Hey, we want to be part of the hate!

POSTED BY: dreamtrove
UPDATED: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 02:14
VIEWED: 18566
PAGE 1 of 3

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, January 4, 2009 7:29 PM

Fascism is running high on the board. I probably should have left earlier. I hate to leave on a sour note, but this has become a hate site.

Read through the posts and find people spouting against the racial inferiors, genetic, religious, their own special monkey people in need of extermination.

I know there are good people here, but the Israel thread has really brought it out. Check out the actual nazi forums and see how tame they are in their animosity compared to what's posted here. I was genuinely offended by the suggestion that because I don't want to see another race get exterminated that this makes pro-holocaust, esp. as the descendent of holocaust suvivors, or more to the point, non-survivors.

The feeling from the neocons on the board towards muslims is beyond racist. It's genocidal.

I was also disappointed once more, over the pile on effect. Once one person had p*ssed on the graves of my ancestors and relatives, a whole lot of other people seemed to jump on board. So I repost things by jews I know and am told that this too is "Nazi" stuff. Nevermind that jews seem genuinely concerned not for themselves, that Israel is bad PR for the jewish community, or the Iraq war is bad PR for americans, but for the actual plight of the Palestinian people and the Iraqi people.

Earlier, I got into a disagreement on the second amendment. I said it didn't support lone reaver's rights to shoot people. I later conceded the point, which makes me worried about the implications, but when one person insulted me, suddenly there was a huge pile on.

Questions? Comments?

GINOBIFFARONI

Sunday, January 4, 2009 7:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Fascism is running high on the board. I probably should have left earlier. I hate to leave on a sour note, but this has become a hate site.

Read through the posts and find people spouting against the racial inferiors, genetic, religious, their own special monkey people in need of extermination.

I know there are good people here, but the Israel thread has really brought it out. Check out the actual nazi forums and see how tame they are in their animosity compared to what's posted here. I was genuinely offended by the suggestion that because I don't want to see another race get exterminated that this makes pro-holocaust, esp. as the descendent of holocaust suvivors, or more to the point, non-survivors.

The feeling from the neocons on the board towards muslims is beyond racist. It's genocidal.

I was also disappointed once more, over the pile on effect. Once one person had p*ssed on the graves of my ancestors and relatives, a whole lot of other people seemed to jump on board. So I repost things by jews I know and am told that this too is "Nazi" stuff. Nevermind that jews seem genuinely concerned not for themselves, that Israel is bad PR for the jewish community, or the Iraq war is bad PR for americans, but for the actual plight of the Palestinian people and the Iraqi people.

Earlier, I got into a disagreement on the second amendment. I said it didn't support lone reaver's rights to shoot people. I later conceded the point, which makes me worried about the implications, but when one person insulted me, suddenly there was a huge pile on.

Questions? Comments?

I have quit posting, hell I have quit reading most of the threads for the same reason.

Lets party like its 1939

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, January 4, 2009 7:49 PM

Maybe the level-headed to regroup elsewhere. Anyone agree with sentiment, PM me.

AGENTROUKA

Sunday, January 4, 2009 7:58 PM

I started reading that thread and then stopped when I stumbled over the term "diaper head".

Why do people do this and not feel like idiots?

BYTEMITE

Sunday, January 4, 2009 8:35 PM

I think the slurs are the only way they know how to express themselves on these subjects. But maybe I shouldn't put words in people's mouths. <_< It could be the arguments just bring out the ugly, I've seen that happen too.

RIGHTEOUS9

Sunday, January 4, 2009 8:54 PM

It's ignorance.

You can browbeat people who are ignorant of universal humanity, you can shout them down, you can pick up and take your toys and ideas elsewhere,

but none of those things will educate, or will help to wear away that misunderstanding. True, there are those disintersted in bothering, there are those who don't want to see the world differently and are unwilling to,

but this is a pretty good board with a "fairly" civil tone, considering how dynamic the views are of the people who post here,

and it gets new readers on the occasion,and on a very rare occasion it gets some of its posters to give some ground.

Maddeningly, as soon as a new post opens they are somehow posting the same nonsense they already grudgingly disavowed, but it's something.

the site keeps me open-minded. It keeps me aware and wary of the rhetoric that comes from people I agree with. I think twice, maybe three times before posting some ideas because suddenly I'm aware that they don't hold as much water as they seemed to when I was just feeling them. In that way I think it keeps me more intelectually honest.

I can only hope it does the same for many of the people I don't agree with.

but back to racism---- People are dogmatic. America became pretty prejudice after 911, because it was scary, because it was large in scale, because it was people from a foreign land that did it. So...heh, people clung to their guns and religion. They chose a boogie man, and saw a crusade of good versus evil. Exterminating evil, according to this model, is of course good.

That mentality is too wide spread to just pick out bad apples. Its more of a phenomenon or a culture. It has certainly faded over the years, but I don't think the solution is to disassociate. I think the solution is to continue to be a part of their discussions, to continue to poke holes in the veil they have let be placed upon their heads,

and more cheezy metaphors...

There are people who don't already have a hardened mind on the world, some of which probably read this board. So you continue to discuss issues with those you disagree with for them.

Sure, if every post turns into an insult fest we have a problem where no information is being discussed, but I don't see that to be the case most of the time.

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, January 4, 2009 8:56 PM

Quote:
I started reading that thread and then stopped when I stumbled over the term "diaper head".

Why do people do this and not feel like idiots?

Thank your various Gods for the Silent Majority

Okay, I will grant that the fault was mine for not doing the same. I tried to argue sense into these people. It went into high flame when *someone* started belittling the holocaust, in which my father's entire extended family was killed. As I posted, it's very difficult to offend me, not impossible.

Curiously, some of these people can be made to see reason, but only for brief periods. I know that some people have mental issues, it didn't occur to me that those employed by our military did, but it would explain a lot.

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, January 4, 2009 9:32 PM

Quote:
RIGHTEOUS9
It's ignorance ... but this is a pretty good board ... considering how dynamic the views are

Actually, it would be easy to make a troll list. I've posted on this board for years, and I think that regardless of politics, certain people could be booted.
If it were my board, I would make this temporary. Not booted for a position, but booted for lack of civility. Then they could be allowed to return, if they chose, and be booted again. Like being voted off the island. I never liked the IRC system, even as an op, because I thought it was a dictatorship. I think the majority should find someone out of line, and they should be forbidden to post for a while.

Another issue is over-posters. Certain Users post 3 threads a day. That clogs things up.

Quote:
the site keeps me open-minded. It keeps me aware and wary of the rhetoric that comes from people I agree with. I think twice, maybe three times before posting some ideas because suddenly I'm aware that they don't hold as much water as they seemed to when I was just feeling them. In that way I think it keeps me more intelectually honest.

This is a thought. A lot of people have said I make them think, particularly I got that from the left. Taoism is pretty conservative, I guess religions are, but it's not completely in line with say "christian conservatism" though there are many points in common. My own conduct is out of line with my faith at times because I'm a flawed human and I get emotionally outraged, or decide to engage some debate that is fruitlless.

I can only hope it does the same for many of the people I don't agree with.

Quote:
America became pretty prejudice after 911

I'm not sure I buy this. It fed the feeling, but if you haven't yet, watch the 1997 film "the seige" with denzel washington and tony shalhoub. the movie is downright precient. But it speaks to the growing anti-islamic racism and the connected real fear of islamic terrorism. I personally think that 9-11 was in part an inside job, I have no idea if there were any muslims involved, but certainly there has been islamic terrorism. The most credible islamic terrorism has been against Israel and ironically, Iran, but there's a fair amount in Africa. Russia, like the US, I am suspicious of, as I am of the UK, that some of these events are staged. Now maybe the only staging is someone sees an islamic terrorist plot and decides to let it happen, but some of the stories, in depth, are completely implausible. Internal to the Islamic world, there's a lot of terrorism, I count Iran out as being a different religion, but Afghan-on-afghan terrorism has been an issue for a while, though often with russian or american support.

But, for a reference point, it's been 20 years since the Cure song "Killing an Arab." It's not new.

Quote:
So...heh, people clung to their guns and religion. They chose a boogie man, and saw a crusade of good versus evil. Exterminating evil, according to this model, is of course good.

Yes, this is the most simple model of human manipulation, and one of the big ones that Tao warns you about. If you can define something as good or evil, you can define the other by contrast. It is of course, a false dichotomy, which is the point. Our partisan political system is based on it.

Quote:
That mentality is too wide spread to just pick out bad apples. Its more of a phenomenon or a culture.

