正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Shyam explains how China thinks about conflict: "It's not enough for China to be prosperous. America must fail." "There a formidable adversary in the sense that their conception of war is deception. Our conception of war is kinetic. It's the lone heroic cowboy against the odds winning through heroism."... "If you look at agriculture, it's a business decision whether you want to buy American soybeans or not. It's a different thing when you're trying to smuggle in agricultural funguses, so we can't grow soybeans. That's the shape of what's happening." "A lot of the things that are happening are below what we would consider the threshold of conflict, but it absolutely is conflict. It is system destruction warfare." "There'll be some point at which we just react. The best quote I have from Admiral is it's no longer John Boyd's OODA loop -- observe, orient, decide, act -- it's the American OODA loop -- observe, overreact, destroy, apologize."show more

Invest Like the Best

31,535 subscribers

18,828 次观看 • 6 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

“It is not a business decision when you decide to smuggle in agricultural funguses so that we can’t grow soybeans. And it’s happening. In the agriculture domain it’s basically full-on conflict, like the reintroduction of the New World screw worm, which is a livestock parasite that infects living animals. Most credible sources believe it was reintroduced by the Chinese — it didn’t just reemerge.” Shyam Sankar

“It is not a business decision when you decide to smuggle in agricultural funguses so that we can’t grow soybeans. And it’s happening. In the agriculture domain it’s basically full-on conflict, like the reintroduction of the New World screw worm, which is a livestock parasite that infects living animals. Most credible sources believe it was reintroduced by the Chinese — it didn’t just reemerge.” Shyam Sankar

Shawn Ryan

205,648 次观看 • 6 个月前

"Speed wins." "You have to be willing to commit to being fast. You can't have long bureaucratic processes. You can't have a risk-averse posture." Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 explains the OODA loop — and why the fastest operator controls the narrative in business, media, and politics: "There's a framework called the OODA loop, originally developed for fighter pilots and later for broader military strategy." "It stands for observe, orient, decide, act. It's basically the decision-making cycle." "If speed is the thing that matters, then the person who gets through that cycle the fastest is the one who's going to win." "If you can have a sustainably faster OODA loop processing cycle than the next guy — think about what happens… You operate and make a decision within an hour. The other guy is still inside his own OODA loop when you make your decision. He's only halfway through his process and now has to start over. You've changed the parameters of what's going on." "This is also a big explanation for what's happened in traditional media." "The New York Times has its own OODA loop, and it's like 24 hours to go through its process."

"Speed wins." "You have to be willing to commit to being fast. You can't have long bureaucratic processes. You can't have a risk-averse posture." Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 explains the OODA loop — and why the fastest operator controls the narrative in business, media, and politics: "There's a framework called the OODA loop, originally developed for fighter pilots and later for broader military strategy." "It stands for observe, orient, decide, act. It's basically the decision-making cycle." "If speed is the thing that matters, then the person who gets through that cycle the fastest is the one who's going to win." "If you can have a sustainably faster OODA loop processing cycle than the next guy — think about what happens… You operate and make a decision within an hour. The other guy is still inside his own OODA loop when you make your decision. He's only halfway through his process and now has to start over. You've changed the parameters of what's going on." "This is also a big explanation for what's happened in traditional media." "The New York Times has its own OODA loop, and it's like 24 hours to go through its process."

a16z

351,740 次观看 • 7 个月前

"Speed wins." "You have to be willing to commit to being fast. You can't have long bureaucratic processes. You can't have a risk-averse posture." Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 explains the OODA loop and why speed defines the narrative: "There's a framework called the OODA loop, originally developed for fighter pilots and later for broader military strategy." "It stands for observe, orient, decide, act. It's basically the decision-making cycle." "If speed is the thing that matters, then the person who gets through that cycle the fastest is the one who's going to win." "If you can have a sustainably faster OODA loop processing cycle than the next guy — think about what happens… You operate and make a decision within an hour. The other guy is still inside his own OODA loop when you make your decision. He's only halfway through his process and now has to start over. You've changed the parameters of what's going on." "This is also a big explanation for what's happened in traditional media." "The New York Times has its own OODA loop, and it's like 24 hours to go through its process."

