Apech

They are Europeans in a way that the British have never been. This may go back to being more at the heart of the Roman empire and its governing principles - and though most of Britain was for a period part of this we were always more peripheral and have never in our history viewed a unified Europe as being a general good - in fact we saw it as threat and opposed any attempts to bring it into being (Napoleon, Hitler et al). Just a thought

Depends which country of course - but most Europeans are just bemused by Brexit and happy to stay in the EU, they are used to the European style of doing things.

Insect

Yeah that's ironic. What on earth do the Labour party want? apart from a general election that is.

Yes we ruled the world but you guys took it from us

If spiritual progress is like a well sign posted three lane highway, then DBs could be compared to a short cut consisting of a dusty track which winds through a dangerous gulch and emerges on a cliff edge, where in an attempt to save yourself you wrap your car round the base of an old tree and emerge with your head spinning, fall flat face down on the ground whimpering and drooling and calling out for your mother. After a short period of hospitalization you discover yourself addicted to opiates and on a fast track to insolvency ... those you turn to for love and support desert you and take out restraining orders and you end up homeless and penniless in a town of merciless drug gangs and street crime. In an act of desperation you steal a lap top from a parked car and log in to DBs for advice where you are told that the problem is that your 4th to 7th chakras are misaligned and you need a reiki herbal bath. This is more or less factual although some details have been omitted to protect anonymity .

Another quiz: https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2018/nov/21/how-populist-are-you-quiz I came out near Obama

I am interested if anyone has expert knowledge of the religion practiced in this period. I am particularly keen to look at how Buddhism emerged in the social context of the immediate following period but also with deep respect for Vedas and Vedanta. Following on somewhat from here http://thetaobums.com/topic/37468-why-daoism-over-buddhism/?p=606350

There's a lot to be said for orderly transitions - and instinctively I like the 'do nothing' or at least as little as possible in times of instability. We've boxed ourselves into a corner where even a second referendum and a Remain vote would be socially destabilising. A hard Brexit is very uncertain in outcome. So maybe a compromise is ok for the short/ middle term.

I have the growing feeling that May is going survive this - especially as there doesn't seem to be a main contender (unless its Rees-Mog himself). But we shall see.

They can't even stage a proper coup

See ... snivelling cowards.

I think May's 'deal' reflects what she really wants which is a half in /half out compromise - which probably makes re-entry more possible. And people from both sides blame her for this. But how come, after the referendum and Cameron resigning none of these snivelling shits actually put themselves forward as leader? Cos they are cowards who can only back stab. So I agree with Paddy Ashdown on this. We are being let down by a whole political class - and while I don't like May at least she was man enough to give it a go.

Q: Are you still beating the breeding partner selected for you by the glorious Joint Committee For Reproductive Control? A: Da/Nyet

As this is virtually identical to the Egyptian Nun (or Nu) the primeaval chaos I feel semi qualified to answer. What it indicates is an undifferentiated state before the 'known' is known. But the 'before' is not temporal. In other words its not before in time. It is that from which knowing and order can emerge but it is in itself unknown. It is the state to which things return and yet also permeates what exists. It is not a luminous cloud, though - that is just to mistake hundun for ordinary states of confusion. You could say that in it all possible states of existence superimpose to such an extent that nothing stands out from it - it is full of life and yet inert. In relation to existence it is a continual source of renewal as it is total potentiality.

You utter communist

Hi, Thank you for your story. I wish you and her well. "Truthfully what I want to do is die (ego death?) into love and acceptance of her in a way that is selfless and detached. I want to appreciate her for all she is and be a stable force of love her in her life, yet I find myself angry at times trying to run from the relationship which hurts her making her feel as if I dont love her." You've set yourself a very high task - I understand wanting ego-death - but I think that 'wanting' it may be a little self destructive. Working towards this kind of love means, I think, facing up to one's own vulnerability, which is very tough. I also think to do this you need to be very careful about your own energy levels and feelings. Its a cliche to say you can't love another without loving yourself - but then some cliches are true. I really like the advice to treat yourself as you would someone in your care. That is attend to your own comforts and needs from time to time so you don't fall into states of low energy and despair. This Shakespearian sonnet came to mind: Let me not to the marriage of true minds Admit impediments. Love is not love Which alters when it alteration finds, Or bends with the remover to remove. O no! it is an ever-fixed mark That looks on tempests and is never shaken; It is the star to every wand'ring bark, Whose worth's unknown, although his height be taken. Love's not Time's fool, though rosy lips and cheeks Within his bending sickle's compass come; Love alters not with his brief hours and weeks, But bears it out even to the edge of doom. If this be error and upon me prov'd, I never writ, nor no man ever lov'd.

Of course - it is only meant as a tool for reflection not some kind of absolute measure.

I think the vertical axis (authoritarian/libertarian) is more significant than left/right in some ways. So people in the bottom left box want some level of 'compassion' in government policy but generally would like to be left alone to get on with their lives.

The problem with this kind of assessment is that it is issue based. Or policy area based. If you are deciding who to vote for, say for Congress or Senate then it is reasonable to check their policy stance. For instance: Immigration. Gay marriage. Legal cannabis. Abortion. Big/small government. .. and so on - to give a reasonable prediction as to how they might vote on legislation. What it misses is ideological outlook. For instance someone can favour gay marriage because they consider gay people an oppressed minority who need to struggle to get equal rights - or alternatively someone may favour gay marriage because as a right wing libertarian they want to eliminate government control of individual freedom. So two completely different views which end up with the same choice. Similarly a left wing person who is also a Catholic might be pro-life etc.

That's me - the left behind.

This is me! Where's Chang?

There's something called political compass which is not too bad. That might not be the right name - it's online and you can answer questions to see where you fit. There's a problem with even this though. https://www.politicalcompass.org/test