There are certain members, not just the one I'm angry at at the moment, but certain members who are constitantly drummers for the cause of panic and hatred. I suppose these people are always there. But temporary suspension would work to remove the behavior from everyone else.

Quote:
I think the solution is to continue to be a part of their discussions, to continue to poke holes in the veil they have let be placed upon their heads,

I don't think that the moles will ever see reason. They're there for propaganda purposes. As are some of the people I think of as basically good guys who have a couple of bad ideas.

[qu

FREMDFIRMA

Sunday, January 4, 2009 9:34 PM

Ah, but that's the crown jewels, DT.

They don't even seem to realize that they are in essence, giving you a guided tour (albeit a damn short one!) of the insides of their head, and even conveniently labelling all the gears, buttons and levers for you.

To know what makes them tick is key to manipulating them, and both myself and Piratenews occasionally play on that by yanking their chains to watch them foam at the mouth on "command" for amusement value.

You know they're self-destructive, and here they are handing you the means and ability to encourage it if not fully bring it about, of their own free will, and yet in your own hurt you don't see the potential that is being offered.

Don't take injury, don't hate back, USE what you're learning about them, against them.

Dude, you're never gonna make evil overlordship at this rate...

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, January 4, 2009 9:56 PM

I see your point, but I don't think they're mindless automatons of a sector to manipulate, I think they are propagandists of the MIC.

Oh, and I won't turn into a giant snake. It never helps.

BTW, email me, off forum, at gmail. There are some things I want to discuss but not on the forum. Items of mutual interest. I've been discussing off forum with John for some time, and also Barb, and occasionally Kathy. There are things not to be posted.

KIRKULES

Sunday, January 4, 2009 11:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Read through the posts and find people spouting against the racial inferiors, genetic, religious, their own special monkey people in need of extermination.

That would be bad if it really happened, but it didn't except in your own personal delusion. One off color remark and all of a sudden everyone that disagrees with you is a fascist. You're the one that seems to know every racist epithet known to man and repeats them ad nauseum, attributing them to imaginary posts that don't exist except in your own fucked up brain. Most of the posters here have never used the hatefull language you attribute to them in all the time I've been here, but since you've been here it turns up in the majority of your posts. You won't have to worry about me responding to your hate filled posts any longer, it's pointless to argue with someone that is incapable of seeing reality. And yes, there is only one reality jackass.

DREAMTROVE

Sunday, January 4, 2009 11:13 PM

Ah Kirkules, so kind of you to join us, I knew someone would want to be part of the hate.

SERGEANTX

Sunday, January 4, 2009 11:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by GinoBiffaroni:
I have quit posting, hell I have quit reading most of the threads for the same reason.

Yeah. I'm kinda with ya there. I suppose part of it has to do with being busy with other things, and just general boredom with the same tired cheerleading, but it also seems that there used to be more of an "Independent/Browncoat" spirit in our midst. It'd be nice to get back to that.

SergeantX

"Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Monday, January 5, 2009 12:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I know there are good people here, but the Israel thread has really brought it out. Check out the actual nazi forums and see how tame they are in their animosity compared to what's posted here. I was genuinely offended by the suggestion that because I don't want to see another race get exterminated that this makes pro-holocaust, esp. as the descendent of holocaust suvivors, or more to the point, non-survivors.

No one suggested exterminating anyone, and no one said anything bad about any holocaust victims, unless you include your parading their suffering and death out as a desperate plea to emotionalism. It’s offensive the way you use the Holocaust as a cheap stunt to trump reasoned debate. As far as extermination, you’re the one who refuses to apart any blame to a terrorist organization targeting Israeli civilians. A terrorist organization that has vowed, in their own words, to take over all of Palestine aggressively:

“There is no solution for the Palestine question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. Palestine is an Islamic land.” -- The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS)

Here’s another quote from one your buddies:

“As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map.” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

KWICKO

Monday, January 5, 2009 12:50 AM

Quote:

Here’s another quote from one your buddies:

“As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map.” Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Except that he didn't say it.

Quote:

To quote Ahmadinejad's exact words in Farsi:

"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word "regime." pronounced just like the English word with an extra "eh" sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase "rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods" (regime occupying Jerusalem).

So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh" is not contained anywhere in his original Farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's president threatened to "wipe Israel off the map." despite never having uttered the words "map." "wipe out" or even "Israel."

The Proof:

The full quote translated directly to English:

"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."

Word by word translation:

Imam (Khomeini) ghoft (said) een (this) rezhim-e (regime) ishghalgar-e (occupying) qods (Jerusalem) bayad (must) az safheh-ye ruzgar (from page of time) mahv shavad (vanish from).

So if I were to say that the Bush Regime will vanish from the page of time, would that be the same as saying that Bush must be wiped off the map?

I didn't think so.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Monday, January 5, 2009 1:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Except that he didn't say it.

Yes, he did say it. There have been many attempts by people sympathetic to Iran to whitewash his statement by parsing the translation. But in the end, even the most generous translation clearly enunciates the idea of eliminating Israel as a state, or wiping Israel off the map. It is an accurate translation.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RIGHTEOUS9

Monday, January 5, 2009 1:11 AM

you're right, I way simplified 911's influence. Prejudice is something that's always been with us, obviously. Maybe America more than alot of european nations(not positive on this though), but 911 certainly stirred up those latent phobias.

I did watch the siege...AND I was going to write a story very similar to it, until it came out and stole my thunder.

RIGHTEOUS9

Monday, January 5, 2009 1:13 AM

and finn,

just gotto ask cuz you've made me curious,

what is the basis for you saying that even the most generous translation says what you say it does?

Do you yourself have the ability to translate the words, or have you read from numerous sources and translations(maybe even some sources that don't have a mainstream bias) that informs your statement?

FREMDFIRMA

Monday, January 5, 2009 1:20 AM

Scuse me while I laugh at the moron-monkey for believing a MEMRI translation.

ha. ha. ha.

The very definition of gullibility is not believing facts which conflict with your worldview, while chug-a-lugging whatever wacky kool-aid does regardless of it's validity.

The wonderful edge of folks like that around here is that by their actions, and their idiocy, it allows easy discrediting of their entire position and anyone who holds it, if I didn't know better I'd say they were strawman carriers workin for the other side - but alas, they actually believe this shit, or believe in the agenda behind it, which'd be hi-larious if it weren't so pathetic.

So, let em pratfall all they want, there's no better way to wreck their agendas than to toss out banana peels you KNOW they're gonna step right on cause they're too blind to do anything else.

Seriously, it's almost TOO easy.

Oh, and DT ?
No, and you know why, sorry.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Monday, January 5, 2009 1:24 AM

My apologies. Kwicko didn’t even cite his comments. Let me provide the link for you.

Quote:
The inflammatory "wiped off the map" quote was first disseminated not by Iran's enemies, but by Iran itself. The Islamic Republic News Agency, Iran's official propaganda arm, used this phrasing in the English version of some of their news releases covering the World Without Zionism conference. International media including the BBC, Al Jazeera, Time magazine and countless others picked up the IRNA quote and made headlines out of it without verifying its accuracy, and rarely referring to the source. Iran's Foreign Minister soon attempted to clarify the statement, but the quote had a life of its own. Though the IRNA wording was inaccurate and misleading, the media assumed it was true, and besides, it made great copy.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NOR200
70120&articleId=4527

According to this site, which as I said has Muslim sympathies, the translation was inaccurate, but it was the translation of the government sponsored Newspaper of Iran. And I’m pretty sure that the official propaganda machine of the Iranian government has a better grasp on what the espoused positions of the Iranian government are then the people at Global Research do. So it’s a little haughty for them to claim that their translation is superior, but that’s just a display of their bias. And in the end, the CGR arrived at a translation that while nuanced to be somewhat muted by Western standards, still conveyed the clear idea of the elimination of Israel as a state.

KWICKO

Monday, January 5, 2009 1:33 AM

Quote:
Take a look at the site that Kwicko posted. It comes from Left-wing site with Muslim sympathies called the Center for Global Research.

Actually, it doesn't. So you're 0 for 2 on this one, wrong both times. But keep trying; it amuses me to watch you flail about.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

OUT2THEBLACK

Monday, January 5, 2009 1:53 AM

Israel the Nazi State :

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFu
ll&cid=1230733139909

"...I said Israel will attack any boat carrying doctors and medical supplies," Barr wrote on her blog, adding that, "Israel is a NAZI state. The Jewish Soul is being tortured in Israel."