"Speed wins." "You have to be willing to commit to being fast. You can't have long bureaucratic processes. You can't have a risk-averse posture." Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 explains the OODA loop and why speed defines the narrative: "There's a framework called the OODA loop, originally developed for fighter pilots and later for broader military strategy." "It stands for observe, orient, decide, act. It's basically the decision-making cycle." "If speed is the thing that matters, then the person who gets through that cycle the fastest is the one who's going to win." "If you can have a sustainably faster OODA loop processing cycle than the next guy — think about what happens… You operate and make a decision within an hour. The other guy is still inside his own OODA loop when you make your decision. He's only halfway through his process and now has to start over. You've changed the parameters of what's going on." "This is also a big explanation for what's happened in traditional media." "The New York Times has its own OODA loop, and it's like 24 hours to go through its process."

a16z

109,997 次观看 • 5 个月前

You ABSOLUTELY Have to WATCH Jeffrey Sachs is an brillant, honorable, honest, insightful, and frank scholar! It's a game of power. It's not that we're defending real things. This is not a conflict about Putin invading Ukraine. if we decide we're the police, which we do, you can't imagine how cynical bullshit we use to justify our actions.

You ABSOLUTELY Have to WATCH Jeffrey Sachs is an brillant, honorable, honest, insightful, and frank scholar! It's a game of power. It's not that we're defending real things. This is not a conflict about Putin invading Ukraine. if we decide we're the police, which we do, you can't imagine how cynical bullshit we use to justify our actions.

Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil

303,635 次观看 • 2 年前

Elon Musk: We should look at each expenditure and ask, is this actually in the best interest of the people? “If your taxpayer dollars are not spent in a sensible and frugal manner, then that's not okay. Your tax dollars need to be spent wisely on things that matter to the people. I mean, it's just common sense. It's not draconian or radical. I think it's really just saying, let's look at each of these expenditures and say, is this actually in the best interest of the people? If it is, it's approved. If it's not, we should think about it.” Press Conference at the White House, February 11, 2025

Elon Musk: We should look at each expenditure and ask, is this actually in the best interest of the people? “If your taxpayer dollars are not spent in a sensible and frugal manner, then that's not okay. Your tax dollars need to be spent wisely on things that matter to the people. I mean, it's just common sense. It's not draconian or radical. I think it's really just saying, let's look at each of these expenditures and say, is this actually in the best interest of the people? If it is, it's approved. If it's not, we should think about it.” Press Conference at the White House, February 11, 2025

ELON CLIPS

16,222 次观看 • 1 年前

Rick Rubin on being addicted to the miracle of creation: “I like the moment of revelation. So we're working on something and it's just okay. It's boring. I'd rather not be there. That's how it feels. But then something happens and it's like magic. Something appears. It's not like we made it. Something comes up in the process. It's conjured in the process. It’s like a miracle and that's the thing that's addictive. That feeling when it's like it's not good, it's not good, it's not good, it's not good. We try something and it doesn't work. Try something else and it doesn't work. But then all of the sudden what we're listening to is really cool. That's the [addictive] feeling, that moment of discovery where it goes from nothing to something really good. And then the whole rest of the process after that is protecting that because it's super delicate. When it happens it's like this miracle happened and this magic thing happened and now we have to protect it through the rest of the process to not ruin it. It's scary because you don't want it to end. You don't want it to stop because we know if it stops, we can't control it. We can't do it again. It's not like that. It's this moment in time where something magical happens. So we spend a lot of time waiting and I can't say that's fun. Waiting is not fun.”

Rick Rubin on being addicted to the miracle of creation: “I like the moment of revelation. So we're working on something and it's just okay. It's boring. I'd rather not be there. That's how it feels. But then something happens and it's like magic. Something appears. It's not like we made it. Something comes up in the process. It's conjured in the process. It’s like a miracle and that's the thing that's addictive. That feeling when it's like it's not good, it's not good, it's not good, it's not good. We try something and it doesn't work. Try something else and it doesn't work. But then all of the sudden what we're listening to is really cool. That's the [addictive] feeling, that moment of discovery where it goes from nothing to something really good. And then the whole rest of the process after that is protecting that because it's super delicate. When it happens it's like this miracle happened and this magic thing happened and now we have to protect it through the rest of the process to not ruin it. It's scary because you don't want it to end. You don't want it to stop because we know if it stops, we can't control it. We can't do it again. It's not like that. It's this moment in time where something magical happens. So we spend a lot of time waiting and I can't say that's fun. Waiting is not fun.”

