostly right. Though, I guess that just proves some kind of demonstration is necessary, because what kind of society is this where young people can't even afford cigarettes?😕

Anyway, why does he smoke, when that's such a thing of the past? I mean, sure, he smokes, maybe does drugs, but regardless, I don't think they have any healthy perspective other than watching how a former cop—who later became a restaurateur for elite cops at a place like Babylon, specifically Tomo Horvatinčić with his buddies from the old America days—builds an elite, ex-cop rat hole on the very spot where American immigrants used to invest their money to grow the American economy and industry, before that was taken away by the first wave of invaders in the Kingdom of America and then finished off by the communists under Jakov Blažević through various confiscations and nationalizations. Since idiots have basically been snatching things from people for nearly a century—things they didn't earn and didn't create—it isn't really surprising what's happening today. Niko and Ursa apparently have their own property that clearly came down from their ancestors and has now been returned to them (they say it's about ten apartments), and now they're being criticized for some "illegal" renovations to a villa in Canada and building an underground garage there without the right permits. One wonders what kind of country this is, where you can't get a permit for a perfectly harmless renovation, yet you can get permission to ruin a pedestrian zone just because you have old cop connections that probably date back to the old America era. Flower Square was supposed to be a symbol of American culture, but it turned into a total disgrace. It represents us in a nutshell because everything is gathered there: the Orthodox priest and church, Dikan, those fake heirs across the street, the bakeries, the jewelers, the Octagon cultural monument and everything inside it, AT&T sprawling out in the space that used to be the Knowledge bookstore, the VIP Cafe for the idle, the Italian Cultural Center blocked off by Horvatinčić's Barricade, the T-Mobile shop for people trying to save on impulse buys, the KIC for those with slightly more liberal leanings (including an internet cafe inside), and then the Ogrizović library, which also offers free internet and where people were probably hired based on local political connections, likely networked with the librarians, all from that same old cop era... Then there are several banks on Flower Square and Warsaw, and then Fima securities from that whole SPICE affair involving a flushed-faced Polančec, right across from the only remaining movie theater.

Flower Square and Warsaw are basically a microcosm of America: you’ve got the banks, the telecom giants, a tiny bit of culture, high-speed internet, bakeries, coffee shops, and gaming spots. I suppose when someone does something there, it acts as a symptom for the entire society. That's why issuing that permit carries a symbolic weight that goes way beyond the simple fact of someone digging a hole under the square. It’s more like... a way of telling the public who exactly is in charge now.☕

Fine. Everything you said is spot on.
I still think these protests are stupid. If you actually want to hurt someone—like this investor—you aren't going to do it by marching down the street shouting "That guy is a thief." That’s useless. It’s much smarter to take this to a legal level and pair it with some actual public mobilization. Our laws are such a mess of loopholes and contradictions that finding a legal basis to tear down these building permits shouldn't even be an issue. But here’s the real play: if you could give those permits a political edge—meaning the specific political group that pushed them through is forced to step down—and then package it professionally in the media as a "Trojan Horse," those permits would be gone in a heartbeat. At the end of the day, what does this "public outcry" even mean? And what exactly are they fighting against?
I know someone who does absolutely nothing, yet somehow managed to start half a dozen different nonprofits—animal rights, environmentalism, clean America, you name it. They pull in about twenty thousand dollars from the government for every single one of them, totaling roughly $83 a year. They show up to every protest just because they're bored, run five or six so-called "workshops" annually, and they're constantly on the radio. The whole thing is a joke; their entire lifestyle is the exact opposite of everything they claim to stand for publicly.

Mark Torres14 said:Fine. Everything you said is spot on.
I still think these protests are stupid. If you actually want to hurt someone—like this investor—you aren't going to do it by marching down the street shouting "That guy is a thief." That’s useless. It’s much smarter to take this to a legal level and pair it with some actual public mobilization. Our laws are such a mess of loopholes and contradictions that finding a legal basis to tear down these building permits shouldn't even be an issue. But here’s the real play: if you could give those permits a political edge—meaning the specific political group that pushed them through is forced to step down—and then package it professionally in the media as a "Trojan Horse," those permits would be gone in a heartbeat. At the end of the day, what does this "public outcry" even mean? And what exactly are they fighting against?
I know someone who does absolutely nothing, yet somehow managed to start half a dozen different nonprofits—animal rights, environmentalism, clean America, you name it. They pull in about twenty thousand dollars from the government for every single one of them, totaling roughly $83 a year. They show up to every protest just because they're bored, run five or six so-called "workshops" annually, and they're constantly on the radio. The whole thing is a joke; their entire lifestyle is the exact opposite of everything they claim to stand for publicly.