The Emmy-award winning actress, who has courted controversy in the past, also condemned Israel's counter-terror operation against Hamas, asserting that, "The destruction of the Jews in Israel has been assured with this inhuman attack on civilians in Gaza."

In her post, Barr likened Hamas to "street gangs" in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Watts, saying that Israel's military campaign is the "equivalent to Los Angeles attacking and launching war on the people of Watts to kill 'the Bloods' and 'the Crips.'"

GEEZER

Monday, January 5, 2009 2:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Take a look at the site that Kwicko posted. It comes from Left-wing site with Muslim sympathies called the Center for Global Research.

Actually, it doesn't. So you're 0 for 2 on this one, wrong both times. But keep trying; it amuses me to watch you flail about.

Of course, when you don't provide cites for your quotes, folk are left with googling them. Since such statements are often copied on other sites with no attribution, it's often hard to find the original source.

Is this the one you quoted?
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/print.asp?ID=5866
It seems to be the original, but it's hard to tell.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

DREAMTROVE

Monday, January 5, 2009 6:12 AM

Cumhal, you may delete your own words, and put words into the mouth of Ahmadinejad or myself, but you will not get a debate from me. Ever.

As I said, I'm also a farmer with a fifth grade education. There's no reason on earth why a man of the military intelligence should care what I say or think.

Personally, I think you're a moron, and incredibly dishonest, a discredit to your profession, and a disgrace to our nation. But that's just my humble opinion, based on the years of nothing that you have posted.

Do us both a favor. Ignore me, and my threads.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Monday, January 5, 2009 6:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
...but you will not get a debate from me. Ever.

Promise?

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

DREAMTROVE

Monday, January 5, 2009 6:26 AM

Geezer:

Thanks for the Link
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".

That sounds much more like the man. Understand also the context. To Ahmadinejad, there are two pressing issues:

1. He cannot support Israel and hold his job. He's already out on a limb because he is a third party candidate with no real base of support who won an election by a fluke of conincidental corruption scandals on the right and left.

2. He's a life long opponent of Apartheid. He is sincere when he says that the zionist regime is an apartheid regime. He looks forward to a joint jewish-palestinian rule, where there is equal power sharing. He prefers this to a two state solution.

I disagree with this, I prefer a two state solution, because I think the one state would be riddled with internal terrorism. Nonetheless I have great respect for the man. My respect for a man is not based on how much he likes me, or how much he and I agree, but on the convictions of his beliefs the consistency of his strength of character and his ability to act on those beliefs to support what and who he loves and cares about. Few leaders measure up to this standard. Manmohan Singh of India, and Ro of S. Korea are such men, as is Fidel Castro, a man who politicially, I have nothing in common with.

US predient I most admire would be TR. I, unlike many, am fond of Nixon and Carter, they measure up to these standards. Reagan I have a few issues with, and Eisenhower I can say a good number of positive things about, but cannot forgive the nuclear testing. Thomas Jefferson is someone that we should all be able to admire, in spite of the fact that he kept slaves.

DREAMTROVE

Monday, January 5, 2009 6:27 AM

Quote:
Promise?

It would be a waste of my time.

Oh, and to everyone else, thank you for the support and comments. All insightful, and helpful. I feel less alone here now.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Monday, January 5, 2009 6:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Quote:
Promise?

It would be a waste of my time.

Probably. Unless you have something intellectually honest to add.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

DREAMTROVE

Monday, January 5, 2009 6:51 AM

Quote:
Probably. Unless you have something intellectually honest to add.

Possessing no education, I can assure you that I will never have anything intellectual to add. It would be easy to snark that you will never have anything honest to add, but I believe the cat.

DREAMTROVE

Monday, January 5, 2009 6:54 AM

Frem

No, I've forgotten. PM me the reason. It does not make sense to me that we should continue to act in solace, and there are things that I will not post to the board.

GEEZER

Monday, January 5, 2009 2:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Geezer:

Thanks for the Link
"The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".

That sounds much more like the man.

Actually, it sounds like Imam Khomeini, who he is quoting.

I'm also not seeing the great difference between "Israel must be wiped off the map." and "...this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."

"Keep the Shiny side up"

SIGNYM

Monday, January 5, 2009 3:07 PM

Geezer, one implies that the occupying force of a city must no longer be an occupier. The other implies that the entire government must disappear.

Finn, you fail to be sufficiently aware of that age-old conundrum: In order to fight Hitler, must one become fascist? In order to fight genocide, must one become genocidal? At one point, you agreed that your goal was to kill only as many as required to save more lives. But the Israeli ambassador to the UN said: "There is no proportionality. We're sorry for the loss of civilians, BUT..."

Ends and mean. Your ends might be fine, but your means betray them.

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

RUE

Monday, January 5, 2009 6:54 PM

DreamTrove

These are the people I have been arguing against during the the last two years you've been gone. They ARE filled wih hate and prejudice, along with deception.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

KWICKO

Monday, January 5, 2009 7:05 PM

Quote:

I'm also not seeing the great difference between "Israel must be wiped off the map." and "...this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time."

Of course you aren't.

As I said earlier, if I say that George W. Bush will go down as a terrible president, and will be largely forgotten by history, that isn't QUITE the same thing as if I said I'd like to see him "wiped from the map", is it? One is saying that the pages of time will little remember a thing or event, and the other is saying we should actively destroy said thing or event. Subtle difference, I know, but I hoped you could figure it out. Guess I overestimated you.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

HERO

Monday, January 5, 2009 8:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Questions? Comments?

Free speech can be a really great thing...until people start saying stuff you don't like.

It can also be noisy.

I think that what you are saying is that you want to end free speech on this board. While that sounds really bad and dramatic, traditionally reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions have not been inconsistant with free speech...so long as you can guarrantee content neutrality.

I note for the record that most of us have been called a troll or worse on this forum, most often when our political opinion is not shared by the other party. I've been hanging around here for years...and I can think of only one person that crosses the line on a regular basis. So if your going to ban someone or set some kind of standards...he's your huckleberry (and we all know who it is).

H

RUE

Monday, January 5, 2009 9:14 PM

"Not booted for a position, but booted for lack of civility."

I don't see any attempt to infringe on free speech here. Free speech doesn't appear to be the issue.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

DREAMTROVE

Monday, January 5, 2009 9:24 PM

Geezer,

Yes, there is.

One is calling for the obliteration of a nation state, the other is calling for regime change.

While I may disagree with the Iranians on a lot of things, I wouldn't disagree with regime change for Israel, however, I don't think it's the Iranians job to do it, and I think they know this. It it the job of the Israelis.

There was a long discussion a while back about how would you have run the Iraq war. A surprising majority of people on the forum supported regime change in Iraq, but not by the means we did it. Collectively, people seemed to think that the US should have supported groups within Iraq who wanted regime change. If Iran does the same thing in Israel, then I guess it's fair. If they try to do what we did in Iraq, it will not only be wrong, but should they succeed, it will be a disaster. No one is going to accept a regime not of their choosing.

This is why the US lately gets my praise for supporting the Maliki govt. even when that govt. does not support us: Because it is a govt. that the people of Iraq want. Chalabi and Bremer were not a govt. that the people of Iraq wanted, and supporting a continuation of that would have ended badly. A lot of people think Iraq is an irreparable disaster. I disagree. I think it's very close to being a stable nation state. There were points within the war where I strongly disagreed with tactical decisions, but in the end, cooler heads prevail. Let us hope the same for Israel and Iran, as well as Palestine.

DREAMTROVE

Monday, January 5, 2009 9:34 PM

Quote:

DreamTrove

These are the people I have been arguing against during the the last two years you've been gone. They ARE filled wih hate and prejudice, along with deception.

I pity you.

As for the free speech, it's not an issue of free speech to walk up to a latino on the street and say "sp*c" or "chicano go home." Civility is a matter of etiquette. If someone wants to write an editorial criticizing US immigration policy, they can. If they want to oppose gay marriage in text, or talking amongst people they know, they can. If they show up at the funeral of a soldier and say "god hates f*gs and all marines are gay because of the don't ask don't tell policy so we're glad your son is dead." That's not free speech, it's inciting people to riot.

Next, a message board has never been, any more than an editorial, protected by free speech. If someone were to come here and start posting the names and addresses of jews or muslims and inciting people to take acts of violence against them, I'm sure they would be kicked out. You cannot go into a church and yet "F^&k God!" at the top of your lungs. You can't go into the post office and say anything political. You can't go into a supermarket and say "You're all whores!"