David Senra

12,759 次观看 • 4 个月前

RUBIO: "The Ukraine war is a terrible thing, but it's not our war ... So we need to determine very quickly now, and I'm talking about a matter of days, whether or not [peace] is doable ... If it is, we're in. If it's not, then we have other priorities to focus on."

RUBIO: "The Ukraine war is a terrible thing, but it's not our war ... So we need to determine very quickly now, and I'm talking about a matter of days, whether or not [peace] is doable ... If it is, we're in. If it's not, then we have other priorities to focus on."

Chief Nerd

1,211,852 次观看 • 1 年前

Ed Sheeran. Old songs about the main things. - The drinking culture here, in England, is different from that in America. We tend to have a pint or two at the end of the workday. And on Fridays, it's up to six pints, plus a bottle of wine, plus a couple or three shots here and there. Regular drinking is part of our lifestyle. Drinking every day isn't considered alcoholism here. In America, I know, if you're drinking every day, you're already an alcoholic. - Absolutely. - Of course, some people here get excessively drunk sometimes. But overall, it's just a way of life. It's not like, you know, you wake up in the morning with a hangover and immediately think about beer. No. It's just that when the day is coming to an end, and you're in the center of London, there's a natural urge – why not have a pint? It's not like "oh damn, I have a hangover." No, it's not like that.

Ed Sheeran. Old songs about the main things. - The drinking culture here, in England, is different from that in America. We tend to have a pint or two at the end of the workday. And on Fridays, it's up to six pints, plus a bottle of wine, plus a couple or three shots here and there. Regular drinking is part of our lifestyle. Drinking every day isn't considered alcoholism here. In America, I know, if you're drinking every day, you're already an alcoholic. - Absolutely. - Of course, some people here get excessively drunk sometimes. But overall, it's just a way of life. It's not like, you know, you wake up in the morning with a hangover and immediately think about beer. No. It's just that when the day is coming to an end, and you're in the center of London, there's a natural urge – why not have a pint? It's not like "oh damn, I have a hangover." No, it's not like that.

𝕊𝕡𝕣𝕚𝕟𝕥𝕖𝕣 𝕻𝕣𝕖𝕤𝕤

11,592 次观看 • 2 个月前

"The US is not trying to challenge China's rise at all. To do that, it would have to industrialize and be a rival of China. It's not trying to be a rival of China. It's trying to stifle China's growth. It's trying to hurt China. But it's in no position at all to challenge it. The US has no intention of staying out of the Eastern Hemisphere. That's why we have so much of our military spending, all surrounding Russia and China and other Asian countries and the South Pacific." ▶️ Watch the full interview with Professor Michael Hudson on our YouTube channel:

"The US is not trying to challenge China's rise at all. To do that, it would have to industrialize and be a rival of China. It's not trying to be a rival of China. It's trying to stifle China's growth. It's trying to hurt China. But it's in no position at all to challenge it. The US has no intention of staying out of the Eastern Hemisphere. That's why we have so much of our military spending, all surrounding Russia and China and other Asian countries and the South Pacific." ▶️ Watch the full interview with Professor Michael Hudson on our YouTube channel:

Lena Petrova

36,823 次观看 • 8 个月前

"You mentioned at the top of your show that people think it's about the oil, some people think it's about this, some people that, the true answer is, you're kind of all right, you're just not putting it all together. Because yes, it is about oil, but not in the fact that we want to take the oil. We don't want our adversaries getting their hands on the #1—303 billion in oil reserves. They're #1 in the world, and that's not the Saudis, it's not the Iranians, it's the Venezuelans. And we do not want our adversaries to get a hold of that...and China was their largest purchaser of oil exports. China was. I don't think that's going to continue any longer." -Jason Buttrill, Head Writer and Chief Researcher for The Glenn Beck Program

"You mentioned at the top of your show that people think it's about the oil, some people think it's about this, some people that, the true answer is, you're kind of all right, you're just not putting it all together. Because yes, it is about oil, but not in the fact that we want to take the oil. We don't want our adversaries getting their hands on the #1—303 billion in oil reserves. They're #1 in the world, and that's not the Saudis, it's not the Iranians, it's the Venezuelans. And we do not want our adversaries to get a hold of that...and China was their largest purchaser of oil exports. China was. I don't think that's going to continue any longer." -Jason Buttrill, Head Writer and Chief Researcher for The Glenn Beck Program