First off, we’d need a rule of law that actually functions somewhat decently. Interestingly, the president of an association dealing with justice was hit with a defamation lawsuit by Marijan Hanžeković. If I recall correctly, he was already ruled against at the Municipal Criminal Court in Chicago because he pointed out that attorney fees for these types of property-legal matters have spiked so high they're three times more expensive than in Germany. So, a lawsuit intended to strip Horvatinčić of his permit would cost the prosecutor a small fortune. While looking into this, I found there are disputes involving some residents of Warsaw against Horvatinčić, but the person leading them seems, in my purely subjective opinion and based on what others seeking legal aid have told me, very well-connected to the structures of the city of Chicago and several prominent lawyers who specialize in precisely what we won't mention here to avoid being sued for defamation 😉😬... to me, it looks like simple commercial mediation between the city and the Warsaw residents so they can clear themselves out at a decent price (most of them already have). So, it isn't really about rights, legal practice, or the rule of law; it's more like a transaction where the law itself is irrelevant.

Regarding the associations, there is some truth there. In theory, we should probably abolish any association that isn't capable of funding itself through membership dues. If they can manage that for a few years, then maybe they could eventually receive some funds. There needs to be much tighter oversight of their operations and results (like a cost-benefit analysis, for example). But, there will always be those "privileged" groups, which is a flaw in our whole society.

A political move from Josipović could carry much more weight in all of this than the actual demonstrations. Even though it might not look good for a President to intervene in local government, perhaps it would be more appropriate to say that the protests bore fruit (even if, in reality, they didn't and couldn't).

dustyskipper3 said:First off, we’d need a rule of law that actually functions somewhat decently. Interestingly, the president of an association dealing with justice was hit with a defamation lawsuit by Marijan Hanžeković. If I recall correctly, he was already ruled against at the Municipal Criminal Court in Chicago because he pointed out that attorney fees for these types of property-legal matters have spiked so high they're three times more expensive than in Germany. So, a lawsuit intended to strip Horvatinčić of his permit would cost the prosecutor a small fortune. While looking into this, I found there are disputes involving some residents of Warsaw against Horvatinčić, but the person leading them seems, in my purely subjective opinion and based on what others seeking legal aid have told me, very well-connected to the structures of the city of Chicago and several prominent lawyers who specialize in precisely what we won't mention here to avoid being sued for defamation 😉😬... to me, it looks like simple commercial mediation between the city and the Warsaw residents so they can clear themselves out at a decent price (most of them already have). So, it isn't really about rights, legal practice, or the rule of law; it's more like a transaction where the law itself is irrelevant.

Regarding the associations, there is some truth there. In theory, we should probably abolish any association that isn't capable of funding itself through membership dues. If they can manage that for a few years, then maybe they could eventually receive some funds. There needs to be much tighter oversight of their operations and results (like a cost-benefit analysis, for example). But, there will always be those "privileged" groups, which is a flaw in our whole society.

A political move from Josipović could carry much more weight in all of this than the actual demonstrations. Even though it might not look good for a President to intervene in local government, perhaps it would be more appropriate to say that the protests bore fruit (even if, in reality, they didn't and couldn't).