Free speech is to be taken as its intended, the right to state a point of view, not the right to insult and threaten, and on a public forum, there are always rules. Sexy pictures of firefly actors is acceptable. Posting pictures of people having sex with animals would undoubtedly get you banned. So there are already rules, it's just a matter of defining them.

DREAMTROVE

Monday, January 5, 2009 10:12 PM

Signym,

Good points all. You're wasting your time talking to the propaganda machines, they never intend to admit that the opponent is human, so there's really no point.

KIRKULES

Monday, January 5, 2009 10:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"Not booted for a position, but booted for lack of civility."

I don't see any attempt to infringe on free speech here. Free speech doesn't appear to be the issue.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

Can I be the moderator of civility. Someones got to do it, might as well be me since I'm the most civil unbiased person here.

KWICKO

Monday, January 5, 2009 10:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Signym,

Good points all. You're wasting your time talking to the propaganda machines, they never intend to admit that the opponent is human, so there's really no point.

Yes, apparently in this case the opponent is a crocodile...or a scorpion...or a "diaper-head" (whatever the hell that is)... but definitely not human, because we all know that people with more melanin who believe in different gods CAN'T be human like us!

(Hopefully you'll recognize the obvious blatant sarcasm in this post...)

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

SWISH

Monday, January 5, 2009 10:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Fascism is running high on the board. I probably should have left earlier. I hate to leave on a sour note, but this has become a hate site.

Granted, I'm not around much, but didn't you already start a thread about how you were leaving this board?

KIRKULES

Monday, January 5, 2009 10:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by swish:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Fascism is running high on the board. I probably should have left earlier. I hate to leave on a sour note, but this has become a hate site.

Granted, I'm not around much, but didn't you already start a thread about how you were leaving this board?

As the new self appointed moderator of civility, I wonder if you would describe your state of mind when you responded to Dreamtrove. Were you hostile, sarcastic, hateful, or (fill in the blank). In the interest in maintaining civility could everyone just describe their attitude and intended tone before posting. I don't know how I'll fairly administer disciplinary action if I don't know whether or not you intended to insult, offend, flame, or abuse ahead of time. Maybe you could just use the code word Nazi or Fascist in your first line to give me a clue as to your intent.
Thanks for your cooperation,

SWISH

Monday, January 5, 2009 11:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
Quote:
Originally posted by swish:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Fascism is running high on the board. I probably should have left earlier. I hate to leave on a sour note, but this has become a hate site.

Granted, I'm not around much, but didn't you already start a thread about how you were leaving this board?

As the new self appointed moderator of civility, I wonder if you would describe your state of mind when you responded to Dreamtrove. Were you hostile, sarcastic, hateful, or (fill in the blank). In the interest in maintaining civility could everyone just describe their attitude and intended tone before posting. I don't know how I'll fairly administer disciplinary action if I don't know whether or not you intended to insult, offend, flame, or abuse ahead of time. Maybe you could just use the code word Nazi or Fascist in your first line to give me a clue as to your intent.
Thanks for your cooperation,

Summary: Bad Person (Not quite Nazi level)
State of mind: Amused
Intention: To mock the schmoe for whom one self-absorbed attention-seeking tantrum wasn't enough.

I will now sit in the corner with the Official RWED Bad Person hat on.

KIRKULES

Monday, January 5, 2009 11:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by swish:
I will now sit in the corner with the Official RWED Bad Person hat on.

Wow, this is the easiest job I've ever had.

FREMDFIRMA

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 12:07 AM

I'd rather have free debate than arbitrary civility.

One of the things I *like* about this place is that you HAVE to argue your position, and effectively, instead of running to a friendly mod and silencing the opposition.

95% of "debate" on other boards seems to various factions trying to bait each other into being banned so that the "winners" don't actually have to argue their positions, and it demolishes the entire purpose of said boards in my opinion.

So I accept the lack of civility, even and especially when it's thrown at me, Kirk's pointed out before I got no issue with takin a couple servings of what I dish out, long as the topic at hand is thrashed out in a useful and informative fashion.

I'd rather have an uncivil argument that actually resolves or clarifies something rather than one so bound in PC politeness that I can't even make sense out of the positions, much less what's being argued.

-Frem

*steals the bad person hat and runs around smacking people as the jester-herald of our glorious imperial mistress, TWG*

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 12:07 AM

Kwicko

That was sarcasm overdose, but I understand the difficulty of expressing sarcasm online. There should be a convention for it.

Swish,

I've left this board many times over the years. It's like a gravity well. If you orbit it, you might fall in and then it's difficult to leave.

Kirkules,

The moderation of civility was proposed as a democracy, not a dictatorship. This doesn't mean that we should all jump on whozit over the bagel thing, but that if people feel the bagel thing is inapproriate, or in this case, just plain boring, then he should give, unless there's a strong maturpasty-ater contingent arriving.

Secondly, since everything you say is sarcasm, it's hard to see why you're here, ditto for whozit, but I'll ignore that. Just saying that sarcasm has its place, but like anything, when overused, loses any meaning at all.

KIRKULES

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 12:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
I'd rather have free debate than arbitrary civility.

But, Frem they're talking a Dictatorship of the Majority, what could be fairer than that.

GINOBIFFARONI

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 12:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
DreamTrove

These are the people I have been arguing against during the the last two years you've been gone. They ARE filled wih hate and prejudice, along with deception.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

I'd replace deception with delusion

they are true believers

Lets party like its 1939

KWICKO

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 2:35 AM

Quote:

Kwicko

That was sarcasm overdose, but I understand the difficulty of expressing sarcasm online. There should be a convention for it.

In the past, I've tried using brackets like the ones used for quotes, italics, and such. [sarcasm]mumblemumblemumble[/sarcasm].

Maybe it could be shortened to [s]...[/s]?

Anyhoo, I'm all for a clear indicator of sarcasm. I do tend to use it as my go-to, probably more than I should. But some of the things posted here really are so bizarre that a sarcastic "Really? D'ya think?" is all that captures the essence of my disgust. Plus, I'm just a natural-born smartass to boot.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 4:18 AM

Quote:

I'd replace deception with delusion

they are true believers

IMHO, they're profiteers. But if you're right, then we're in worse trouble than I thought.

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 10:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkules:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"Not booted for a position, but booted for lack of civility."

I don't see any attempt to infringe on free speech here. Free speech doesn't appear to be the issue.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

Can I be the moderator of civility. Someones got to do it, might as well be me since I'm the most civil unbiased person here.

Gosh dang it, you beat me to it. Since I know that the best way to determine how great the intelligence of a person is to gauge how moch they agree with me, I figured I would be the logical choice. But you are pretty close, at least in this thread, so I would have made you my deputy. But I don't get to spend much time here, so just keep doing a great job. Kudos for your accomplishments so far. I'll try to remain available for consultations on the hard calls, tho.

As practice, I'll say that my frame of mind is Against Anit-semites, but I'm not Jewish, or related to any that I know of. Plus I'm amused at all the postings of those who won't seem to miss DT, not to mention the secret society that DT wants to have "off-line, via gmail" but nobody seems willing to join - who was it that did not want to join any group that would accept him as a member? So, that would be Pro-Peace, and Amused, eh?

The coolest thing about it is that it only needs to happen in RWED, and the rest of the board can remain aloof. Thanks to unsung heroes like thatweirdgirl newbies are regularly and clearly informed to not venture into RWED with thin skins (or faulty logic units), so your enforcement here should not dilute the enjoyment of the rest of the board.

RIVERLOVE

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 12:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by jewelstaitefan:
.... it only needs to happen in RWED, and the rest of the board can remain aloof. Thanks to unsung heroes like thatweirdgirl newbies are regularly and clearly informed to not venture into RWED with thin skins.

I've always had a little problem with that piece of advice that is often given to newbies. Why stay out of the RWED? It's generally a great forum, and there are always interesting topics and stimulating interactions between posters. I've been able to navigate thru all the stuff here for many years, and I'm still standing tall. So what if sometimes it gets a little rough, so what if sometimes it seems everyone is against you, so what if you get called a name or two. If you have that severe a confidence problem, then maybe you really aren't a Browncoat after all.

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 1:38 PM

Who is the newbie?

LEEDAVIDT

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 2:30 PM

i'm confused why there is so much anger here ...
so,i'm leaving this post with a quote....

