Posted on 04/27/2018 4:01:41 AM PDT by neverevergiveup
I remember reading a story about two twin sisters in Russia before the Wall came down. They were like 70 years old and both spinsters who lived together all their lives. Both were active in some sort of anti communist undergraduate “resistance” for decades. Because no one could trust anyone neither of them knew about the others activities. Apparently conditions can become so odious one cannot even trust a twin sibling. Sobering.
I trust Donal Trump. I doubt I will ever like him like I liked Reagan but I trust his ego.
Trump sees himself as a winner and will not accept defeat easily. I trust Donal Trumps ego to keep him fighting even when the GOP politicians folds.
Captain Elizabeth Lochley of Babylon 5.
I couldn’t resist the Crusade reference.
Outside of spouse, the GSD, a few of my remaining relatives, and maybe two or three others, the rest are debatable.
I trust Donal Trump. I doubt I will ever like him like I liked Reagan but I trust his ego.
Trump sees himself as a winner and will not accept defeat easily. I trust Donal Trumps ego to keep him fighting even when the GOP politicians folds.
—
Why are you spelling his name wrong? Just curious.
“...Who do you trust? ...”
My Springfield M1A, and the Glock 19.
That’s about it.
How can you trust them, they are in the water. Don’t you remember the boating accident?
1) If it seems that someone is out to get you, they are.
2) Don’t rely on the government for anything; it will always screw you.
3) Individuals bearing arms are the best defense against the world’s most dangerous killer: government.
4) Don’t believe what you’re told. Check for yourself.
5) The best way to keep a secret? Keep it to yourself. There is no second best.
6) Never discuss your business, activities, plans or secrets with anyone. Every item of information, no matter how small, can and will be used against you. (And don’t allow family members to discuss anything either.)
7) Never trust lawyers, socialists, liberals, progressives or anyone else with communist type leanings.
8) Never involve a lawyer.
9) Never trust software solutions (eSignatures), checkboxes that you have read something. They will never replace a handshake and an ink signature. They are the domain of lazy lawyers and legal assistants.
10) Trust the guys you served with and never let them down.
11) Never take anything for granted.
12) A friend is someone you trust and can talk openly and confidentially with.
13) A true friend is someone who you can call and ask for help when you have to get rid of a body in the middle of the night.
14) Cops carry guns to protect themselves, not you.
15) Never trust civilian law enforcement (cops, SWAT, DHS, TSA, etc.). They think they are like the military, but they aren’t. There are exceptions (mostly Sheriffs).
16) You can trust a military person or veteran; the military has honor and has instilled honor in those who have served.
A good day is when I wake up.
A great day is when I don't deploy the airbags.
Wise man.
It almost seems as if the concept of trust is under assault. As we head down to path to being like East Germany, will the circle of trust decline to just ourselves and God? And after a few genrations of iron rule, will even that go?
Doom and gloom. Feh. TGIF. I’ll buy more ammo :-), but what do I do about the guns I lost in a boating accident? I guess I’ll have to use a slingshot...or go trolling for them ;-)
Haven’t had enough coffee yet this morning. Still mostly asleep
So Donald Trump is what I mean to say
Wisdom is recognizing the truth.
Haven’t had enough coffee yet this morning. Still mostly asleep
—
Oh, yeah... The perils of PBC (posting before coffee). I know it well :-).
Trust is an interesting thing.
I admit to being an optimistic person by nature, and that does extend to my fellow man. I partially agree with what another person on this thread said, that you cannot trust anyone. I say partially, because I think that is a terrible way to go through life. My view is that there are some people in some circumstances you can and should trust, and other people in other circumstances you should not trust.
Sometimes, they are the same person in different circumstances, but more often, they are different people in the same circumstances.
I take each person in life I encounter as an individual, and offer them default respect and trust from the moment of the first encounter. This is true from any phone, email, or personal (physical) encounter. I believe that trust in a physical encounter is quite a different thing than trust in a non-physical communication, which is generally not completely possible to do safely. (The exceptions may be long duration correspondences where you get a feel for a person by the way they communicate, write, opine, etc. such as what we experience in some cases on Free Republic or similar things)
I do have a name for this, I call it “Default Respect” which I extend to everyone (or try to) until they demonstrate they are undeserving of that respect. Granted, Trust and Respect are two different things, but I find they are often related. Both generally fall into the category of things that may not be purchased or requested, but must be granted and given.
What I discuss below is the initial phase of trust, the first physical encounter. I depend on my gut instinct, and I have found that I am both a very good judge of character, and a very bad judge of character! The point is, if I do trust someone, I generally have to do a calculus of risk. If the risk outweighs the benefits of trust (benefits which may extend far beyond an initial encounter and turn into lifelong relationships and positive memories) then one cannot “give” trust. If the risk is low, the threshold for granting trust is low, and is generally given.
An example of High Risk with a corresponding High threshold for granting trust is giving your life’s savings to someone for investment. Low Risk with Low threshold might be asking someone in a supermarket for advice on what kind of spice can be put into some kind of dish you plan to prepare.
So you see, it is that initial calculus you must do that determines trust. So, I am going to write about the concept of assembling both consciously and unconsciously the elements by which you can determine ‘trust’.
From the instant I meet someone, my mind is somewhat abuzz with sensory and non-sensory input, and the assembling of the “person” begins in my mind. I do judge people by their appearance and manner. All I describe in the next several paragraphs often takes shape in the first few seconds the person enters my sphere, and these things, while physical, DO impact “trust”. We all do it, it is human nature. And they are, I believe, vital in many circumstances.
That said, here is how my mind sets the table, though it is only a portion, not the entirety.