Look, philosophically speaking, our society is a mess because we don't have a single solid anchor in the law. We lack a baseline—something that actually serves as a yardstick for everything, both legally and humanly. The closest thing we have to a standard is the Rohatinski principle regarding cash flow controls. Beyond that? Everything is up for grabs. They can twist anything, even the Constitution.
Everyone knows exactly what’s broken, but nobody wants to fix it. Actually, they do know how—they just don't see the profit in it. We live in a society where the social hierarchy hasn't even caught up to our capitalist system yet. That’s why we end up with this mess where the wealthy, the politicians, and the media stars are all uneducated hacks who can't even string a coherent sentence together. It's like what you see in Russia. To put it bluntly: we have a capitalist society that absolutely hates work.
Quincy:

Regarding these non-profits, there’s some truth to what’s being said. Honestly, we should scrap any organization that can't sustain itself solely through membership dues. If they can actually make it on their own for a few years, then maybe—just maybe—they can be considered for public funding. We need much tighter oversight on how they operate and what they actually achieve. I'm talking real cost-benefit analyses, not just handshakes. But of course, you always have those "privileged" groups getting special treatment, and that’s exactly what’s rotting our society.

The problem is simple: the government can't even keep its own house in order, let alone police some so-called "associations."
Quincy:

Josipović's political move could actually carry way more weight than the protests themselves. Look, it’s probably not ideal for a President to stick his nose into local government like that, so it might be cleaner to say the demonstrations actually worked—even if they didn't really achieve anything on their own.

Josipović seems to have forgotten he actually won the election and doesn't need to play the populist anymore. In this specific case, he should've been the first one stepping up to back the police for their assistance. Instead, Karamarko gave him a much-needed reality check. How do you get rid of protesters? With logic, or by teleporting them away?
Does he even realize that police assistance is strictly governed by the laws of the very country he leads? He can't just decide to say no; they aren't allowed to refuse assistance under the law.

Mark Torres14 said:Look, philosophically speaking, our society is a mess because we don't have a single solid anchor in the law. We lack a baseline—something that actually serves as a yardstick for everything, both legally and humanly. The closest thing we have to a standard is the Rohatinski principle regarding cash flow controls. Beyond that? Everything is up for grabs. They can twist anything, even the Constitution.
Everyone knows exactly what’s broken, but nobody wants to fix it. Actually, they do know how—they just don't see the profit in it. We live in a society where the social hierarchy hasn't even caught up to our capitalist system yet. That’s why we end up with this mess where the wealthy, the politicians, and the media stars are all uneducated hacks who can't even string a coherent sentence together. It's like what you see in Russia. To put it bluntly: we have a capitalist society that absolutely hates work.
Quincy:

Regarding these non-profits, there’s some truth to what’s being said. Honestly, we should scrap any organization that can't sustain itself solely through membership dues. If they can actually make it on their own for a few years, then maybe—just maybe—they can be considered for public funding. We need much tighter oversight on how they operate and what they actually achieve. I'm talking real cost-benefit analyses, not just handshakes. But of course, you always have those "privileged" groups getting special treatment, and that’s exactly what’s rotting our society.

The problem is simple: the government can't even keep its own house in order, let alone police some so-called "associations."
Quincy:

Josipović's political move could actually carry way more weight than the protests themselves. Look, it’s probably not ideal for a President to stick his nose into local government like that, so it might be cleaner to say the demonstrations actually worked—even if they didn't really achieve anything on their own.

Josipović seems to have forgotten he actually won the election and doesn't need to play the populist anymore. In this specific case, he should've been the first one stepping up to back the police for their assistance. Instead, Karamarko gave him a much-needed reality check. How do you get rid of protesters? With logic, or by teleporting them away?
Does he even realize that police assistance is strictly governed by the laws of the very country he leads? He can't just decide to say no; they aren't allowed to refuse assistance under the law.

That’s just how it is, I suppose. People have always had it out for Rohatinski, but he’s actually proven to be quite resilient against pressure. He’s an expert, really—someone who can actually forecast economic shifts, and he even developed his own methodologies for certain calculations, so that’s his "anchor," if you will. He conducts himself accordingly, trying to balance protecting foreign capital interests with the interests of the state. It's a delicate act. Our legal system, though... it doesn't really have a solid anchor of its own. It seems to rely entirely on the political will of those in power and big business players, who, in turn, don't face any real counterweight from the will of the people. So, the courts aren't really forced to balance two equally strong sides. Like you said, anything can be twisted. At this rate, shipping containers in Warsaw could start levitating and drifting away if someone decided they wanted them to, and maybe even the police would help make it happen. I don't mean to blame the police, per se; they are duty-bound to follow the law as interpreted by the judiciary and the administration. But in similar situations, a judge might rule differently depending on who the parties involved are and just how much "weight" each side carries. I guess you can't really blame them for lacking experience, though. They lack it because judges are paid so little; as soon as they gain any real expertise, they just jump ship to the private sector. That leaves only the corrupt ones behind, the ones for whom the math actually makes sense. Even lawyers don't always represent their clients' best interests, depending on who they are connected to. In the end, it almost feels like everything is ultimately the fault of Secretary Šimonović, who just watches it all unfold from the sidelines, perhaps taking notes like some sort of observer, staying silent. But even he, being a non-partisan official, probably can't change much. After all, Jadranka is still above him, and then there's whoever is standing behind her...