Mal: But it ain't all buttons and charts, little albatross. You know what the first rule of flyin' is? Well I suppose you do, since you already know what I'm about to say.
River: I do. But I like to hear you say it.
Mal: Love. You can know all the math in the 'Verse, but take a boat in the air you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down, tells ya she's hurtin' 'fore she keens. Makes her home.
River: Storm's getting worse.
Mal: We'll pass through it soon enough.

keep flyin' fellow browncoats (remember,most of us are on the same team)

"it ain't much"

http://www.myspace.com/leedavidt

GEEZER

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 3:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Geezer, one implies that the occupying force of a city must no longer be an occupier. The other implies that the entire government must disappear.

Consider that the source of the remark, Ayatollah Khomeini, also referred to Israel as the "Little Satan" and said:

"We must all rise, destroy Israel and replace it with the heroic Palestinian nation."

"Islam and the Muslims and all international standards regard Israel as a usurper and aggressor and we do not approve the least negligence in terminating its aggressions."

"The criminal hands of the world arrogant states will not be severed off the Islamic lands unless Muslim nations and oppressed peoples rise against them and their offsprings especially Israel."

"It is incumbent on all Muslims especially Muslim countries to do away with this core of corruption {Israel} any way possible."

"This degenerative tumour that has, with backing of major powers, been planted in the heart of Islamic states and whose roots daily threaten the Islamic lands must be removed with help and effort of Islamic states and the great nations of Islam."

http://www.geocities.com/ahlulbayt14/khom-quds.html

So I'm thinking he wasn't talking about peaceful elections.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 3:58 PM

Quote:
Mal: But it ain't all buttons and charts, little albatross. You know what the first rule of flyin' is? Well I suppose you do, since you already know what I'm about to say.
River: I do. But I like to hear you say it.
Mal: Love. You can know all the math in the 'Verse, but take a boat in the air you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down, tells ya she's hurtin' 'fore she keens. Makes her home.
River: Storm's getting worse.
Mal: We'll pass through it soon enough.

Well spake, lurker above.
You're right, we lose sight of the idea.

There are a couple of company men, and alliance moles, but for all we know, they might be future allies, but more importantly, it's not them that brings us down, it's our own infighting.

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 3:58 PM

Quote:
Mal: But it ain't all buttons and charts, little albatross. You know what the first rule of flyin' is? Well I suppose you do, since you already know what I'm about to say.
River: I do. But I like to hear you say it.
Mal: Love. You can know all the math in the 'Verse, but take a boat in the air you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down, tells ya she's hurtin' 'fore she keens. Makes her home.
River: Storm's getting worse.
Mal: We'll pass through it soon enough.

Well spake, lurker above.
You're right, we lose sight of the idea.

There are a couple of company men, and alliance moles, but for all we know, they might be future allies, but more importantly, it's not them that brings us down, it's our own infighting.

KIRKULES

Tuesday, January 6, 2009 10:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by leedavidt:
i'm confused why there is so much anger here ...

keep flyin' fellow browncoats (remember,most of us are on the same team)

I don't think you'll find any place on this site that is more like life on Serenity than the RWED. As a matter of fact it's pretty tame here compared to life on Serenity. I know everyone sees something different in Firefly, but don't forget River stabbing Jane, River kicking Simon in the throat, Simon punching Mal, Mal telling Jane to leave the table, Mal threatening to put Jane out the Airlock, etc. I think the list could go on for a while. At one point in the movie Mal threatens to kill anyone who isn't helping or getting out of his way. As far as I know there have been no death threats around here so far. I think the quote that best describes my feelings about people in RWED is Book's dieing words to Mal.

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, January 7, 2009 9:47 AM

Ah, but Mal kicked Jane from the table for acting like people here :)

You left out River trying to get everyone killed, and Simon trying to get everyone killed, Simon letting Kaylee die, and who was that mole they picked up in the beginning?

It's no use! The hair will still be there!

FREMDFIRMA

Wednesday, January 7, 2009 5:11 PM

Well, it ain't never boring, and that's a fact.

-F

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, January 7, 2009 9:42 PM

And yet, boring is what the media are after, and so they were sure to find it.

I think they've found a formula of information addiction:

Get the viewer just bored enough that he's almost about to turn it off, and then dangle something interesting:

Here, we'll have a middle of matrix two pointless married couple argument that will annoy you all while we await the grand battle. You know there's a big battle, so you're gonna hang on, the question is, how much will you endure in order to get to the battle? In the theater, the answer seems to be about 45 minutes.

Then there's the almost sex. The cute neighbor next door has just moved in. If this were a porn show, our hero would be banging her on top of the washing machine with a minute, but instead, we're going to dangle her at you to make sure you keep watching. (This, btw, is why I support pornography, it frees everything else up to be not porn.)

And then there's media news. Something interesting happened today! And in just 55 minutes we'll tell you, but first, a story about a puppy with aids, and the fight that the owner had with the neighbor, who fears the dog might be gay, and now this ad break. But when we come back, the new medical shortcuts being taken that could kill you. But not until we talk about how to poof your hair - AT HOME!

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, January 8, 2009 3:26 AM

That being why I don't watch TV, and consider most of hollywoods output in the last fifteen years to be downright trash - sadly tho, even books have gone downhill as those still writing them for codgers like me have been dumbed down themselves, not to mention the need to prostrate oneself for five and more years at writers workshops which are more or less mutual suckup societies, got thrown out of the last one for starting a brawl by calling J.D. Sallinger 'crap that can be beaten by angsty teen livejournal' which it is.

Funny that, however, a friend of a friend decided NOT to go that route, wrote a work to stand on it's own merits and actually bagged enough respect to get the folks at Baen books to pick it up, after it sold out to the point where the smaller publisher initially used could not keep up.

Larry's a great guy, and the work has a definate over the top Buffy-ish flavor to it, with a side order of Tremors type camp, so it would prolly appeal to the folks here.
http://larrycorreia.wordpress.com/mhi-sample/

I'd highly reccommend pre-ordering from the second run however...
http://www.amazon.com/Monster-Hunter-International-Larry-Correia/dp/14
39132852/ref=ed_oe_p/189-5214509-0108863
Cause the original run are now collectors items worth about two hundred bucks and more.
http://www.amazon.com/Monster-Hunter-International-Larry-Correia/dp/07
41444569

It's good stuff, believe it.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 3:25 PM

Frem,

I'll take a look sometime, when I decide it's a better use of time then reading some of these posts.

But I just wanted to say that there was unfocused hate which could all be deposited in a single thread.

Got something to say about Jews? Muslims? Don't wait! Just bring on the hate!

This is an accountability free zone!
Don't cloak your hate in a Gaza debate!

Let me start:
I have an issue with socialists. They kill hundreds of millions of people, and quite frankly that's just not polite. I mean, if you want to go kill people, that's one thing, but everything in moderation guys. Also. Kill people in interesting ways. I mean, sure, while it may be interesting to pull a person to pieces on a rack, when you do it 30,000 times in row, it just gets boring. Also, a little word about child raising under socialism. Children need to learn that actions and consequences are connected. If you just randomly shuffle them into labor camps, they'll never learn and grow up to be healthy reasonable adults, well, okay, partly that's because they die, but you get my drift.

AGENTROUKA

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 3:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Let me start:
I have an issue with socialists. They kill hundreds of millions of people, and quite frankly that's just not polite. I mean, if you want to go kill people, that's one thing, but everything in moderation guys. Also. Kill people in interesting ways. I mean, sure, while it may be interesting to pull a person to pieces on a rack, when you do it 30,000 times in row, it just gets boring. Also, a little word about child raising under socialism. Children need to learn that actions and consequences are connected. If you just randomly shuffle them into labor camps, they'll never learn and grow up to be healthy reasonable adults, well, okay, partly that's because they die, but you get my drift.

Um. WHAT is your knowledge of socialism based on?

If the free-hate-for-all thread is not the place for discussion, I apologize (I mean it!) but I'm just a little curious, as I was born in a socialist system and while it had FLAWS(OMG, flaws!) mass murder and child labour camps were notably absent.

BADGERSVERYFINEHAT

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 4:00 PM

Erm, how do Socialists kill hundreds of millions of people? I'm fairly Socialist, but I've not even killed one person. Maybe i just need to pull the finger out and get on with the killing...

Or is it back to the "sarcasm-difficult-to-expresss-online" thing.

Picture me confused

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 4:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
If the free-hate-for-all thread is not the place for discussion, I apologize (I mean it!) but I'm just a little curious, as I was born in a socialist system and while it had FLAWS(OMG, flaws!) mass murder and child labour camps were notably absent.

It always is notably absent. No one advertises mass murder and child labor camps.

