I have been thinking about the following the last several years and have drawn some dark horse conclusions. I’m boiling it down here and leaving it a riddle. It’s another way to see something we may rarely question.
“Political compass” or “left/right spectrum” is a mind trap. Radical isn’t included within the trap. Why isn’t it? Not for “a reason” but for the dangers of “reason” itself.
The political spectrum tool stamped in our brains, with its minor variants, is a brain trap to prevent political reasoning while deceptively posing as a tool of political reasoning. It functions in reality in the following ways.
1. Substitution of complex social thought with simplistic explanations.
2. Internal self denying the holism of our humanity by it assigning limited dimension personality to political beliefs.
3. Separation of popular social forces into false diametric opposition of each other.
4. Divorcing political agency from culture, pulling culture apart by its political parts.
5. Hiding the beneficiaries of this brain trap, making them invisible and innocuous.
6. Simultaneously as making these beneficiaries invisible, the brain trap gives to them everything it takes away from the rest of us, making themselves central to the self definition of all others.
The next thought in puzzling this is yours to take. Step back & examine for yourself the “left/ right spectrum tool” as a potential deceptive brain trap. Note what you observe. What other things do you see that I did not describe? What of my observations did you similarly note?
Now that you’ve given it thought, what is the invisible within it, that counterintuitively has the only clear definition, that informs all others which I allude to in my sixth point?
Clipped from Episode 316, Bret and Heather discuss a new paper that finds infection tends to lead to greater frailty in older people. This reverses the causality of Terrain Theory of Disease (frailty of the body leads to greater susceptibility of infection), and also provides support for a prediction made by Bret and his co-author Debbie Ciszek in the unpublished, longer version of their reserve capacity paper from 2002.
Mentioned in this segment:
Ragusa et al 2026: https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/gerona/glag043/8497853
Weinstein & Ciszek 2002: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11909679/
Cleaning “spas,” massive brains, and mirror experiments.
"Do these truths about manta rays make them less beautiful to you? Have I stolen wonder from you by telling you some of what we know? Or rather, have I provided you even more basis on which to find more wonder, seek more beauty in the world? I hope that the latter is true."
Dr. Heather Heying reading the beginning of the chapter on beauty from her upcoming book
On a recent Inside Rail episode, Bret Weinstein explains why he still calls himself a liberal to guest Brandi Kruse.
Watch the full episode here: https://darkhorse.locals.com/post/7654402/the-views-of-brandi-kruse-on-darkhorse-podcast
“We can’t blueprint our way out of this puzzle. We certainly can’t conserve our way out of this puzzle. That’s the reason I’m not a conservative.”
X: https://x.com/BretWeinstein/status/2032183791910068292
Youtube: https://youtu.be/YRskSFo191Y
Rumble: https://rumble.com/v770s5i-unholy-war-a-conversation-with-tucker-carlson-on-darkhorse.html
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4TBI0WTHGP71OOUf32Y1O1?si=aqFyIdHeQ-6Uv6GT6W2SnQ
Locals: https://darkhorse.locals.com/post/7762696/unholy-war-a-conversation-with-tucker-carlson-on-darkhorse
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/reel/1844433419562947
Transcripts and timestamps available for your convenience.
Full Episode:
Bret,
As I write this in my DarkHorse hoodie, I have heard you say multiple times that Trump would be impeached, if things in the election go poorly. I completely disgree for 2 reasons:
First, to get a conviction in the Senate you need 2/3rd majority (67 votes). If the Democrats were to win every single Senate seat open (35 of 35, including 13 deep red seats) they would have a 69/31 majority. Unless Trump actually committed a high crime, they might not even get 100% commitment from their party, e.g. Fetterman (although, I am sure it would be near 100%.)
Second, it would be a tactical mistake. If they have a majority in the House (fairly likely) and/or a majority in the Senate (important in controlling the agenda and committees) then they have the power they need to slow down the MAGA agenda. Trump will be a lame duck after the election whichever way it goes, and if he is impeached then the country gets a JD Vance taster, making him an incumbent President they have to run against if he is ...