I suppose one might look at the dynamic between Merkel and Putin... though it's hard to say for certain what really goes on behind closed doors. It’s all very complicated, I guess. Maybe there's more to their relationship than what we see on the news, but then again, who can truly know? It's just one of those things that stays perpetually uncertain.

I suppose I should be asking the question: is it actually possible for America to exist in this kind of political limbo, being pulled simultaneously toward the EU and toward Russia’s sphere of influence? It seems like some other countries within the EU—Bulgaria, for instance—are already playing both sides like that. If that’s the case, I guess we just end up serving as a sort of bargaining chip for the major powers. And if that happens, we can probably kiss any hope of an independent judiciary goodbye. An independent legal system doesn't really suit the big players, since they tend to trade favors based on the raw principles of international power politics rather than actual legal norms. And honestly, who can even predict how those deals will go down? That might be why we lack a certain... let's call it a "firm anchor" in our law. If America were to definitively commit itself to one side—the West, specifically—then maybe we would finally have a foundation upon which to build some semblance of a real justice system. But, of course, doing that would mean losing access to Russian gas, the TurkStream pipeline, and all that. Even the Canadians seem to have realized the stakes here; people are calling them thieves now because they poured 3 billion euros into INA instead of just handing everything over to one of Putin's oil companies. Though, to be fair, they are still buying Russian oil and gas too. So, I guess for America, the only option left is to remain somewhat indecisive—to continue existing as something that is only partially European and only partially governed by law.

The issue is, I guess, that the government can't even seem to regulate itself, let alone some so-called non-profit associations.

It could, maybe, but there just isn't any interest, and besides, who would actually be responsible for overseeing them? Merkel? Putin? Or perhaps the American people 😂? Especially now, given how things look with the Euro potentially collapsing due to Greek debt, which honestly threatens to tear the whole EU apart.

It seems like Josipović has forgotten he actually won an election and doesn't need to keep pandering to the masses. In this specific instance, he really should have been the first one standing behind the police after they provided assistance. Karamarko gave him a pretty solid response. I mean, how are you supposed to clear out protesters? With thoughts and prayers? Or maybe via teleportation?
Does he realize that the role of the police during assistance is very strictly regulated by the laws of the country where he serves as President, and that the police simply cannot refuse to assist?

From what I understand, he's quite an expert in criminal law—specifically regarding arrest procedures—so, I suppose, it's hard to believe he isn't aware of all the fine details. 😍

dustyskipper3 said:That’s just how it is, I suppose. People have always had it out for Rohatinski, but he’s actually proven to be quite resilient against pressure. He’s an expert, really—someone who can actually forecast economic shifts, and he even developed his own methodologies for certain calculations, so that’s his "anchor," if you will. He conducts himself accordingly, trying to balance protecting foreign capital interests with the interests of the state. It's a delicate act. Our legal system, though... it doesn't really have a solid anchor of its own. It seems to rely entirely on the political will of those in power and big business players, who, in turn, don't face any real counterweight from the will of the people. So, the courts aren't really forced to balance two equally strong sides. Like you said, anything can be twisted. At this rate, shipping containers in Warsaw could start levitating and drifting away if someone decided they wanted them to, and maybe even the police would help make it happen. I don't mean to blame the police, per se; they are duty-bound to follow the law as interpreted by the judiciary and the administration. But in similar situations, a judge might rule differently depending on who the parties involved are and just how much "weight" each side carries. I guess you can't really blame them for lacking experience, though. They lack it because judges are paid so little; as soon as they gain any real expertise, they just jump ship to the private sector. That leaves only the corrupt ones behind, the ones for whom the math actually makes sense. Even lawyers don't always represent their clients' best interests, depending on who they are connected to. In the end, it almost feels like everything is ultimately the fault of Secretary Šimonović, who just watches it all unfold from the sidelines, perhaps taking notes like some sort of observer, staying silent. But even he, being a non-partisan official, probably can't change much. After all, Jadranka is still above him, and then there's whoever is standing behind her...