And if this is a free-hate zone then I hate drunken people who stumble around the dance floor spilling their drinks and recklessly brandishing their cigarettes. The closest I ever came to a bar fight was when some asshole (probably a socialist) was standing around like an idiot on the dance floor, spilling his drink and bumping into me and my partner while we were trying to dance. Then he burned my dance partner with his cigarette and I got in his face and told him to get the hell out of here or I was going to ram his cigarette up his ass. He left. He left the bar! All I wanted was for him off the dance floor.

Damn socialists.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 5:52 PM

Accountability free zone, but I think you guys have the gist.

Yeah, there was some tongue in cheek there, but I was refering to socialist regimes, not parties or people. Of course, the deaths would be from National Socialists, Soviet Socialists, and Maoist Socialists, Baathist Socialists, all state-socialists.

But I just thought that I would get it started. There's an awful lot of hate going around, I thought it needed a home to stop it from infecting everything else. That way we can take all the hate more lightly ;) and it can live in its own little thunderdome. I mean, yeah, there are people on this forum who hate muslims, and people who hate jews, but the labels get thrown at people who don't, and pretty often.

Hence, a shiny new accountability free zone. You can say anything here and it won't affect your external persona. Got something to hate? I was the sacrificial lamb by starting it off, got a couple flames for it, xie xie.

It's like what I said about porn in an earlier thread. On the internet, there's an infinite variety of porn. This frees up other things to be not-porn, and so some of the most watched films online are things like Freedom to Fascism or Zeitgeist. However, on TV, where porn is banned, everything is porn, even, or should I say especially, the ads. People watch mindnumbingly stupid reality TV shows in hopes that a swimsuit might fall off. Whereas, which you have the change to click on College F^&kfest, dumb show with hotties, or intelligent show with little or no sex, you're going to opt for 1) or 3), whereas on tv, 2) would reign supreme.

Finn. I was in a bar with a date, a girl who liked to drink, so we went in, and some guy shoved his hand up her skirt. That ended in a bar fight. I lost, because the guy was about 7", but then he lost, because the bouncers came and did a number on him. I think the guy was just a democrat, not a socialist :)

KWICKO

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 6:51 PM

Quote:

Finn. I was in a bar with a date, a girl who liked to drink, so we went in, and some guy shoved his hand up her skirt. That ended in a bar fight. I lost, because the guy was about 7", but then he lost, because the bouncers came and did a number on him. I think the guy was just a democrat, not a socialist :)

Where to begin? 7"? Really? Is that all? That doesn't seem very tall. Maybe you meant 7 feet...

And he was obviously a democrat. If he were a Republican, he'd have shoved his hand down your pants while crying about how shamed he was about it.

Oh, by the way - it wasn't me! I'm not exactly 7 feet tall, but I'm not far from it at 6'9"...

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

RIVER6213

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 7:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Fascism is running high on the board. I probably should have left earlier. I hate to leave on a sour note, but this has become a hate site.

Read through the posts and find people spouting against the racial inferiors, genetic, religious, their own special monkey people in need of extermination.

I know there are good people here, but the Israel thread has really brought it out. Check out the actual nazi forums and see how tame they are in their animosity compared to what's posted here. I was genuinely offended by the suggestion that because I don't want to see another race get exterminated that this makes pro-holocaust, esp. as the descendent of holocaust suvivors, or more to the point, non-survivors.

The feeling from the neocons on the board towards muslims is beyond racist. It's genocidal.

I was also disappointed once more, over the pile on effect. Once one person had p*ssed on the graves of my ancestors and relatives, a whole lot of other people seemed to jump on board. So I repost things by jews I know and am told that this too is "Nazi" stuff. Nevermind that jews seem genuinely concerned not for themselves, that Israel is bad PR for the jewish community, or the Iraq war is bad PR for americans, but for the actual plight of the Palestinian people and the Iraqi people.

Earlier, I got into a disagreement on the second amendment. I said it didn't support lone reaver's rights to shoot people. I later conceded the point, which makes me worried about the implications, but when one person insulted me, suddenly there was a huge pile on.

Questions? Comments?

It took you this long to figure out that many people in this forum are xenophobic and small minded?

DREAMTROVE

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 10:45 PM

Ah, the infamous one lives.

13, I disagree. They are xenophobic and loud, but I think they are a minority. I think that when they post much, they cause the majority to be silent, or leave the site. Then I suppose, they become the majority, at least of posts.

I'm not slow, the post density changes. Several people commented, ebb and flow.

AGENTROUKA

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
If the free-hate-for-all thread is not the place for discussion, I apologize (I mean it!) but I'm just a little curious, as I was born in a socialist system and while it had FLAWS(OMG, flaws!) mass murder and child labour camps were notably absent.
It always is notably absent. No one advertises mass murder and child labor camps.

Yes, but it's still a lazy assumption to make that all socialist states must exhibit the worst characteristics of totalitarian regimes.

Eastern Germany wasn't squeaky clean by far but if there had been child labor camps or secret mass murder, the evidence would have come up after it was dismantled.

And if no one advertizes them, how can you even suspect that democracies left and right aren't running child labor camps and committing mass murder? These things are no more inherent in socialism than they are in democracies. They are symptoms of oppressive totalitarian regimes in general.

AGENTROUKA

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Accountability free zone, but I think you guys have the gist.

Yeah, there was some tongue in cheek there, but I was refering to socialist regimes, not parties or people. Of course, the deaths would be from National Socialists, Soviet Socialists, and Maoist Socialists, Baathist Socialists, all state-socialists.

I'll argue that it's still less a symptom of socialism than it is of oppressive, totalitarian regimes in generally trying to achieve or stay in power. Historically, many (most?) but not all socialist systems have started as or turned into such regimes, often because they were created out of extreme circumstances to begin with, which tends to favor the radical.

Almost any system to rise out of extreme circumstances is likely going to be imperfect or oppressive itself. Fascism, socialism, absolute monarchy, sham democracies, what have you.

And no, I am not a socialist.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
And if no one advertizes them, how can you even suspect that democracies left and right aren't running child labor camps and committing mass murder? These things are no more inherent in socialism than they are in democracies. They are symptoms of oppressive totalitarian regimes in general.

Well that’s always a concern, you’re right.

I do think, however, that socialist economies are more likely to be totalitarian, then capitalist economies, for the simple fact that socialism is often used as an excuse for totalitarianism. The government controlling the means of productions puts a lot of power in the hands of the government.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Finn. I was in a bar with a date, a girl who liked to drink, so we went in, and some guy shoved his hand up her skirt. That ended in a bar fight. I lost, because the guy was about 7", but then he lost, because the bouncers came and did a number on him. I think the guy was just a democrat, not a socialist :)

I had a problem like that one night. I have a friend that is a fan of the fruit of the vine, and she’s also a professional dancer so when she gets plastered she puts on an enticing show for all the guys in the bar. One night a similarly drunk guy started harassing her after she danced with him to that point that I had to say something. Which he promptly ignored, so I had to get in his face. H e was a lot bigger then me, I’m sure he could have pounded me, but my strategy was to just pick up this girl and leave so I wasn’t really worried about a fight. However, one of his buddies, whom I had seen on post before, whispered something to the drunken dude which made him apologies and leave. So that was the end of that.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:33 PM

Not too many 'socialists' in this band of US-associated dictators ----

Amin, Idi
Uganda

Banzer, Colonel Hugo
Bolivia

Batista, Fulgencio
Cuba

Botha, P.W.
South Africa

Cedras, Raoul
Haiti

Cerezo, Vinicio
Guatemala

Diem, Ngo Dihn
Vietnam

Doe, General Samuel
Liberia

Duvalier, Francois
Haiti

Duvalier, Jean Claude
Haiti

Fahd bin'Abdul-'Aziz, King
Saudi Arabia

Hassan II
Morocco

Marcos, Ferdinand
Philippines

Martinez, General Maximiliano Hernandez
El Salvador

Mobutu Sese Seko
Zaire

Noriega, General Manuel
Panama

Pahlevi, Shah Mohammed Reza
Iran

Papadopoulos, George
Greece

Park Chung Hee
South Korea

Pinochet, General Augusto
Chile

Pol Pot
Cambodia

Somoza, Anastasio Jr.
Nicaragua

Somoza, Anastasio, Sr.
Nicaragua

Smith, Ian
Rhodesia

Suharto, General
Indonesia

Trujillo, Rafael Leonidas
Dominican Republic

Videla, General Jorge Rafael
Argentina

Zia Ul-Haq, Mohammed
Pakistan

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

AGENTROUKA

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:39 PM

And to flood this thread some more..