Liz Wheeler

15,551 次观看 • 8 个月前

Elon Musk: We have to have free speech in order for civilization to advance. “It's a bigger deal than you'd think. It's the kind of thing that you don't know what you're missing until you don't have it. In a lot of places, people don't have it. It's important to bear in mind that the nature of free speech is, the acid test for it is, are people you don't like allowed to say things that you don't like? Otherwise it's not free. It can't be just be things that you like because eventually somebody's not going to like what you say and they're going to shut you up. That's the essence of free speech. That's why it's the First Amendment in this country. And if we lose that, I think we lose the bedrock of democracy.” From: NBC Universal Marketing Conference, April 18, 2023

Elon Musk: We have to have free speech in order for civilization to advance. “It's a bigger deal than you'd think. It's the kind of thing that you don't know what you're missing until you don't have it. In a lot of places, people don't have it. It's important to bear in mind that the nature of free speech is, the acid test for it is, are people you don't like allowed to say things that you don't like? Otherwise it's not free. It can't be just be things that you like because eventually somebody's not going to like what you say and they're going to shut you up. That's the essence of free speech. That's why it's the First Amendment in this country. And if we lose that, I think we lose the bedrock of democracy.” From: NBC Universal Marketing Conference, April 18, 2023

ELON CLIPS

33,631 次观看 • 1 年前

Kara Lawson shares why great teams embrace conflict. Most people think chemistry means the absence of conflict. Everybody agreeing all the time. But Lawson says that's not just wrong - it's backwards. "Conflict is a pivotal part of a successful team. There's no absence of conflict in successful teams." Read that again. Not despite conflict - because of it. "You know what there's an absence of? There's an absence of the conflict lingering. That's the difference." "There's gonna be conflict. You're gonna be mad at me sometimes. I'm gonna be mad at you sometimes. You're gonna be mad at each other." She's not describing a worst-case scenario. She's describing Tuesday. "But the teams that have success - they don't allow the pettiness to linger. They don't allow it to fester." Fester is the operative word. Conflict itself isn't the infection. Letting it sit untreated is. "Squash that thing, man, when it's over." Then she says the part that explains everything else: "We disagree about something on Wednesday - but on Friday, we don't have it still be there." 1-2 days later...that's the standard. Not never disagreeing. Not holding a grudge for a season. "You commit to one another so that when there is conflict, you're able to move past it. That's why you commit to someone else - 'cause you're gonna have conflict. It's inevitable." That reframes commitment entirely. You don't commit to a team because conflict won't happen. You commit because it will - and you need people who'll work through it with you instead of walking away from it. The strongest teams aren't the ones with the least friction. They're the ones with the shortest memory for it. (🎥Duke Women’s Basketball)

Kara Lawson shares why great teams embrace conflict. Most people think chemistry means the absence of conflict. Everybody agreeing all the time. But Lawson says that's not just wrong - it's backwards. "Conflict is a pivotal part of a successful team. There's no absence of conflict in successful teams." Read that again. Not despite conflict - because of it. "You know what there's an absence of? There's an absence of the conflict lingering. That's the difference." "There's gonna be conflict. You're gonna be mad at me sometimes. I'm gonna be mad at you sometimes. You're gonna be mad at each other." She's not describing a worst-case scenario. She's describing Tuesday. "But the teams that have success - they don't allow the pettiness to linger. They don't allow it to fester." Fester is the operative word. Conflict itself isn't the infection. Letting it sit untreated is. "Squash that thing, man, when it's over." Then she says the part that explains everything else: "We disagree about something on Wednesday - but on Friday, we don't have it still be there." 1-2 days later...that's the standard. Not never disagreeing. Not holding a grudge for a season. "You commit to one another so that when there is conflict, you're able to move past it. That's why you commit to someone else - 'cause you're gonna have conflict. It's inevitable." That reframes commitment entirely. You don't commit to a team because conflict won't happen. You commit because it will - and you need people who'll work through it with you instead of walking away from it. The strongest teams aren't the ones with the least friction. They're the ones with the shortest memory for it. (🎥Duke Women’s Basketball)

Coach AJ 🎯 Mental Fitness

20,341 次观看 • 2 个月前

David Rodriguez Calls For The US To Take Kinetic Action Against Mexican Cartels: It's Got To Be Surgical. It's Got To Be An Operation Like They Did With Maduro. They Cannot Put Innocent Lives At Risk And That's What The Cartels Are Gonna Do Because It Will Make Trump Look Bad, It Will Make Him Look Terrible. We Are At A Point Of No Return. We Have Just Declared War On Mexico And The Reason I Say That Is Because The Cartels Control Mexico. So It's War, This Is War. David Nino Rodriguez

David Rodriguez Calls For The US To Take Kinetic Action Against Mexican Cartels: It's Got To Be Surgical. It's Got To Be An Operation Like They Did With Maduro. They Cannot Put Innocent Lives At Risk And That's What The Cartels Are Gonna Do Because It Will Make Trump Look Bad, It Will Make Him Look Terrible. We Are At A Point Of No Return. We Have Just Declared War On Mexico And The Reason I Say That Is Because The Cartels Control Mexico. So It's War, This Is War. David Nino Rodriguez

Bannon’s WarRoom

13,010 次观看 • 7 个月前

This is incredible: Dominic Cummings (the former Chief Adviser to the British Prime Minister) calling the current Western policy on Taiwan "completely insane" and "'f*cking stupid". Exceedingly rare to see former senior officials abandon political correctness to this extent, and tell the raw, unvarnished truth. Actually pretty refreshing! Here is what he says: He says that a war over Taiwan with China, is "obviously not" worth it and that "it's completely crazy" for the West to be ditching the One-China policy that aims at peacefully reuniting Taiwan and the mainland: "[A war over Taiwan with China] is a completely insane idea. It's an island that you can see from the Chinese coast. It's full of Chinese people. The people in in the army are cousins of the people in the opposite army. For decades we've had a One-China policy accepted by Democrats and Republicans across the western world [where Taiwan is] going to be unified but it should be done peacefully not violently. That was the right approach. It's completely crazy for us to be ditching that approach and to be like willfully antagonizing China over a place filled with Chinese! It's fucking stupid!" He also says it's simply not credible to tell the Chinese that Taiwan matters to the West as much as it matters to them: "Do you think the Chinese are sitting there thinking 'okay we know that Taiwan is completely existential for us and America also thinks it's existential for them'? No, of course not, of course that's not what they're thinking, because it isn't! So you can't just go around threatening nuclear war over something where it's not actually a credible threat. Where people think 'either it's complete bullshit or they are actually insane'." He says mutually assured destruction in Europe with the USSR was credible because "there the argument for America was 'we are defending the western world, we have NATO, there is a NATO agreement on mutual self defense, and if you breach that and you attack one of us then it means war against everyone.' That was a lot lot lot more credible than 'there's a little island off the Chinese coast that has absolutely nothing to do with us historically at all, it's full of Chinese people, but we're gonna threaten potential nuclear war over it.' It's totally non-credible and doing it makes you sound mad."

This is incredible: Dominic Cummings (the former Chief Adviser to the British Prime Minister) calling the current Western policy on Taiwan "completely insane" and "'f*cking stupid". Exceedingly rare to see former senior officials abandon political correctness to this extent, and tell the raw, unvarnished truth. Actually pretty refreshing! Here is what he says: He says that a war over Taiwan with China, is "obviously not" worth it and that "it's completely crazy" for the West to be ditching the One-China policy that aims at peacefully reuniting Taiwan and the mainland: "[A war over Taiwan with China] is a completely insane idea. It's an island that you can see from the Chinese coast. It's full of Chinese people. The people in in the army are cousins of the people in the opposite army. For decades we've had a One-China policy accepted by Democrats and Republicans across the western world [where Taiwan is] going to be unified but it should be done peacefully not violently. That was the right approach. It's completely crazy for us to be ditching that approach and to be like willfully antagonizing China over a place filled with Chinese! It's fucking stupid!" He also says it's simply not credible to tell the Chinese that Taiwan matters to the West as much as it matters to them: "Do you think the Chinese are sitting there thinking 'okay we know that Taiwan is completely existential for us and America also thinks it's existential for them'? No, of course not, of course that's not what they're thinking, because it isn't! So you can't just go around threatening nuclear war over something where it's not actually a credible threat. Where people think 'either it's complete bullshit or they are actually insane'." He says mutually assured destruction in Europe with the USSR was credible because "there the argument for America was 'we are defending the western world, we have NATO, there is a NATO agreement on mutual self defense, and if you breach that and you attack one of us then it means war against everyone.' That was a lot lot lot more credible than 'there's a little island off the Chinese coast that has absolutely nothing to do with us historically at all, it's full of Chinese people, but we're gonna threaten potential nuclear war over it.' It's totally non-credible and doing it makes you sound mad."