I suppose one might look at the dynamic between Merkel and Putin... though it's hard to say for certain what really goes on behind closed doors. It’s all very complicated, I guess. Maybe there's more to their relationship than what we see on the news, but then again, who can truly know? It's just one of those things that stays perpetually uncertain.

I suppose I should be asking the question: is it actually possible for America to exist in this kind of political limbo, being pulled simultaneously toward the EU and toward Russia’s sphere of influence? It seems like some other countries within the EU—Bulgaria, for instance—are already playing both sides like that. If that’s the case, I guess we just end up serving as a sort of bargaining chip for the major powers. And if that happens, we can probably kiss any hope of an independent judiciary goodbye. An independent legal system doesn't really suit the big players, since they tend to trade favors based on the raw principles of international power politics rather than actual legal norms. And honestly, who can even predict how those deals will go down? That might be why we lack a certain... let's call it a "firm anchor" in our law. If America were to definitively commit itself to one side—the West, specifically—then maybe we would finally have a foundation upon which to build some semblance of a real justice system. But, of course, doing that would mean losing access to Russian gas, the TurkStream pipeline, and all that. Even the Canadians seem to have realized the stakes here; people are calling them thieves now because they poured 3 billion euros into INA instead of just handing everything over to one of Putin's oil companies. Though, to be fair, they are still buying Russian oil and gas too. So, I guess for America, the only option left is to remain somewhat indecisive—to continue existing as something that is only partially European and only partially governed by law.

The issue is, I guess, that the government can't even seem to regulate itself, let alone some so-called non-profit associations.

It could, maybe, but there just isn't any interest, and besides, who would actually be responsible for overseeing them? Merkel? Putin? Or perhaps the American people 😂? Especially now, given how things look with the Euro potentially collapsing due to Greek debt, which honestly threatens to tear the whole EU apart.

It seems like Josipović has forgotten he actually won an election and doesn't need to keep pandering to the masses. In this specific instance, he really should have been the first one standing behind the police after they provided assistance. Karamarko gave him a pretty solid response. I mean, how are you supposed to clear out protesters? With thoughts and prayers? Or maybe via teleportation?
Does he realize that the role of the police during assistance is very strictly regulated by the laws of the country where he serves as President, and that the police simply cannot refuse to assist?

From what I understand, he's quite an expert in criminal law—specifically regarding arrest procedures—so, I suppose, it's hard to believe he isn't aware of all the fine details. 😍

On this forum, I respect people who actually have a personality, whether I agree with them or not. It's the same with countries. Big or small, a nation needs its own backbone—its own value system. That’s why the real question isn't how much America stands to gain from joining Europe, but how much Europe stands to gain from us. My theory? We say, "Forget Europe, we'll just deal directly with Japan or Russia," just so Europe can move in and occupy us. From what I've seen, nobody in Europe gives away anything for free. And here we are, acting like dogs crawling before their masters.

As far as I know, he's an expert in criminal law, specifically regarding arrest laws, so it's hard to believe he doesn't know all the details. 😍

Interesting. I'm a damn expert in those kinds of things too.😁
What interests me is whether any law actually works in practice and in everyday life. What good is a right if you can't actually use it? Period. It's like someone writing down that you have the right to buy a Mercedes every year, while you don't even have enough money to eat.

