I am crossing this divide now. I have secondary education but no university and I am working to get to med school now (In Finland it is a combined undergrad and med school). I think I can do it but I don't really know how to study. I know how to learn but learning in schedule is the issue. I was too ill to go to university when I should have and I could have gone to easier courses I could have gone to without an entrance exam and done OK but I always wanted medicine. Or well, I not easier but easier to get into like maths. After I got better I ended up in aid work, and stopping that is really hard. But I still want to become a doctor so I am trying now in my thirties. Having what looks like undiagnosed ADHD that is now under investigation and crappy childhood might explain part of why I never became what people felt I should have but the fact that I never had to learn to study because I didn't need to get through is up there.

I try to remember that our education does not mean anything for our value, but it seems hard when it comes to you.

Thank you! This really does point me in the right direction.

And as an aside, I absolutely love how welcoming the open source community is.

Would have suggested it but Calcifer is written with C in Howl's Moving Castle.

I played being a bureaucrat. I became woke moralist. Well, kind of.

I realized later that's what it sounds like. I am not defending the act itself. I have spent a lot of time criticising it myself. What I am trying to do is to frame it into context. Bible is not without its pretty heinous acts. What I have an issue with is that people frame Islam, Christianity and Judaism in completely separate contexts. It is no less insane to convert to Christianity than Islam. Both are problematic and all three are built on each other literally. IMO based on religious texts Islam is better but that doesn't mean it is without significant faults. There are buts like with Aisha. Otherwise, I would have converted already.

People forget that countries, cultures, religions and people are not as simply understood as Islam bad. That would make my work easier. But religions are a complex mixture of all with a side of history. For example, both Christianity and Judaism also require veiling yourself as a woman but few do. I haven't really met a Christian who doesn't wear polycotton. And as few that don't eat crustaceans. Not even Catholicism nor Orthodoxy require either. But Bible does.

Fundamentalist thought processes have been pretty widespread in Islam for the past half a century. But they are not also explainable with just Islam bad. A lot of it is overcorrection because of imperialism. Some are about the far-right which while Islamophobic carries a lot of commonalities with fundamentalists of all types. And some are about religion. It is a potent mix and is used by a lot of populists globally. While there is a lot to criticize, it is often mischaracterized. Which makes me sound like I am defending the faults. I am not and should have framed better.

Only one brand of fundamentalist Islam is exported from KSA. There are a lot of brands including ones brought from Iran and Afghanistan not to mention whatever ISIS was doing.

It is both descriptive of groups who work against fascists and part of the name of some groups who currently and historically work against fascists. This doesn't make suing the CEO of Antifa any less insane.

The issue is that what Antifa actually is and how the public perceives it are two different things. This is why certain people will believe this as much as NSDAP being socialists because it is in the name which makes them leftists unless you really give a history lesson. And from experience that will end up in that they either say that's just your opinion, look at you with glassed eyes or never even listened to you into the end.

Yes, both are historically really incorrect and at the level of a glance funny in inaccuracy. But on more deeper level this (insert the right fallacy or tactic as it escapes me) is a lot more insidiously dangerous. How do you efficiently encounter it in a way that most people will come out of the discussion with the most accurate knowledge?

While I agree with you, maybe edit would make some sense. There is a huge amount of propaganda and misconceptions about antifa which is why it is so easy to take your original comment as truth.

Things either need to be really, really bad and people are done or we need to find what they care about more than being comfortable. I was not always politically active. It took until my late twenties and seeing how bad things can really be. I have been an activist on the human rights front for about a decade. And it only happened because I really saw the issues in my country and continent. But while my family knows as I make sure they know, and some kind of care, it is not important enough for them.

But weirdly. My country had literal neo-Nazis as a minister and everyone with a brain thinks we still do as bids of the same feather and so on. And suddenly my leftist but not active friends became active, online and outside that. It is weird when I have been warning that this is the road we are on for the better part of a decade it took it to happen for people to take action. Thankfully we are still solidly democratic so this might work. At least for a few years.

They definitely are emotionally compromised person being manipulated but being emotionally unintelligent and being emotionally compromised are not the same thing. While being emotionally unintelligent will affect your risk of being radicalized it does so through your own emotions and capacity to process them in a healthy way.

Radicalization happens in steps. You don't get from being blind to racism and as the next step participating in genocide. Nor do you go from wondering if you are being lied to for some nefarious reason to believing 5G will kill you. It is a slow and gradual process. A lot of people are following the same playbook. It includes things like moving goalposts, giving the same legitimacy to two viewpoints that are not equal in ethics or evidence, playing on fear and discomfort, and giving convenient fall guy for people's difficulties. In my language, there is a saying that in a group stupidity condenses. That isn't because people's intelligence somehow lessens but because of the social nature of human beings.

It is not like people in Nazi Germany suddenly lose their collective cognitive or emotional intelligence in 20s and 30s. There were pretty clear issues going on that could be seized for populist politics. It is also not like Nazis themselves didn't have a huge amount of anti-intellectual pseudoscience in their idealogy and, in the case of some members, a lot of occultism going around.

The hard truth is that people in general are really bad at seeing manipulation. You can see the clumsy attempts but the majority of people judge others' actions based on their view of their intentions. And as in general we would like to think of ourselves as well-intentioned, we are not judging if someone is manipulating all the time. Critical thinking can help but the thing about radicalization is that it speaks to multiple psychological tendencies we naturally have.

And while I deem QAnon shit and even any flavor of alt-right or religious fundamentalism idiocy, the pure fact that they have been as successful as they have tells that their manipulation is quite finessed.

I'm Finnish. We also start with wooden pencils and graduate to either ballpoint pens or some kind of fineliner marker. I am the only person I know with a fountain pen who actually uses it for normal writing. Mainly because it hurts so much less.