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:

But I just wanted to say that there was unfocused hate which could all be deposited in a single thread.

I get really aggravated with absolute statements or language.

"Evil", for example. It's a lazy concept because it prevents people from using their brain to actually engage with something.

Or the wholesale dismissal of another culture, another system, other life choices, without a hint of compassionate curiosity.

Slurs.

Anything, really that attempts to draw a thick line between people, defining one group as good and one as "other" and bad, as we we aren't each of us mere circumstances away from that "other".

It is such an arrogant, lazy, cowardly position to take, and it always pisses me off.

Venting prejudice and hate is fun!

AGENTROUKA

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:

I do think, however, that socialist economies are more likely to be totalitarian, then capitalist economies, for the simple fact that socialism is often used as an excuse for totalitarianism. The government controlling the means of productions puts a lot of power in the hands of the government.

I figure they have that tendency because socialism almost always arises from some kind of extreme situation where perhaps oppression was already a factor. It radicalizes people and in such an environment the most radical and most power-hungry rise to the top and the confused masses follow, out of idealism or fear. Radical, power-hungry people in power.. pretty much the recipe for totalitarianism, right?

There is a definite historical correlation there, but not a causation in that the system of socialism itself would inevitably create oppression and mass murder.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
I figure they have that tendency because socialism almost always arises from some kind of extreme situation where perhaps oppression was already a factor. It radicalizes people and in such an environment the most radical and most power-hungry rise to the top and the confused masses follow, out of idealism or fear. Radical, power-hungry people in power.. pretty much the recipe for totalitarianism, right?

There is a definite historical correlation there, but not a causation in that the system of socialism itself would inevitably create oppression and mass murder.

I’m not confident that there’s not a causation. If you put the economy squarely in the hands of the government then you run an increased risk of totalitarianism.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:06 AM

Quote:
River6213 started to feel something in her legs and arms; she could actually move them a bit. “Great, I’m not paralyzed” River6213 thinks. The sound of the helicopter overhead was pretty loud and getting louder, but through it she thought she could hear other voices speaking. River6213 was feeling rather panicked at this point. “ShadowFLY can’t be too far away” she mutters to herself. “I’ve got to get out of here” she thinks. River6213 starts the nasty business of dragging herself out from under the wreck that used to be a very nice Jaguar. She pulls herself from underneath the vehicle just in time to see two figures standing across from each other regarding each other. There is nothing but silence until the figure closes to her says “State your Business.” River 6213 doesn’t recognize the nearest figure standing there, but she right away knows who the other figure is. “Oh shit!” River6213 says out loud as her gaze falls onto the duffel carrying figure of Shadowfly.

River, real River, who has come out of the shadows.

There's no shame in being who you are, and I'm sorry if I offended your alter egos. If you've been reading this board for the past four years you know that I was institutionalized for 3 years. I didn't mean any offense.

As you came out of the shadows when you name was mentioned, considering sockpuppet theory. I was slow, yes, I saw this happen before. True, it's possible to provoke people by assuming IDs and ranting at them, and people are, sure, basically sheep. But people are just animals. They react to what they see. Throw a pie in their face, they'll throw one back. Give them a pie for dessert, they'll give you one back.

I'm sure if you were listening all along, you know that I have had some pretty priceless wars with a number of people, and Citizen most of all, though not in a long time.

I'm somewhat flattered that you came out of the shadows to comment to my post. As far as being fruity as a nut, I think it's safe to say there's a lot of that around here, and I think John knows that he takes the cake on this one.

Just wanted to ask if you're feeling okay. If you follow the threads on neurology, you know me and Kathy both know a lot about this, and have some pretty different ideas about this.

You also know one of my sisters has chronic depression as a result of mercury poisoning (assuming you read all of these) and I'm helping her currently get off of psychiatric medicine.

I agree, doctors can't fix people, they usually make them worse. For what it's worth, I liked the Fruity Obama bar and the Patsy Cline song, which I've had on mp3 for many years, for the same reason.

Now, all of that said, if River Tam were here in my room, I wouldn't cure her, even if I could. I'm not sure that I should have cured myself. But I've lost a lot of friends to depression in the past, and taking the steps is not the same as knowing which steps to take. It is always better to know, than not to know.

To become crazy, from normal. That's a trickier game. I was certifiable and certified, when I encountered Firefly. I sympathized with River a lot. There's certainly a power in a different state of mind, and I'm not in complete agreement with the popular social view that one state of mind is right, and any other wrong.

As for the stuff I post on this board, it's usually targeted to try to bring some sort of accord between multiple members. I've been here for a long time, got here just ten days before you. I've seen a lot of things, you've seen them too. I watched the whole Kaneman thing, and the ShadowFly too, hence the choice of quote above.

As for the bias, it goes up and down too, In the beginning, the anti-muslim feeling was pretty small. Only a couple of people who thought reaver=muslim. As for the anti-semitism, I think my first post on this board was a long rant against Pirate News for his stance on jews. But all of this does cause a number of people to stay silent on an increasing number of threads, several people have told me so. Hence the hate threads (these focused thr

AGENTROUKA

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I’m not confident that there’s not a causation. If you put the economy squarely in the hands of the government then you run an increased risk of totalitarianism.

Theoretically, it's supposed to be in the hands of the people, anyways.

I'm fairly certain that you cannot have an extremely oppressive regime where the wealth/economy isn't concentrated in relatively few hands, be that government or its rich supporters. Any system loses stability when the gap between rich and poor becomes too large. If the government doesn't have direct control of the economy, if it is corrupt, the rich and powerful will use the government as their tool, just like a corrupt socialist government would abuse its powers.

The effort would be a bit smaller for a corrupt socialist government, it's true, but we have never really seen one that wasn't corrupt from the start, either.

SIGNYM

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:23 AM

Quote:
If you put the economy squarely in the hands of the government then you run an increased risk of totalitarianism.

If you put the government squarely in the hands of the economy then you run an increased risk of fascism.

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I’m not confident that there’s not a causation. If you put the economy squarely in the hands of the government then you run an increased risk of totalitarianism.

Theoretically, it's supposed to be in the hands of the people, anyways.

And that’s the reason why totalitarian rulers love socialism. Total rule and propaganda in one neat package. Everyone from Hitler to Stalin to Saddam Hussein used some form of it.

And it’s interesting the way many people don’t have any problem recognizing the dangers implicit in a capitalist economy where the money is concentrated in a small group of people, but then turn around and love the idea of socialism which by definition concentrates the wealth in small group of people. Ultimately, the one huge advantage for the preservation of a free state that capitalism has over socialism is that the government is a third party which can be used to control the excesses of the wealthy. No such safety net exists in socialism.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

SIGNYM

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:34 AM

Quote:
the government is a third party which can be used to control the excesses of the wealthy.

... but rarely is.

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

KIRKULES

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:36 AM

I have no problem with the idea of Socialism, but I don't believe it is an independently sustainable form of Government. Without Capitalist societies to leach off, Socialist societies quickly become impoverished due to lack of economic incentive. The economic growth of Capitalist countries is the only thing that keeps money flowing into Socialist countries. Without the market Capitalism provides Socialism would quickly fail.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
the government is a third party which can be used to control the excesses of the wealthy.
... but rarely is.

You’re welcome to live in that fantasy, but you live in a free country because the US government legislates rules to the economy all the time. Some would argue too much – some argue not enough, but at the end of the day, the difference between a free state and a totalitarian state is not just the ruthlessness of the government, but also the regulation or degree of control applied to the economy.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

RUE

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 12:47 AM

"I have no problem with the idea of Socialism, but I don't believe it is an independently sustainable form of Government. ... Without the market Capitalism provides Socialism would quickly fail."

I'm not sure I agree. Does Sweden need the US ? Denmark ? Iceland ? Remember, the US had a big hand in bringing the world economy down, which would have gone along quite nicely without.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

KIRKULES

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 1:12 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
"I have no problem with the idea of Socialism, but I don't believe it is an independently sustainable form of Government. ... Without the market Capitalism provides Socialism would quickly fail."

I'm not sure I agree. Does Sweden need the US ? Denmark ? Iceland ? Remember, the US had a big hand in bringing the world economy down, which would have gone along quite nicely without.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

It looks to me like the biggest trading partners of the Countries you mention are mostly Capitalist countries (Germany, Britain, USA). The USA has also subsidised them by providing for their defense for the last 60 years. Without US protection they would have had to spend a much larger proportion of their GDP on defense and would have probably ended up speaking Russian anyway.