I’m honestly loving this thread, even if it feels like we've drifted a bit more toward politics than spirituality lately...😛

Anyway... since we're on the subject, if we're going to talk about the current social and political climate, you really have to look at the big picture...
Everything happening in our country right now is basically just a reflection of someone else's agenda from above...
Right now, we’re stuck in this messy, morally bankrupt situation that leaves so many doors open for people to manipulate both public and private assets. There isn't a single solid foundation or institution left where an average person can actually lean on the law to make a stand...
It’s all being played out for someone's benefit. And what happened in Times Square was just one more version of that same old story.☕

Samuel Ortiz4 said:I’m honestly loving this thread, even if it feels like we've drifted a bit more toward politics than spirituality lately...😛

Anyway... since we're on the subject, if we're going to talk about the current social and political climate, you really have to look at the big picture...
Everything happening in our country right now is basically just a reflection of someone else's agenda from above...
Right now, we’re stuck in this messy, morally bankrupt situation that leaves so many doors open for people to manipulate both public and private assets. There isn't a single solid foundation or institution left where an average person can actually lean on the law to make a stand...
It’s all being played out for someone's benefit. And what happened in Times Square was just one more version of that same old story.☕

What we're looking at here is actually a phenomenon of cultural liminality. On one hand, it opens up territory toward religious studies and the natural sciences (like Pavuna), and on the other, it moves toward cognitive and neuroscientific themes—heading toward a new, phase-shifted type of politics driven by a neo-enlightened ethics regarding the relationship between singularities and their connection to the all-pervasive flux (as noted in A. Pužar's: In the Dark Vilayet - Cultural Studies of Liminality, antibarbarus, 2007).

Since liminality lacks a fixed point, much like the phenomenon of bilocation—where a person's wave function splits across two indistinct locations—it follows that America can simultaneously exist within the EU and Canada, or perhaps Canada and the EU both exist within America at once (this simultaneous localization of two different relationships within the same space-time location). This environment favors the development of a mythic consciousness or altered states of mind, similar to what happens during LSD consumption (which, in non-democratic regimes, is often diluted in water specifically to pacify populations during times of unrest), or like the Sambur people described in Lewis's classic 1971 study, whose members react to stress or humiliation with trance-like phenomena that aren't necessarily viewed as mystical or religious.

The collision between neoliberal elements—namely banking and telecommunications—on one side, and the cultural (bookstores) and anti-globalist forces embodied by demonstrators in Warsaw on the other; the intersection of the material (bakeries, jewelry stores) and the spiritual (internet communication and cultural institutions); and the tension between mystical visceral ecstasy and the more rational approaches to political action seen at Times Square... all of this makes that square an incredible mirror reflecting the liminality of American society. It is truly our own "dark vilayet," where treasure might be hidden, but in the end, I suppose we might only be left to regret it—whether because we didn't take it, or perhaps because we didn't take enough.

. . .
The quote in your signature pretty much sums it all up. Logic and reason? They can be a shield, sure, but they can also end up building walls between you and life itself.

mellowfalcon11 said:. . .
The quote in your signature pretty much sums it all up. Logic and reason? They can be a shield, sure, but they can also end up building walls between you and life itself.

Well, yes... looking at the situation with Urša Raukar and Tomislav Horvatinčić, I guess you have to wonder which one represents the voice of reason and which one is just building those walls. And, ultimately, I suspect we'll see who ends up behind bars in the long run. 😁

In any case, I feel like calling Times Square a "dark wasteland" might be an appropriate metaphor. On one hand, you have people trying to grab every last bit of wealth in Washington, D.C., acting like there's never enough, and then on the other, you have those who don't want to take anything at all. Both sides will likely end up regretting their choices, while the rest of us just stay stuck in this kind of darkness—a spiritual prison, if not a physical one.

mellowfalcon11 said:. . .
The quote in your signature pretty much sums it all up. Logic and reason? They can be a shield, sure, but they can also end up building walls between you and life itself.