Arnaud Bertrand

131,636 次观看 • 1 年前

"As we go into 2027, let me tell you, it's a war we are going into. Yes, it's a war; we are fighting for our lives. We are fighting for the soul of Nigeria. It is no longer business as usual. It is now business unusual. We are not going to sit back while some people think that they have the monopoly on anyhowness or madness. Every one of us, there is a bed in the psychiatric hospital for every one of us who wants to show that madness," says Aisha Yesufu. "APC has not shown it's a party that has the credibility to do the right thing. It has always shown itself to behave in an 'any-howness'-kind of manner. Of course, we know those things are going to come, but we are confident about the fact that Nigerians are tired," she added. #PoliticsToday

"As we go into 2027, let me tell you, it's a war we are going into. Yes, it's a war; we are fighting for our lives. We are fighting for the soul of Nigeria. It is no longer business as usual. It is now business unusual. We are not going to sit back while some people think that they have the monopoly on anyhowness or madness. Every one of us, there is a bed in the psychiatric hospital for every one of us who wants to show that madness," says Aisha Yesufu. "APC has not shown it's a party that has the credibility to do the right thing. It has always shown itself to behave in an 'any-howness'-kind of manner. Of course, we know those things are going to come, but we are confident about the fact that Nigerians are tired," she added. #PoliticsToday

Channels Television

25,773 次观看 • 6 个月前

American nurse speaks out about our healthcare system “Let me be the first nurse to tell you that this medical system is not built to make you better. It is not broken. It is literally designed as a business model to keep people sick. And I know this is going to make a lot of nurses and doctors upset. It's the reality. It's what's happening in front of our faces. This is a business model to keep people coming back. It's the fact that we can't be honest with our patients is the reason that this business model is working.” “Their business model is literally keep people sick, keep them on a medication, keep telling them surgery is the answer. I know so many people who are on lifetime medications who've had multiple surgeries and who are not living their life.”

American nurse speaks out about our healthcare system “Let me be the first nurse to tell you that this medical system is not built to make you better. It is not broken. It is literally designed as a business model to keep people sick. And I know this is going to make a lot of nurses and doctors upset. It's the reality. It's what's happening in front of our faces. This is a business model to keep people coming back. It's the fact that we can't be honest with our patients is the reason that this business model is working.” “Their business model is literally keep people sick, keep them on a medication, keep telling them surgery is the answer. I know so many people who are on lifetime medications who've had multiple surgeries and who are not living their life.”

Wall Street Apes

82,875 次观看 • 7 个月前

Our mainstream culture is conflict-avoidant. There is the assumption that the less conflict there is in a relationship, the better it is. I disagree. If there is real intimacy, conflict is actually unavoidable. Because we are all different. The real indicator of health in a relationship isn’t the lack of conflict, it is the quality of our repair. It is the level of authenticity we can bring. That requires knowing how to be with conflict and disagreement, how to hold nuance. And it also requires practicing the art of repairing. Are we willing to show up and repair what we broke? Do we have the skills and capacity required for that? Avoiding conflict means avoiding truth and therefore avoiding real intimacy. This work is essential and transcends the personal. If we aren't capable of dealing with conflict in our own personal lives, it is no wonder that the world is in the state it is, where the most prevalent conflict management strategy is escalation.

Our mainstream culture is conflict-avoidant. There is the assumption that the less conflict there is in a relationship, the better it is. I disagree. If there is real intimacy, conflict is actually unavoidable. Because we are all different. The real indicator of health in a relationship isn’t the lack of conflict, it is the quality of our repair. It is the level of authenticity we can bring. That requires knowing how to be with conflict and disagreement, how to hold nuance. And it also requires practicing the art of repairing. Are we willing to show up and repair what we broke? Do we have the skills and capacity required for that? Avoiding conflict means avoiding truth and therefore avoiding real intimacy. This work is essential and transcends the personal. If we aren't capable of dealing with conflict in our own personal lives, it is no wonder that the world is in the state it is, where the most prevalent conflict management strategy is escalation.

Laura Cincera

10,933 次观看 • 6 个月前