Natural physical appearance is not primary...though it does play a role. Color, sex, physical features, they all factor in to a small degree (often, how can they NOT factor in, I am only human) but not beyond. If someone has a disfigurement of some kind, or is completely unattractive, that doesn’t count. More relevant to me is their countenance...their eyes, the skin around the eyes which can indicate chronic sorrow, anger, or humor so effectively to me...the set of the mouth, and so on. I also factor in their carriage. Do they stand up straight, do they slouch, do they look alert and alive, or dead and vacant, etc.
But I DO factor in jewelry, cosmetics, piercings, tattoos, hair styling, cleanliness, and clothing. I don’t think it is shallow to do so. I do not judge people on the physical attributes God gave them at birth, or how they have been changed by the vagaries of life, but I do judge people on things they have control over.
If I see green and pink hair, that tells me something. If someone is unwashed and slovenly, that tells me something. If they have tattoos and piercings, that tells me something (though not always negative). Their clothes, their condition, and how they wear them tell me something. If I see someone ostentatiously dressed, that is not generally a positive thing, though seeing a person dressed nicely and neatly DOES tell me something. Clean clothes are a positive, and unclean clothes are not generally a negative, depending on the whole picture, but the condition of the clothes apart from cleanliness DOES tell me something. Clothes in poor condition that are slovenly are generally a negative impact, while clothes in a worn condition, but are clean and mended are a net positive.
Now that the table is set in my mind, I often have the person in a series of categories, all of which may have equal consideration. For example, if I see a person with bizarre hair, facial tattoos, multiple piercings, and unconventional clothes, I may have a series of containers they fall into such as: NEGATIVE: TRYING HARD TO BE PERCEIVED AS “INDIVIDUAL”, or NEUTRAL: IS INDIVIDUALIST BUT EXPRESSES IT IN WAYS I WOULD NOT, or POSITIVE: COULD BE A GOOD PERSON WHO WANTS TO BE SEEN AS ECCENTRIC, and often, it is the full sensory input, the look of the eyes, the set of the face, etc. that creates the containers, not simply the appearance of the hair, tattoos, piercings, or clothes.
In a different example, I may see a teenager with the ball cap with flattened brim at an angle, worn over a bandana, white “wife beater” t-shirt, and trousers worn low exposing a lot of underwear. I have an extremely negative opinion of boys or men who dress like this, regardless of color, and there may be only two containers: NEGATIVE: PARTICIPANT OR FAN OF VIOLENT HIP-HOP CULTURE, or NEGATIVE: WANTS TO BE SEEN AS PART OF VIOLENT HIP-HOP CULTURE, NOT AS HIMSELF. In cases like these, there is a prejudicial pit these people often fall into, and it is more difficult to find positive containers in my head...and that is how things will stay until I interact with them.
One more example would be a large guy with long hair, bushy beard, and “pirate gear” as one of my former bosses used to refer to biker guys. I might have a container that says NEGATIVE: WANTS TO BE PERCEIVED AS A BADASS FOR ITS OWN SAKE BECAUSE HE ISN’T CONFIDENT ENOUGH TO BE HIMSELF, or NEUTRAL: LIKES TO BIKE WITH PEOPLE, LOOKS LIKE PEOPLE HE HANGS AROUND WITH, or POSITIVE: HAS APPEARANCE OF BIKER WITH BIKER GEAR FESTOONED WITH PATRIOT GUARD PATCHES/MILITARY PATCHES/AMERICAN PATCHES. (that is just experience...I like almost all those guys I have met)
On top of all this, are the things people wear or display that have an outsized impact on my perception. If I see someone with a bumper sticker, hat, t-shirt or jewelry with things like these following examples, I place them in an almost universal negative container in my mind: Peace sign, Rainbow (homosexual) icon, Che Guevara, Hammer and Sickle, Black Lives Matter, United Nations, Any number of NGO’s (such as UNICEF, etc.) any strongly Democrat Leftist slogan icon or indicator (such as open and vocal support for Hillary, Bernie, Obama, etc.), Coexist, Socialism, and so on.
Conversely, if someone with a bumper sticker, hat, t-shirt or jewelry with things like these following examples, I place them in an almost universal positive container in my mind: American flag, Gadsden flag, POW/MIA, nearly any military indicator (such as Globe and Anchor, unit indicators, etc), NRA, RKBA, and so on.
As I said, these are all things that happen in the first few seconds when I see someone. They usually do not DETERMINE my treatment or potential trust in the final analysis, but they can be strong indicators in conjunction with actual interaction. Sure, they are prejudicial, but I think all people are prejudicial by our very nature...and that is not just in a bad way, but in a good way as well. As long as the prejudicial impressions don’t rule the day, they are useful tools.
This ALL feeds into your calculus you must perform, once your eyes meet and you speak to each other.
That is one of the key things I loved about Reagan...”Trust but Verify”.
There is a lot of wisdom in that.
Funk and Wagnalls.
Psa 142:4 I look for someone to come and help me, but no one gives me a passing thought! No one will help me; no one cares a bit what happens to me.
This is the epitome of the trust issue. You look around you and no man cares for your soul, as other versions state it.
Psa 142:4 I looked on my right hand, and I watched, but no one recognized me; escape was lost to me; no man cared for my soul.
It is the soul part that should haunt us. The soul being our very essence. But I encourage all to go read it in context.........................
My additional comment is never never never hire or trust a “financial advisor”.
Learn what you need to learn—never depend on an outsider.
I don't trust media, the educational system, and most of local, state, & federal governments.
You may want to use your Funk and Wagnalls dictionary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.