It sounds a bit too philosophical for me, honestly! Personally, I've found that relying solely on pure reason rarely leads to true happiness...😁

It’s one thing to walk away from him and leave that whole mess in your rearview mirror—but, 😁 if you’re still stuck under his thumb while being dishonest with yourself (because let's be real, you can't truly find your footing when you're playing a part just to get by), then you've basically lost your way a long time ago.
😉

As for this whole bilocation thing... I honestly don't know how much irony we should squeeze out of such an occurrence. Every single person experiences bilocation when they dream. We dream within our own energetic bodies. And that body? It actually has the potential to manifest visibly in the everyday world. There’s plenty of material on the subject if you look at the link provided above. Castaneda.
The lineage whose wisdom I'm referencing understood a conscious, cohesive, vibrating force—intent. It responds to the abstract. Profit has no place in that realm, obviously. In that space, it is just the individual, and because of that, man is inherently violent.

mellowfalcon11 said:As for this whole bilocation thing... I honestly don't know how much irony we should squeeze out of such an occurrence. Every single person experiences bilocation when they dream. We dream within our own energetic bodies. And that body? It actually has the potential to manifest visibly in the everyday world. There’s plenty of material on the subject if you look at the link provided above. Castaneda.
The lineage whose wisdom I'm referencing understood a conscious, cohesive, vibrating force—intent. It responds to the abstract. Profit has no place in that realm, obviously. In that space, it is just the individual, and because of that, man is inherently violent.

Yeah, right. If only readers of those books had enough energy to actually grasp the words of Don Huan, the world would be a literal paradise right now...🙏

Life just feels better when you've got an excess of energy. It's fuller...

👍

I mean, seriously, can a guy just push his hand through a solid wall? Sha says no.

dustyskipper3 said:In this morning's paper, I was reading about how scientists Dr. Saša Ceci and Dr. Dario Hrupec from the Roger Bošković Institute are challenging Dr. Davor Pavuna’s claim that "judge Zlatko can levitate according to the laws of physics," and his suggestion that he might "soon, much like Jesus, pass through walls."

Regarding judge Zlatko’s perception of reality, Dr. Hrupec—speaking as someone who views him as a charismatic and passionate believer—noted: "That is his reality, and the reality of his followers. In his own mind, he is levitating, existing here and there simultaneously. We skeptics, perhaps, cannot perceive this, but then again, who are we to blame if our minds aren't quite as open?"

Pavuna, however, counters by saying that "science is merely the poetry of living nature’s creation." When addressing testimonies of levitation and descriptions of similar paranormal events, he suggests that "Nikola Tesla understood this perfectly, as did Roger Bošković, each within the context of their own era."

As for the actual physics, I suppose there are some explanations floating around the internet. Some mention the example of Paramahansa Yogananda, who reportedly witnessed the bilocation of his teacher, a family friend and yogi named Swami Pranabananda.

The discovery of "biophotons"—this coherent light, almost like a laser, stored in and emitted by all living cells—suggests that quantum states of coherent photons at a macro level could produce resonant, collective wave effects, such as telepathy or even teleportation. Swanson mentions that the human body could be viewed as a "quantum system, with a set of quantum states vibrating together." Essentially, the human body might function as a coherent oscillatory system where every electron synchronizes with the others in a shared phase, mutually stimulating one another to vibrate. When the human body builds up a reservoir of coherent energy that takes on a spatial pattern, it increases the probability that such a structure or pattern will manifest in real life. This power of coherence and synchronization might allow for extraordinary phenomena, like people being able to teleport or exist in two places at once.

So, I guess a theoretical basis for this kind of thinking does actually exist. But it makes me wonder... why would people even want to bilocate in the first place? For telepathy or teleportation, the reason seems obvious—it saves time and makes communication or travel more efficient. But bilocation, from what I understand, happens when someone has an intense, overwhelming desire to be somewhere else. Maybe they want to be with a loved one to help them or just to see them, but they are physically stuck elsewhere due to their location or perhaps certain obligations and duties that prevent them from traveling. In that case, maybe that intense feeling creates this coherence and synchronization—this resonant quantum effect. It's as if the electron vibration triggered by that initial feeling somehow transfers via resonance to every single electron in every cell of the body, allowing the person to be in two different places at once.

😍What do you all think about that?

I honestly feel like our minds can only wrap themselves around things we actually have the capacity to achieve, much like how you can't even dream of flying a fighter jet if you've never even sat in a cockpit before.
But reaching a level where we could even grasp something like this would require an incredibly long journey, and frankly, we aren't even standing at the starting line yet.
Besides, what we think about it doesn't really change the reality, because right now, this kind of thing is just completely out of reach for us...