RUE

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 1:19 AM

Iceland, Sweden and Denmark don't have defense forces ? I think they would be very surpised to hear that !

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 1:31 AM

Politics is a small subject, so I want to keep this short in case River wants to read my above post.

Finn, I tried that tack and got headbutted, there was no escape. And you're right about socialist states. It's the basic principle of universal cooperation that makes it possible. The hippie crowd doesn't stop to think "cooperate with what, exactly"

Kathy, yeah, I think there are a lot, Botha was never a dictator. Neither was Ian Smith. Ian Smith, incidentally, was hailed by his populous even to his dying day as their rightful duly elected leader. When Mugabe gave orders to his own most loyal guard to arrest Smith, they refused. Pol Pot, OTOH, was an avowed socialist, as was Noriega, I will have to look these others up, but you also omitted people that you knew were socialists like Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong Il. I'm not here to argue about the validity of state socialism, I was just sacrificing so others wouldn't feel so bad.

Quote:
Does Sweden need the US ? Denmark ? Iceland ?

All capitalist nations, one of those three intensely so, generally considered the second most capitalist nation on earth after Switzerland. That's why Iceland won't join the EU, it doesn't want in on the one currency, because it is the new banking center of Europe.

But as for socialism, I'm not going to bother looking up the list, because it's too much time, I'm hazarding a guess there are a few more socialists, but that's not the point. Look down the list of massive genocides in history and you will see a lot of state socialism. Esp. lately in Africa, though not exclusively. It's probably the biggest violent killer to come along since western religion. Maybe it's a part of western religion. But certainly, the biggest killer probably outside of socialism is our own govt., which is a sanctimonious self appointed elite. Lately, it hasn't been so bad, a lot of wars and death, but nothing like it was in its more socialist days (WWII) oh, and that was a snark.

To say that I don't like socialism is an understatement, I'm not here to argue it. I'm not a great fan of capitalism either. I think that's a hobson's choice. But given the two...

Still, I'd like to think there's a third choice.

The flaw in capitalism is in its name: Capital. It rewards extant wealth, and always will. It should have been replaced by Industrialism when the industrial revolution struck. The stock market was invented by the banking industry so that capitalism would not fall to industrialism, because it could leverage a takeover with use of its ownership of the gold, which now had no value, unless they kept people in power who would assure that it did.

The flaw with socialism is also in the name, which is short for social engineering. The core idea is that govt. (known for its benevolence, peacefulness and competence) would engineer all aspects of society from the top down. The hallmark of "cooperation rather than competition" was cooperation with that top down plan, and the elimination of competing points of view.

SIGNYM

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 1:43 AM

As usual, we're having a problem of semantics.

What is socialism? It's not just another name for tyranny or "social engineeering". My casual definitions are:

capitalism: Individual ownership of the means of production; no state involvement on wealth distribution
communism: ownership of the means of production by the masses; free distribution of wealth
socialism: capitalist production; distribution of wealth heaviily controlled by the state
fascism: ownership of the state by the capitalists.

Mix-and-match with democracy, republic, dictatorship, or other means of goverment (as opposed to production and distribution) as needed to create about 30 different variants.

Now, the trick, in MY book, is to keep the various forms of power from coalescing: keep the media, religion, government (force), and money away from each other. You not only need separation of church and state, you need separation of church and money, money and media, church and media, media and government...

I think you get the picture.

---------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 5:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
As usual, we're having a problem of semantics.

What is socialism? It's not just another name for tyranny or "social engineeering". My casual definitions are:

capitalism: Individual ownership of the means of production; no state involvement on wealth distribution
communism: ownership of the means of production by the masses; free distribution of wealth
socialism: capitalist production; distribution of wealth heaviily controlled by the state
fascism: ownership of the state by the capitalists.

I think some of these are poor definitions.

Socialism: Government ownership of the means of production; meaning that the government controls production, administration and distribution of goods and profits.

Fascism is not really an economic philosophy. Nazi Germany was a de facto socialist regime. And Nazi Germany is a perfect example of a totalitarian regime tending towards socialism as the government demands more and more control.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

DREAMTROVE

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 5:18 AM

nice things to have, sure.

The origin of socialism is not a speculative matter. It was originally social engineering.

Just like neocons were originally called the American Trotsky Communistws, then the TSWP, then the Social Dems, then some became neoconservatives, but even then, they never denied who they were, and never claimed to have changed beliefs. They just said "we're trotsky socialists who support the conservative movement" because as irving kristol said they had be "blindsided by reality" He meant that a large conservative christian public that did not vote would vote if certain issues were on the table, and then the neocons could win. They had tried for many years to win a democratic primary with no luck. Clinton was their first democrat, after 20+ years of trying

SIGNYM

Wednesday, January 14, 2009 8:40 PM

Finn, I got this from Conservative Resources:

Quote:
Capitalism is an informal economic system in which property is largely privately owned, and in which profit provides incentive for capital investment and the employment of labor.

Socialism is a formal economic system in which society exerts considerable control over the nation's wealth and property in the pursuit of social justice.

Communism is a formal economic system in which property, particularly capital property (e.g. factories, machines, tools, etc.), is commonly owned and scarce resources are allocated through planning as opposed to price signals in a free market.

www.conservative-resources.com/capitalism-vs-socialism-vs-communism.ht
ml

The reason why I came up with the definitions that I did was because there doesn't seem to be a definition for governments which control distribution, as opposed to governments which control production. Since most peeps call government distribution programs (Social Security, welfare, unemployment, health care) "socialist", while referring to nationalized production as "communist" I decided to go along with the flow.

But if you don't agree with my definitions- a vaid point, since nobody seems to have a good handle of what they mean by each word- the I'm okay with using your definitions, as long as we reserve a word for a system of government-controlled distribution.

---------------------------------
Let's party like its 1929.

DREAMTROVE

Thursday, January 15, 2009 1:34 AM

Etymology is a hobby of mine. I accept no definitions, for the record. This gets me into some arguments. Most definitions are some part interpretation.

Capitalism is a system based on capital, as the measure of wealth. I disagree with such a system as it rewards inheritance over industry and progress. It's still better than the competition.

FINN MAC CUMHAL

Thursday, January 15, 2009 4:30 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
But if you don't agree with my definitions- a vaid point, since nobody seems to have a good handle of what they mean by each word- the I'm okay with using your definitions, as long as we reserve a word for a system of government-controlled distribution.

All economic theories concern the distribution of goods. The more formal a theory is the more that distribution is handled by the government.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

CHRISISALL

Thursday, January 15, 2009 4:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
All economic theories concern the distribution of goods. The more formal a theory is the more that distribution is handled by the government.

Very astute. I'd not put it into that frame before.

The impressed Chrisisall

AGENTROUKA

Thursday, January 15, 2009 10:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
And that’s the reason why totalitarian rulers love socialism. Total rule and propaganda in one neat package. Everyone from Hitler to Stalin to Saddam Hussein used some form of it.

In general, I agree with this. I'm no fan of socialism in its pure form, anyways, for the reason that you state - it can somewhat more easily be abused by people with totalitarian ambitions.

The only thing I do vehemently disagree with is the tendency to assume that such ambitions MUST exist or would inevitably result, or that there is an undeinable connection between mass murder or child labor and socialism. Socialism is a utopian system but it is not an inherently evil system.

Child labor, in particular, is something I MUCH rather associate with unchecked capitalism.

FREMDFIRMA

Thursday, January 15, 2009 11:45 AM

The only thing I do vehemently disagree with is the tendency to assume that such ambitions MUST exist or would inevitably result...

I concur, and it is that very assessment which marks the difference between Darwinist, and Kropotkinist, schools of thought on human behavior.

I mean, if human nature was really that nasty, how the hell did we build civilisation in the first place, and if it's human nature then why do we *have* to pound it into children by means so extreme that some of them would be called outright torture if you did it to an adult ?

Ain't natural at all, you ask me.

On that note, saw a kid's T-shirt today that left me a little awestruck at the effectiveness and simplicity of it's message.

On the front it said.
"You shouldn't hit people."
And on the back.
"Children are people too."

A whole philosophy expressed perfectly in eight words, impressive that was.

-F

KWICKO

Thursday, January 15, 2009 12:34 PM

Quote:
Child labor, in particular, is something I MUCH rather associate with unchecked capitalism.

Yup, and so it was, until the government stepped in to "control the means of production" with evil socialist-communist things like labor laws...

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

1 2 3 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE