 |
|
|
|
| Subtopic | Msgs | Last Updated |
Saturday, January 3, 2009 - 02:52 am  Here we go. This should make America and Britain a bit of cash. I just hope the Jewish know what there getting themselves into.
| |
| Saturday, January 3, 2009 - 04:09 am I really don't know what you're talking about... But at least you said "Jewish". 
| |
| Saturday, January 24, 2009 - 06:39 am Did you see that big arms shipment to Israel? That should have made us a bit of cash (Every little helps) I wonder how the arms dealers are going to survive now that Obamas President? Come to think about it.....I wonder how Britains gonna survive?  Grow your own Veg (Every little helps) Just don't get too stressed when the snails, slugs, caterpilars, worms and birds eat some of your crop. It's just life.
| |
| Saturday, January 24, 2009 - 09:02 am do u work nix
| |
| Saturday, January 24, 2009 - 07:30 pm Tree Surgeon. Why? Do you?
| |
| Saturday, January 24, 2009 - 09:42 pm you ever fall out of any ? :-) and yes i do (contractor)
| |
| Saturday, January 24, 2009 - 10:26 pm Not yet............Touch wood There has been the odd time when I thought I was going to die, but hey........what a rush ;) Contractor, nice. What do you prefer? Sniper or up close and personal?
| |
| Friday, January 30, 2009 - 04:03 pm To resuscitate capitalizum, it's looking like we are going to have to suffocate the future generation's means to survive. Is'nt it about time we realised that desire is'nt worth the risk and that capitalizum, as a force to live by, has become unsustainable and unworkable?
| |
| Saturday, January 31, 2009 - 06:26 am if you could fellate yourself youd disappear.
| |
| Saturday, January 31, 2009 - 07:56 am There's always the hope.
| |
| Sunday, February 1, 2009 - 11:21 pm The was to resuscitate capitalism in the US is to kill corporate gains tax's, lower income tax's and maintain infrastructure. This is the best way to put people to work. Also we don't need the big drain of military bases in over 150 foreign nations. Slash the pentagon budget that invests in completely backward projects while maintaining the benefits of vets(I'm one so I'm looking out for myself) and those who chose to stay active alike. Any hows that's my opinion, I fail to see how these bailouts or whatever you want to call them. Private investment encourages growth but the big guys with cash won't invest if all the profit potential is gone because of of overbearing tax rates. Yooper
| |
| Sunday, February 1, 2009 - 11:33 pm "To resuscitate capitalizum, it's looking like we are going to have to suffocate the future generation's means to survive. Is'nt it about time we realised that desire is'nt worth the risk and that capitalizum, as a force to live by, has become unsustainable and unworkable?"- nix A monetary system can only grow and expand so much. then it will collapse upon itself. Everone knocks socialism, that is mainly due to media brainwashing on the subject. Cuba has thrived for many years. Socialism can work. I'm not saying that socialism is a cure all. I merely wish to point out that a Greed powered system such as Capitalism, can only grow to a certain point closely followed by economic ruin. Sum say that that time is now and the global monetary system is falling apart. Capitalism has worked for a few hundred years. But now it's time to try something new.
| |
| Sunday, February 1, 2009 - 11:48 pm Ha! Time for yearly repost I guess? ------ Why Socialism? by Albert Einstein This essay was originally published in the first issue of Monthly Review (May 1949). http://www.monthlyreview.org/598einstein.php ----- PS Do not bother to call me communist or socialist or idiot. I'm not Albert Einstein
| |
| Monday, February 2, 2009 - 12:02 am Cuba has thrived??? Are you nuts, when did they become an economic power... what is their GDP per person, like $12,000 how pitiful. The only reason it is that high is because of of remittances from those living abroad, and the government slowly allowing more and more capitalist business. The reason for this mess falls square on the back of the Average baby boomer American who allowed our Government to set up FM's then privatize them while still using them as a tool of the Legislature forcing them to buy bad loans because they were from minority poor. Hell we all fucking know they should never have been issued, but we financed groups to force the loans to be made. (Acorn& others) The alliance between these groups lobbyists, and the big boys in Washington, along with the fucking Ceo's of the FM's makes by bowels want to churn all over the pavement. Thanks God their are maybe 25 decent men in Washington or the situation would have been all the more grave. Call your senators and tell them to vote against the bailout... see if they listen if the don't... vote them out. (or even better lock and load, I'm not serious boys, but it has crossed my mind) From my shrine view in the Northwoods, Yooper
| |
| Monday, February 2, 2009 - 01:45 am Profane, but accurate. Government Bureaucrats and Politicians + Idiotic Business Execs = Disaster The US combines the worst of business practices with governmental manipulation/coercion to create most of our economic problems.
| |
| Monday, February 2, 2009 - 02:18 am Just because the US system has some serious problems does not excuse Poobah's comment that the Cuban System is superior to ours... I mean if he thinks it is I encourage him to move there, don't more our economy further in their direction I pray to you, all... all of you, don't push us closer to a communist scum hole. From my shrine in the Northwoods, Yooper
| |
| Monday, February 2, 2009 - 05:03 am A brother of mine (see Dirt) has been to Cuba. If you consider these facts you'll see they aren't doing that bad - a)they get slammed by hurricanes every year b) an ancient U.S. embargo and various attempts made by the U.S. to destabilize the nation. After all this, Cuba still offers Free College and health care to it's citizens. "all of you, don't push us closer to a communist scum hole." Communist or capitalist, they all smell like the same shit. Money. No matter what, that is what churns the gears of repression and social abuse. Thus stated, maybe we need to stop the Socialism v. Capitalis arguement and create a new system that helps elevate underprivalaged people and retain full democratic process. Obscene personal gains and greed would have to take a side seat. /side note- Read "wealth of Nations" and you'll see my beef with Capitalism.
| |
| Monday, February 2, 2009 - 05:32 am "Wealth of Nations" author please or ISBN? Thank You Also I have not been to Cuba yet, although I almost hope I get to see their situation. From my shrine in the NNorthwoods, Yooper
| |
| Monday, February 2, 2009 - 05:46 am Adam Smith. A primer on free market economics. 18th century.
| |
| Monday, February 2, 2009 - 06:40 am I'd agree that history shows us that every political, economical or social system was overcome. Every empire, every power fell sooner or later. Seems, nothing lasts forever. On the other hand, if any of us "knew" what is the next "thing" to come we probably wouldn't be posting here and playing this game, but petting our Nobel medal or women of doubtful character or both Personally I have hopes for democracy with strong elements of direct democracy, unlike the kind of representative democracy we know and have at the moment.
| |
| Monday, February 2, 2009 - 08:04 am "I'd agree that history shows us that every political, economical or social system was overcome. Every empire, every power fell sooner or later. Seems, nothing lasts forever." There's a term for this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeitgeist All that is will inevitably cease to exist. Empires rise and fall like the sun. Laws are passed, laws are revoked. People are born and people die. Society, however, exist as long as we do and it is slowly evolving. Any Student of history can tell you this. We will adventually get it right. Trust me- Society is a whole lot less messed up than it used to be. We still have misconseptions and bad habits...but we don't burn witches or lynch other ethnics over superstition and ignorance.....for the most part. I personally believe we are in the early stages of a new order of things. Wether it be good or bad, we will soon find out. I bet you a nickle the next evolution of Human Society is near. 10yrs tops and we will have a new perspective of life.
| |
| Tuesday, February 3, 2009 - 05:48 pm Cuba is so wonderful in fact thousands of people have risked their lives in shark infested waters to escape the workers paradise. Odd perhaps they are just ungrateful of the wonderful system Castro has
| |
| Thursday, February 5, 2009 - 12:42 am The Cubans are no more forced to live under Castro's rule as we are forced to live under our supposed Gov'ts rule.
| |
| Thursday, February 5, 2009 - 01:25 am /me hands Austia an inner tube. /me points South. Cuba is 90 miles that way. Start paddling. Sorry we don't have a secret police to try and stop your escape. I will throw rotten fruit at you in simulation.
| |
| Thursday, February 5, 2009 - 10:23 am A. I live in Oregon. The nearest river leads to the Pacific...not very cost effective. B. If we had a secret police we wouldn't know about it...hence...secret. C. Dirt has spent a significant amount of time in Cuba and it IS NOT as bad as our Gov't says it is. They are #1 in the world in Medical response and have the BEST in Hurricane response..in the world...Way better than ours. /see Katrina /me hands tube back to Sam. Start Paddling
| |
Thursday, February 5, 2009 - 03:02 pm
According to whom? The Official: I Have All The Final Answers Society? Kids.LOL
| |
| Thursday, February 5, 2009 - 03:47 pm Hav'nt the USA done everything they could to make life difficult for Cuba?
| |
| Friday, February 6, 2009 - 10:11 am @FB- :-p @nix- oh yeah.
| |
| Friday, February 6, 2009 - 10:17 am What the USA has done to Cuba has essentially made the country self-sufficient.
| |
| Sunday, February 8, 2009 - 04:57 am Wow... thats all I have to say. I don't think these response's even dignify an inelligent response, so I won't give one. Your idiology has made itt impossible for you to see the truth, take your head out of the textbook and look at real life. From My Shrine in The Northwoods, Yooper
| |
| Sunday, February 8, 2009 - 08:25 am been doing that the whole time. With unbiased eyes. Being younger, the world looks a lot different from down here.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 01:59 am I don't care if Castro's farts cure cancer to be honest. A totalitarian state sucks. And despite the assurances of such experts Cuba is a totalitarian state. I have great health care. I pay for insurance. Nor do I wish to pay for your health insurance. Get a job. I don't need or want a benevolent liberal overlord to take care of my every need. Nor do I want the huge European tax levels to pay for it. And the suggestion of such a overhaul to our system of government makes me load up my rifle and prepare for the revolution. Secession is the only answer to Socialism.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 04:09 am Uh... what Johanas? Americans don't expect everyone to pay for their own education, nor care if they can. Why? Because its in the nations economic and moral interest to do so, to have an educated population. People aren't expected to hire out police officers like mercenaries (might happen with corrupt police officer maybe). If your house burns down the fire department doesn't hand you a bill. You pay welfare to disadvantaged people that have economic trouble for whatever reason, because it is in the nations interest (even if people that can't think long term disagree). "Free marketeers" bailout corporations that have failed under the free market, due to political and corporate shortsightedness and destructive self interest. All these benefits are socialistic, I doubt you will find many conservatives supporting Reaganomics complaining that only people supporting a war should have to pay military tax, that people only for drug Prohibition should have to pay for the war on drugs. Or that when welfare is abolished only people robbed by welfare recipients which are now forced to adleast steal to support themselves (not every unemployed person can find a job but just don't want to you will actually find that type in the minority), should contract out police, pay their muggers legal fees, and possible jail term. Yet somehow only rightist America stands against national funded healthcare. Privatized healthcare hurt American businesses competitiveness because they need to provide health plans to employees in some cases, it hurts the majority of the people at the benefit of the few, since it is in the health insurances interest to deny treatment whenever possible instead of treating people when needed. It hurts the consumer based economy, by causing health and pharmaceutical costs to become artificially inflated to generate profits, reducing disposable income for the majority of Americans, which in turn hurts jobs that could be generated from this extra cash. And after all isn't that the basis of Reaganomics? Increase the general populations disposable income and in turn generate growth that is ment to generate government income to counter additional costs incurred by the government. Also GDP and growth is a terrible way of determining economic development in my opinion. I think standard of living, purchasing power, national debt - projected growth of income, and employment. Would be a greater determination of economic achievement, after all whats the point of being the richest nation on earth if a significant population lives in poverty. And growth has to peak at some point (if it hasn't already), which then the communist manifesto prophecy might come true (I'm not a communist).
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 04:18 am I might add, many Americans die from treatable ailments not because of the quality of the nations healthcare but the affordability of it. Or the evil selfishness of an insurance company that denies it, or a government that doesn't have a problem with it.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 04:30 am Hehe poo "If we had a secret police we wouldn't know about it...hence...secret". Shhh man don't tell anyone but I know this organization called the secret service, they protect the president.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 04:32 am facts- number of US citizens(average) killed each year due to terrorism- 68 # of US citizens who killed each year by heart disease- 400K+ $ spent on war on terror each year- $500B $ spent on heart disease research and prevention-$1-2B Now lets talk about pork barrel spending....um...yeah. How about that war on terror. If the average college education were to cost $50K, then each year we could send 10million people to school each year. I think we have a problem here.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 04:46 am Poobah, Facts: the Constitution of the US provides for the use of funds for the defense. It does not call for $'s to be spent on heart disease research or prevention, or education. Now as far as the war in Iraq is concerned or the War on terror in general whether or not we agree on it's necessity I think all agree it has been mismanaged and and as bungled as or defense is in general... too affected by defense contractor's special interest groups, Pac's, and flat out corrupt politicians at the highest levels of government. This being said, I think even as a member of the military tat the budget is to high for a post cold war nation to support. This does not excuse the pork barrel spending encouraged by both "conservatives" and liberals of any party. From my Shrine in the Northwoods, Yooper
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 04:58 am Well I have no quarrels with student loans. Providing they don't need start paying their loan off until they reach a set income, not sure if thats the system you have in America, but in Australia the government covers your university costs but expects to be repaid and charges a small amount of interest, and is linked with CPI (basically an indexation of living costs). University education is semi essential, and I consider it an investment in your future. But we need people at the bottom as well there may be oversupply of university qualified if it were made free. But should be considered making certain degrees free if it projected there will be a shortage. The previous leader of Australia was the most conservative rightist leader Australia had for a long time, over his 11 year reign he made almost no commitment to added investment in public education (he couldn't hand dollars over quick enough to private schools), and cut back vocational education, and kept government loan supported places for medical degrees to a minimum, even while knowing the population was set to age in the future incurring more demand on the health system, while changing slowly our health system to emulate America's by cutting regulation of medicine costs and subsidizing private health insurance (strange how they only support the free market when it convinces them). Only recently are we starting to feel the effect of this republican's (really this guy was as republican as someone could get) governance. The health is up to shit with shortages across the board, trades are experiencing shortages, and over the last 7 years, public student performance in mathematics, sciences, and literacy has declined. Ad least this has generated popular support for socialism.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 05:01 am I think poo's point was. If you can find money to kill people you can find money to improve your nation.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 05:32 am That maybe true, that if you can find money to kill you should be able to find money to help improve the nation. That is not what I am argueing at all however. I am saying that that is not what the constitution of the us says is the responsibility of the federal government. The tenth amendment reads and I quote "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." now if you have a problem with this amendment their are ways of having it changed. But since currently no amendment does this I see all laws infringing on this constitutional amendment as unconstitutional. South Dakota v. Dole is the precedence that many such laws are based upon, and I feel that was a poor judgment by the supreme court. Anyways it doesn't look like anything is going to change soon so this is a non issue at the moment. From My Shrine in the Northwoods, Yooper
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 05:50 am That amendment sound quite reasonable. And goes perfectly with the libertarian philosophy. Things are a lot different, I think the founding fathers of the American revolution would be rolling in their grave right now, to see how their country ended up more like a feudal theocratic state then an anarchic oriented republic (I said more not exactly). I have no problem with free trade libertarianism (but thats not how the donkey or the elephant govern anymore), I just think with carefully planned government oversight can improve the nation as a whole. The real problem with failed socialism is the leader forgets why they support socialism and automatically assumes that anything the government doesn't control isn't doing it right. I can't comment on South Dakota v dole but I'll look it up.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 06:00 am See the nice part about federalism is the states have the right to provide benefits, then I'd have a choice to try and change what I don't like or move, but with the national government assuming more and more responsibility it leaves the individual with less influence. From my Shrine in the Northwoods, Yooper
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 06:09 am In this case the conditions laid out by the supreme court made the decision ok. And generally I agree with the taxing and spending clause. But good things come with moderation and I understand concerns, that would come with socialism. Its a tricky process go too free market and you get this shitstorm right now, go too libertarian and the government has to power to protect assets with this current shitstorm, go too socialist and you end up exacerbating the issues you care about or even end up with communism.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 06:15 am What I ment by feudalism is see little difference between it and a federal republic. Feudalism ment the king or federal government knows best maybe I didn't use the right word. Does what I just said just contradict what I commented on South Dakota v dole, well yeah kind of. But I don't think its a black and white issue. On the other side people could say that the federal government does know best since it is the majority voice of the republic. Kind of flawed since you only have two choices though. There is no absolute right and wrong on government control and intervention. I base my opinion on circumstances, and intended effect of intervention and control.
| |
| Monday, February 9, 2009 - 06:59 am My point being- terrorism is sham. not even a threat. Heart disease-very real A shrinking educated class- extremely real Dumb people- an epidemic for our current generations. solution- Vote Poobah in 2012
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 03:09 am Ok Poobah, terrorism is a sham, that's why I spent a year in Iraq talking to the people there about their lives, extremists , and yes to much or to little presence by the Americans in different regions of the country. You have no clue whether or not they exist, but I do I have seen psychopathic religious nuts, blow themselves up because they want something changed about their government, take into consideration that their is a brainwashing in effect right now of many young middle easterners. Take into consideration that many religious leaders in Iraq still have power by preaching hate daily in the mosque. I heard it with my own ears so don't tell me that doesn't happen either. Oh yeah, I think it was Nix saying how awesome Cuba is. In that case, why don't you start preaching your message and move there. Nobody likes the guy on the pulpit that won't back up his words with actions. If you don't like it there, don't give me a call because I'm sure it won't be to hard to float to another chunk of land. From my Hideaway Shrine in the Northwoods, Yooper
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 03:24 am Nay Matthew. Was not me. All I said was 'Hav'nt the USA done everything they could to make life difficult for Cuba?'
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 04:28 am Aye, Nix my bad, I believe that was someone else.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 06:52 am How are armies supposed to destroy an ideology? History indicates military action against causes only strengthens them. How many times can we make the same mistake before we understand.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 11:58 am um...matthew...will you come here for a minute? /me puts my arm around him. You see matthew, people have varying opinions. This is true. Sometimes peoples opinions are disagreed upon by other people and sometimes they get heated. You must not let it overrule logic. Saying that someone should LEAVE the country for expressing their views is actually the MOST unpatriotic thing one can do. Freedom of expression is THE entire basis of our country. Some may forget this. "You have no clue whether or not they exist, but I do I have seen psychopathic religious nuts, blow themselves up because they want something changed about their government, take into consideration that their is a brainwashing in effect right now of many young middle easterners." um...we attacked them. hundreds of thousands have died because of us. YOU EVER WONDER WHY THEY DON'T LIKE US? Remember a little quote like "Violence breeds violence"? Do you think we are more popular now than before? Do you really believe that we are winning the hearts and minds of the middle east by killing and supporting the killing of their people? You really think our shit don't stink and we got attacked because they just decided that they don't like us? It doesn't work that way. I admitt, I haven't been to Iraq. I, however, have strongly apposed this war since before it began. It is and never was our business. I can, however, understand, that if someone dropped a bomb on my house and killed my family, I would be killing them. So Of course they preach hatred and mistrust. We haven't earned their trust and rightfully so. now let me throw you a pitch. Have you been to Cuba? Have you talked to the people? Now you see the Hipocracy of your above statement. I hope you know that it is a sad day for America when A SOLDIER will tell someone to leave the country for expressing the very rights you fought for. "How are armies supposed to destroy an ideology? History indicates military action against causes only strengthens them. How many times can we make the same mistake before we understand."-angus Well, they don't really want to destroy the ideology. More like stoke the flames. it's the natural resources they really want. crazy irrational America haters gives them a reason to be there.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 01:37 pm National Socialism, Greater Japanese CoProsperity Sphere, World Communism, Greater Serbia, and The Greater French Empire. One might conclude that violence or the threat of violence settled those ideologies quite thoroughly.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 05:17 pm Hey Poobah, I did not mean to tell you to to leave, for I love all my fellow Americans greatly no matter what their political or religious views. Also I have not been to Cuba, so you are correct all my sources are from secondhand knowledge but even the 3rd source sources which are pretty independent have led me to believe their economy isn't what I'd classify as "great". It sounds like you have intimate knowledge of it, so I'd like to hear what it is you like about their economy so much. From my Shrine in the Northwoods, Yooper
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 05:34 pm P.S. I was in Iraq to stoke the flames? That's not what I got out of it... go ahead go call me stupid and young, tell me that I fell for all the propaganda, but do that after you talk to a few native Iraq is and ask how they feel about the Americans troops. In fact ask more than one two, look for a representative group of Iraqis and I think you'll find as I did, that they generally appreciated my presence.
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 10:35 pm lol. If it would be hipocracy for me to call you stupid and young. and our soldiers, for the most part, don't stoke the flames. People like the Bush administration did an excellent job of that. I haven't talked to an Iraqi citizen, but I have more than a few friends who are over there or have returned. One in fewer pieces than when he left. Cuba's economy isn't the greatest...but as you ALL can see, neither is ours. This arguement started because I said "Cuba's not as bad as our media states." I was mainly trying to root out misconceptions. I know I may live in the realm of misconceptions, but my reverance for Human life is not one, nor should it ever be considered one. @FB- War is inexcuseable. it should only be a last resort. I am not talking about appeasement either, but all diplomatic and economic angles should be tried in an attempt to prevent the loss of life that goes with war. on the subject of Ideology- what about that big bag of BS that's the "We are American, German, Israeli, French and/or British and do what we want" ideology? or the "Make as much money at all costs" ideology? What about "manifest Destiny"? We all know how that ended up. point being- an ideology doesn't die. It changes its costume and reemerges. (Japanese became capitalist leaders and profiters.) An Ideology of the people and by the people cannot die. It cannot be forgotten and the more you try to stamp it out, the more the people who support it are going to scream. Hitlers Ideology still exists. the Serbian Ideology still exists. Time is the only enemy of ideology. war and suppression only give fuel to that fire. /side note- the capitalism-communism conflict is purely economic....the dumbest reason to kill each other. "Hey, lets kill each other because we spend our money differently!"
| |
| Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 10:37 pm /another side note- Time to start "Poobah's Bongs not bombs program". We drop bongs on the middle east...yup I said it.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 12:41 am Hell get them high, doesn't bother me, also drop some on my place.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 04:30 am Yo, them boy's don't need your bongs. Them boys have their own. Trust...........them boys blaze up the Leb.........With filters when not on the bong.....Rude
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 09:57 am Nix is right, they have plenty already, in fact it is where the majority are produced I believe, some very nice ones i might add.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 10:09 am I actually know that most of the high quality Glass "Water Pipes" or bongs are made from Eureka, California up to Southern Oregon. We should trade stashes with the Iraqis in an effort for peace. I think it's better then exchanging blows that only result in the dead youth of each nation.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 10:59 am "One might conclude that violence or the threat of violence settled those ideologies quite thoroughly". At what cost? Both economically and morally, You need to be very brutal to stamp out all the people that support an ideology, in this day and age with modern communication its not a viable option. All using violence will do is bring fourth supporters of this ideology from across the globe, no matter how wrong the ideology may be. Unless your willing to commit mass genocide at the drop of a pin then your efforts are going to be wasted. At the end of the day, you have blown your countries budget that could have been used to improve life not destroy it, your conscience questioning yourself, and no results to show.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 11:00 am Oh and yeah more weed. No one will have the energy to blow themselves up when their stoned.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 01:44 pm Hmmmm. By your reasoning, The Macedonian Greek Empire lives on as do the Roman, Holy Roman, Ottoman, Egyptian, Hittite, Assyrian, Carthanginian, Mongol,etc., etc.? My previous examples and these latest all have one commonality: Militant, Expansionist Nationalism. Most societies have undergone a period of it and most were defeated(internally,and/or externally) or simply evolved past it. Or is it your contention that the Japanese as a people are intent upon again dominating East Asia militarily? The Chinese might have a word or two to say about that.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 02:06 pm FB- you no longer need a military to bring someone to their knees. My comment about the Japanese was about their capitalist economic expansion. It is like the former warrior ideology. Except instead of how many heads you've taken, it's how much money you make.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 02:17 pm Again by your reasoning, the United States is locked in mortal combat with our former enemies and allies? Who is the victor in such a struggle and how does one define victory? Is it a dollar, yen, or euro amount? And how do we define "to their knees?" When a nation has sufficient economic power over another that they may modify the others' domestic or foreign policies by diktat?
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 02:34 pm "Again by your reasoning, the United States is locked in mortal combat with our former enemies and allies?" never even hinted that. I was refering to ideology on the social level. I tend to exclude political bodies in my references. They have their own Ideology. I was refering to the fact that if a generation is subjected to a particular ideology, that ideology will resonate through several following generation. Even if the inventors of said ideology no longer live. let me site my sources- *The Neo nazi movement. *KKK and AB in the U.S. *The "Arab Revolution" *Religion in general. like I said. Time is the only thing that will smother an such ideologies. War only stokes the flames. "And how do we define "to their knees?"" embargos and acts of market manipulation.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 02:52 pm So it wasn't Von Blucher and Wellesley that finished off the fervent French nationalism that had swept across Europe under the military command of Monsieur Bonaparte, but rather....time? Then of course, Phoenician ideology of command of the Mediterranean perished not at the hands of the Legions under Scipio Aemilianus at the conclusion of the Third Punic War, but rather died of old age?
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 03:23 pm I woke up this morning, looked out the window, and the world was still there. I see no crisis. The sky is still up above, the ground is still beneath my feet. Go about your busines,all is well.
| |
| Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 11:44 pm Think of the military conquest as a hedge clipper. You snip off the head of a plant and the body still survives. at least, for a while. Unless it's a rose bush. When Bonaparte lost, his drive for his ideology stopped expanding. BUT, The French still believe they should rule the world. The ideology isn't as fervent as it used to be. now I will show you my point using a historical event. Rome and the Huns. The Roman's attempted to indoctrinate the Huns. They tried bullying the Huns, and yes, even killing their leaders. But if you know history, you know how that ended. How about another one? This one may be contriversial. The Nazi's tried their hardest to exterminate the Jewish Ideology...and...yeah...didn't work. It only garnered support for the Jewish Ideology. Like I said before. Military involvement only gives resolve to an invaded lands ideology. You may destroy their armies. Burn their cities and kill their leaders. You may also forget that most crucial building block for all ideologies....The people. Like I have said repeatedly- after the inventors are dead, the children will carry the ideology for decades, centuries and even millenia. once again. Time is the only thing that will bury an ideology. (next to mass geonocide, which really is iffy and you may actually create a bigger problem.)
| |
| Friday, February 13, 2009 - 02:46 am Like I said bob. Its not the age where circumnavigating the globe in 80 days would be an impossible feat. Our soldiers aren't equipped with Pilium and tower shields, a phalanx tactic would prove useless, and news can travel around much more freely. With the emergence of the process called the scientific method, a great amount of progress we humans have achieved. If military action was never truly effective in the past why will it be any more effective now with these new conditions? As the ability and range to communicate increases, the less effective aggressive actions and propaganda will be. This is why dictators hate freedom. You also see why people with ideologies that are unable to compete in the intellectual arena actively seek to dismiss and censor all opposition.
| |
| Friday, February 13, 2009 - 02:27 pm Tell yourselves that all you like, but human beings remain human beings. The cultural evolution to which you refer is a very recent developement not matched in most of the world. There will be much more war before it becomes the norm. Ideology as a way of thinking is meaningless. Only the means and will to force that ideolgy on others is relevant in this context. Those societies who forfeit their means and will to defend their own ideologies and systems will find them subverted or conquered by others who haven't. That's the real history. Beat your swords into plowshares. Someone will always make a new sword and slaughter you with it.
| |
| Friday, February 13, 2009 - 04:55 pm Just sticking my nose in. "The Nazi's tried their hardest to exterminate the Jewish Ideology...and...yeah...didn't work. It only garnered support for the Jewish Ideology." I believe the Jews ended up on the "winning" side of that war. As the losers, the Nazi "ideology" HAS been largely wiped out.
| |
| Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 02:13 am "the Nazi "ideology" HAS been largely wiped out." That's a load of BS. Open your eyes. Just they other day someone scratched a swastika into a mirror at work. It still thrives under the surface and only a sugar coated existence can hide that fact. "Beat your swords into plowshares. Someone will always make a new sword and slaughter you with it." The educated actually, always prevail. If a majority of the world were educated, we wouldn't have that problem.
| |
| Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 02:44 am If military victory only fanned the flames of ideology, we would see Nazi ideology in control, not some kid scratching a swastika on a mirror in hiding (and how do you know it was not a devout hindu). I think you are forgetting Clausewitz's famous line "Der Krieg ist eine blosse Fortsetzung der Politik mit anderen Mitteln". War is not a means to itsself but is used as a tool to get your way, and it can be used to defeat a people or an ideology. Farmer Bob has covered only a few small samples of that in history. I would add slavery, is that still around after being defeated militarily in the US? It would not have disappeared otherwise, and Obama would not likely be President(even though his father is African, not African-American). All the cultural forces in the world would not have brought Southerners to abandon slavery without the force of arms. Those who do not embrace strength and become strong are forced to submit or live at the whim of those who are strong.
| |
| Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 12:35 pm The industrial revolution was making slavery obsolete anyways. AND the civil war WAS NOT fought over slavery. The Emancipation Proclimation was infact a political move and means to destabalize the southern economy. Must I remind you that even Lincoln owned slaves. Robert E. Lee thought it was an "abomination" but chose to fight for his native Virginia. As you can see there are vast differences in the reasoning behind that war. Must I also remind you that the ideology birthed during the Civil war still thrives in areas of our country. War may kill an ideology. I guess it is possible, however, war also super charges an ideology. Case in point- The Crusades: all of them spanning that 100yr stretch. Clearly, they didn't succeed in stamping out the Islamic barbarians. Check and Mate ;)
| |
| Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 05:00 pm "That's a load of BS. Open your eyes. Just they other day someone scratched a swastika into a mirror at work. It still thrives under the surface and only a sugar coated existence can hide that fact." And you're comparing this to the 1930's and 40's?? I purposefully added "largely" wiped out because I recognize that it maintains an insignificant presence today. "AND the civil war WAS NOT fought over slavery" Yes it was. "States rights" was a veil for "slavery rights". "War also super charges an ideology" Agreed. But that doesn't mean you should avoid war so as not to "supercharge" an ideology. Particularly if you're dealing with an aggressive ideology. "The Crusades: all of them spanning that 100yr stretch. Clearly, they didn't succeed in stamping out the Islamic barbarians." Was the purpose of the Crusades to stamp out Islamic barbarians? Or was it to control a region? This is your Check and Mate. Again you cite a failed military campaign (multiples in this case) to support your claim. HAD the crusades succeeded and HAD the objective been to remove "Islamic barbarians" and HAD that not happened then you may have something to support your case. As it is, your argument is flawed. There are probably better examples to support it. BC
| |
| Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 05:56 pm BC's right you know. Also Grand Poobah, the educated make the weapons and give them to the uneducated to do the educated's dirty work. We will always have this problem.
| |
| Saturday, February 14, 2009 - 11:59 pm @BC So are you going to tell me that the crusade/christian/judea/islamic pillow fight that is still raging, is a bad source to use? Thousands of years of conquest has failed to end either ideology. The North wasn't even thinking about Slaves rights at the start of the war. READ A MODERN HISTORY BOOK. Not one that still says that Columbus is a hero and a saint. And not one that says that slavery is the driving force behind the Civil war. The truth is- The south was not happy about the Norths subsidizing of southern crops and purchasing foriegn products...so they practiced a constitutional right...and secceeded. @Nix. Ones "education" can vary. The term is clearly used as an umbrella. One could know how to make weapons, but have know clue about modern and historic literature. I was refering to an all emcompasing education. One that allows you to look at the world through realist eyes. And war is never ok. Never ever. unargueable.
| |
| Sunday, February 15, 2009 - 04:49 am Hmmmm, well hello everyone. I'm new to the game and have just started reading the forums. This thread is INDEED very interesting. I'd like to add a little insight I have gained about President Lincoln and the use of Slavery Emancipation. In the World history of the time, England and France had just abandoned slavery. The southern states were courting France for assistance and support to defeat the northern states. Lincoln was VERY aware of this. The southern states were know worldwide to advocate and demand the right to own slaves. Lincoln used this to his advantage to keep the rest of the world out of the war. By declaring the emancipation of slaves he effectively shut the door to foreign support of the south's war efforts. How could France or England be an aid to the south (advocating slavery) and at the same time disavow slavery in their own countries? Lincoln believed in the moral correctness of ending slavery but could not find a time or way to do so without alienating the support he had in the northern states. Remember he was both trying to impose some federal laws that ran contrary to state's rights. It was the definition of a state's right and a federal jurisdiction that ignited the civil war. How is war ever right. War is never right and is never wrong. War is a political tool. As a soldier I never questioned my legal orders. My duty as a soldier was not to agree or disagree with a policy. I surrendered that right upon enlistment. I was trained that we were the tool of a politician to effect policies, not to make them. I once had a general staff officer explain to me that war is the cosiquence of a simply stated complexity. "You either stand for something, or you fall for anything." Where we sometimes go astray is to impose our ideologies upon others whom have NO interest or desire for our ideologies. I have come to view our technologies and social maturity in diverse proportion to each other. In times of our histories technology had not progressed as far as our social and moral maturity. The industrial revolution brought about advances in technology that began to make progress toward a balance between technology and moral/social maturity. Greed and comfort overcame that balance. It drove technology to be valued over and above morality. We stand in a time when right and wrong are very grey and imperical knowledge outways everything else. We will find ourselves being able to manipulate anything and everything around us but without a moral choice and value in doing so. My question for all to consider and contemplate is: Are we seeing a time in history when religious beliefs are at war with science and technology? Where those that value a moral way of life are strongly opposing those that are in an avid persuit of imperical knowledge?
| |
| Sunday, February 15, 2009 - 06:17 pm God V's Man? Neither can win and only one can lose. For the fear of Man created God and the fear of God created Humanity.
| |
| Sunday, February 15, 2009 - 11:23 pm tit
| |
| Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:52 am Say that on your own Booboo. LOL
| |
| Monday, February 16, 2009 - 01:59 am Religion is a tool of an archaic and ancient system. People no longer need slaves. We can make a machine that will do the work of 30 men. We have computers that can compute the most complex laws of mathmatics and physics. We have a new understanding of ourselves, the world and the Universe. We now know that lightning is not "Gods anger". How many religious claims can be discredited by science? Religion gave us a vision, Technology gives us the means to obtain it. Don't get me wrong. I believe everyone should be spiritual, but in his or her own way. You don't need a book to tell you right from wrong. You should already know. The Organized religions now only hold us back and destroy lives through greed, corruption and war. It has served a purpose, but that purposed has passed. It's time for everyone to stand on their own feet and quit hiding behing the vail of "god". It's time to cut the dead weight and move on.
| |
| Monday, February 16, 2009 - 04:11 am stone is a tool of an archaic and ancient system. wood is a tool of an archaic and ancient system. television is a tool of an archaic and ancient system.
| |
| Monday, February 16, 2009 - 05:11 am Stone is a natural resource Wood is a natural resource Television IS a tool of an Archaic and modern system Religion blinds the minds eye. Narrows your forsight. Allows you to accept rediculous claims as fact and leads to hatred, misunderstanding and continued human suffering. Television and religion are of our own creation and need a serious overhaul.
| |
| Monday, February 16, 2009 - 06:11 am "Religion blinds the minds eye. Narrows your forsight. Allows you to accept rediculous claims as fact and leads to hatred, misunderstanding and continued human suffering" In a pantheistical context,allowing for extream immaturity,perhaps. In a panentheistic context,not so much.Actually it would be a natural resource. In a human context all you really need are guts ,the statement has no meaning.
| |
| Tuesday, February 17, 2009 - 05:44 am So, if religion is a natural resource. Can you eat it? make shelter out of it? Does it grow back after you harvest it? Is there a vain of Religion in the rocks? If not, it's not a resource. More like ancient enviromental observations, superstitions and ignorance. I believe your statement only has fragments of meaning.
| |
| Tuesday, February 17, 2009 - 02:55 pm "More like ancient enviromental observations, superstitions and ignorance." And an explanation to explain everything other than "it just happened". I guess gravity is just "ancient enviromental observations, superstitions and ignorance" as well.
| |
| Tuesday, February 17, 2009 - 11:54 pm "I guess gravity is just "ancient enviromental observations, superstitions and ignorance" as well." a dramatic increase in Universal expansion has physicists taking another look at the laws of gravity. Even to the point of rethinking the theory of the "Great Crunch". What we "know" about the universe changes rapidly. Remember, a theory is just a theory. also, Gravity is an ancient enviromental observation. It is not, however, a superstition or the acts of ignorance. I meant that most organized religions are made of the three combined.
| |
| Wednesday, February 18, 2009 - 12:19 am From "the will of man" the debate evolves to religion. Six Impossible Things Before Breakfast: The Evolutionary Origins of Belief by Lewis Wolpert Our leaps of faith REVIEWED BY JOHN CAREY [snip] Neuroscience reveals that belief and logic activate different parts of the brain, and where belief and logic clash, humans will almost always opt for belief, sticking to it obstinately despite adverse evidence. Students offered alternative sets of statistics will choose the one that confirms their prejudices, and a dogged reliance on existing beliefs shows up emphatically in matters affecting health. The belief that vitamin supplements provide a defence against illness, and that "natural" products are not harmful, is widespread even among educated people. Wolpert does not condemn such superstitions, for beliefs, it seems, can keep you healthy, whether they are valid or not. Experiment shows that all sorts of pain can be relieved with a sugar-pill placebo, provided the patient believes in its curative powers. Credulity may ensure survival better than logic. The same applies with religious beliefs. Surveys suggest that religious people are happier, more optimistic, less prone to strokes and high blood pressure, more able to cope with life's problems and less fearful of death than the irreligious. It follows that belief in the supernatural is an evolutionary advantage, and our ability to have such beliefs must, Wolpert deduces, have been partly determined by our genes. [snip] http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/non-fiction/article741335.ece The Nobel prizewinning physicist Niels Bohr kept a horseshoe nailed to the wall above his desk and, when asked whether he believed it would bring him luck, replied: "Not at all. I am scarcely likely to believe in such nonsense. However, I am told that a horseshoe will bring you luck whether you believe in it or not." - Quote of the day
| |
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 12:00 am "It follows that belief in the supernatural is an evolutionary advantage." Only recently have people been confident enough to strike out and say "I have not religeous affiliations". Granted, you'd get burnt on the stake at one time for doing so. I never said that spirituality is bad. Untill the "what created existence?" question can be answered, we cannot discredit divine creation. However, organised religion is a sham, a scam and a farce. The history books prove this. Read them as you choose.
| |
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 01:09 am IF belief is indeed an evolutionary advantage, and it is partly coded in our genes, question is: Why and how to get rid of it? or perhaps: What to replace religion with? IF the need for such belief is natural, biological, and even healthy in a sense, what we are going to do with the 75% or so of the people all around the world who believe in .. something?
| |
| Friday, February 27, 2009 - 12:54 am Science. They will start to believe in life and death for what it is. The fear will bring them a new perspective of being and what it means to be. Some will go to the dark side for protection. The rest will have no choice but to unite and fight the dark side for protection. For when they lose God they will become God, judge and executioner. Instead of turning the other cheek knowing God will deal with them, the good will deal out their own punishment. It will Good men v's Bad men. Religion will be replaced with War. Peace&Hardcore...............Nix001 MNA
| |
| Friday, February 27, 2009 - 04:55 am THE history of religion is as old as the history of man himself. That is what archaeologists and anthropologists tell us. Even among the most primitive, that is to say, undeveloped, civilizations, there is found evidence of worship of some form. In fact The New Encyclopedia Britannica says that as far as scholars have discovered, there has never existed any people, anywhere, at any time, who were not in some sense religious. When it comes to the question of origin, people of different religions think of names such as Muhammad, the Buddha, Confucius, and Jesus. In almost every religion, we can find a central figure to whom credit is given for establishing the true faith. Even though these individuals are considered founders of the major religions that we are familiar with, it must be noted that they did not actually originate religion. In most cases, their teachings grew out of existing religious ideas, even though most of these founders claimed divine inspiration as their source. Or they changed and modified existing religious systems that had become unsatisfactory in one way or another. So basically religion is a set of beliefs or ideology that people subscribe to. Many times when the word 'religion' is used it is in a negative connotation. And for certain 'religions' it is deserved. But wouldn't the best way to determine what religion, or set of beliefs is best, be to look at the followers of that code, or religion? Because as history so often shows, actions speak louder than words. By the religions followers actions and conduct you can determine if a religion or set of beliefs is true or correct.
| |
| Friday, March 6, 2009 - 04:57 pm We have lost the beginning of this thread I started it by hoping that by the will of man and through the actions of the captains of capitalizum (who got us into this economic crisis) the problem will be sorted. Well. They have come up with an idea. Print more money.........Sorry..........implement quantitative easing for the banks and big buisness. In other words....keep the rich rich through the taxs of the future generations. I know. What other choises do they have except to tell the people the countries broke and that they are all going to have to live like many other countries around the world. By the means of bare necessity. I know. The rich won't like that. But if they had'nt of squandered and betted with the worlds money in the first place we would'nt be in this mess. Bloody Capitalists. I also advised at the beginning of the thread to step outside, look at your home and check it's secure, grow some veg and buy a stab/bullet proof vest. Quantitative easing. I wonder how much someone got paid to come up with that?
| |
| Sunday, March 8, 2009 - 10:51 am just noticed this thread i must say i thoroughly enjoyed it and spent like an hour reviewing all the posts with their internet sources and texts cited as evidence in your presentations of arguments. got to agree with the i think religion is bullshit when it was made up, but it had purpose to help a species cope with the uncertainties of everyday life/death and it still has its role but it has been horribly abused by individuals at times and the only way to get rid of it is to replace it with science in the new generations and breed it out of existence with law and persecution spanish inquisition style fun fun . i consider myself athiest but that wont get me out of accompanying my 52 yr old mother this weekend to her crazy upbeat sing and dance church. show me proof of god ill believe if not science rules... about the country well a republic can only last until the people learn that they can get money out of communal coffers and at that point it is only a matter of time until economic collapse. people are greedy by nature unfortunately its a baser survival instinct. dont go nuts on me for this theory i just came up with but i think unfortunately due to the substantial but not complete decrease in the white mans racism and bigotry in america there is not much to drive the poverty stricken and ignorant masses to strive to achieve and conform since they are now our equals they got nothing to prove and so now my america is a country of lazy drug abusing kids who will never grow up. i feel sorry for you old folks u will have horrible after care if its left to these under achievers to care for you in your old age. that is how i see my generation i am 23 with a bba in management and no one else in my families generation will even get an associates ever... but atleast they all made it through highschool rofl. as a country we need to learn to live within our means, balance budgets government and personal, and for gods sake we need serious education reform and the sooner the better...colleges have put education second to the demands of the customers capitalism at work great... anyway keep posting comments nice to hear from educated people. ive spent my whole life working blue collar jobs with drug addicts and felons and you just cant get this kind of insight from them.
| |
| Monday, March 9, 2009 - 12:03 am shaun, that made me think of an oft-quoted line about survivival from the glory days of fuckedcompany.com (Circa 2001): "Ordinary men were battered and smashed, except for mike91919595, who was equipped with some AK-47s and a Honda full of silver." As to religion, although you'd never know it from the news, I believe it's on the way out. Centuries ago, the Church was everything, and called all the shots. Then came governments, then came capitalism. At the risk of oversimplifying, corps now rule the roost, they just need occasional help from government to bail them out of their bigger mistakes. But churches? Please. At the turn of the millenium I read an interesting meta-history of human endeavor. To paraphrase: if there were a galactic museum of the universe, one might find there a display of Earth from the period 1000 A.D. to 2000 A.D., showing a suit of armor and a 747 labeled "examples of metalworking from the period." Perspective is everything. Anyhow, being 57 myself, I look forward to some young whippersnapper subsidizing my retirement even as he's wiping the applesauce from my saggy chin. *winks*
| |
| Wednesday, March 11, 2009 - 02:02 pm Shaun comfort breeds complacency. Only when you know the price for underachievement do lazy people realize the importance of achievement. Give a 3rd world child an opputunity for a good education and they will not take it for granted. Its a bit of a shame, probably the greatest minds of America fail because they are stuck in a povery trap. I feel that now more then ever governments should be providing support and opputunity to disadvantaged citizens if developed nations are to keep their standing in the world. I guess this recession might be a wake up call to all the Bam Margeras and Paris Hiltons. Or who knows in a decade it will be reverse roles for immigrants, immigrants migrate to the developed world for higher employment while nationals do all the shitty jobs.
| |
| Friday, April 3, 2009 - 07:06 am Zdeněk Pavlovský (Fearless Blue) Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 06:07 pm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Q&A: Islamic finance [snip] What is Sharia law? Under Sharia Islamic law, making money from money, such as charging interest, is usury and therefore not permitted. [snip] How does Islamic finance work? The overarching principle of Islamic finance is that all forms of interest are forbidden. The Islamic financial model works on the basis of risk sharing. The customer and the bank share the risk of any investment on agreed terms, and divide any profits between them. [snip] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3548656.stm ------- In an Islamic monetary system, money itself has no value. 'Islam denies the conventional mentality that out of every dollar a new dollar has to be created', says Shariah scholar Dr. Imran. This means, that capital can only increase in value in value if a financial vehicle's underlying asset increases in value. Since interest is forbidden under Islamic law, money can not add value to itself. - http://www.ameinfo.com/177501.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yo Zde. They have just been talking about that on the news. They were wondering why the G20 are'nt talking about implementing it.
| |
| Friday, April 3, 2009 - 12:09 pm im not qualified to have educated comment, however, some of those who qualified are do indeed suggest that such system would probably help to "prevent" the so called financial, which then some believe translated to economic, crisis we go through. i guess we can now see why the current system we have at the moment is preferred, thus defended, by some, and its not about ideology, religion, freedoms, rights, nor efficiency on global scale ;) well, history teaches us that every system was overcome, but whats behind the corner nobody knows, not even Nobel prize for economy winners.
| |
| Friday, April 3, 2009 - 07:30 pm Nix, That's all well and good, but it relies on trust. It offers no incentive other than kindness to give somebody else your money. If anything it hurts the lender, they are no longer free to invest their money. It's like a risky bank account with no interest potential. Ben
| |
| Friday, April 3, 2009 - 11:44 pm in your opinion MasterofAll or is it a scientific fact? just curious because from your posts i cannot tell whats fact and whats opinion.
| |
| Saturday, April 4, 2009 - 05:50 pm Zdenek, That bit right there was an opinion formed off of the snippets posted by nix. Since it's an opinion, I would love for someone to prove me wrong. I enjoy learning something new. I did see something in his post about how any profits are shared between the lender and the "lendee". So that is a potential variable that would make what I said wrong. If there is a source of profit other than interest (which is forbidden under that system), what I said would be probably be wrong. You say posts, plural, so I assume you've read by posts in the environmentalism debate thread. Reading those posts, I'm sure you noticed that I never directly quoted any articles. That is because those posts summarize the opinions I have formed based on facts I've learned by reading and listening to all angles of an issue. The problem lies in the fact that many of the "facts" in that subject are so tangible. Ideas in that area have shifted so drastically in the past 30 years that nobody can really call a scientific article fact. There will always be people that take what others call facts and present them with "facts" to the contrary. It's difficult to say your ideas represent only facts, because someone can always use opinion or conflicting "facts" to disagree with you. The view I present is what I consider to be the most intelligent angle on an issue. When I write my posts, I say exactly what I believe to be true, there is all ways the potential that I will be proven wrong. Suffice to say, my posts represent what I believe to be true at the time that I write them. I would love for people to agree with me, and I do consider myself to be correct on the subjects I talk about. In the environmentalism thread I consider myself to be very knowledgable about the issues I discuss. Cementing yourself in one position is foolish. I have been trying to determine whether nix is willing to be proven wrong and learn, or whether there is no convincing him to shift his views in even I minute way. Everyone should be willing to learn, very little in life holds true under every possible range of conditions. That last post was an opinion formed on the fly using the information presented to me, but my posts in the environmentalism thread are heavily steeped in the "facts" that I consider to be true. Ben
| |
| Saturday, April 4, 2009 - 06:34 pm Hi Ben. 'Cementing yourself in one position is foolish.' Does that mean that there is nothing that you concider to be true? Or would stand up for/live for/die for? Is there no fact to life? If everyone was to sit on the fence, how would the bad things get changed? I also if proved wrong will adapt my belief. (except the environment. I will always believe we should stop people from destroying it) Capitalisum, according to the G20, has failed. It also failed in the 1930's. Get burnt once you be more careful. Get burned twice you stop doing what ever you are doing thats getting you burnt. Unfortunatly, it seems that the leaders of capitalisum don't get burnt. And when the dust clears they'll be back up to their old tricks again. Capitalisum needs a free market. Society needs a regulated market. Whats more important? Profit or society?
| |
| Saturday, April 4, 2009 - 08:07 pm Hi Nix, To answer your last question there, neither, capitalist society runs on profit. Without the potential for profit, our current society would collapse. People don't do much if there is no potential for them to get anything out of it. Even charitable deeds which seem like nothing but kindness benefit the person giving in a mental way. People give money to charity because it makes them feel good. People do nothing just to be nice. People do things because the see a benefit in doing it, or they just feel like they should. All of this is detailed in that book I told you to look at in another post. Where you quoted me there, you took my comment a bit too literally, I was saying things change. You need to adapt to those changes in order to survive. That's how it is in nature and society. I have certain things that I believe to be my fundamental rights, and I would be willing to die to defend those rights. But that is only because I gain more of a psychological benefit to resisting than to just give up and die. And nix, I agree with you about the environment! You read my first post on the environmentalism thread; the environment is getting steadily destroyed by humanity. I just feel that your solution is poorly thought out. For example, you constantly talk about how we should all grow our own food and turn back to nature. Like I said in another post of mine, farming is extremely damaging to the environment! Small scale farming is inefficient, and requires overlarge amounts of labor for the return you get. You kind of steered around that point in the environmentalism thread, so I would still like your response to that. I understand you will never advocate the destruction of the environment, and I sure as hell don't want you to. But can't you acknowledge that the methods you propose are not the best path? Also, in my opinion the G20 meeting is just a political gimmick that makes the voters (and the leaders themselves) feel like their leaders are doing something. In the case of the US, it just involves sucking up to your leaders to give us a better world image. Which leader said capitalism has failed? I hadn't heard that. You want the truth? The goverment has failed. They screwed up; miserably. Failures in the market are mostly due to poor government regulation, be it too much or too little. An example in my government (US). I'm assuming you guys over in Europe hear about Bernie Madoff. If you haven't, he was a guy who set up a 50 billion dollar ponzi scheme. The sad part, a financial analyst told one of our regulatory boards, and they ignored him! That isn't a failure of capitalism, it's a failure of government. Unbrideled capitalism would be a disaster, I'm not denying that. But with a capable government, capitalism works great. What I've coined "public stupidity" is the thing that is destroying the US. Most americans have no knowledge of the issues affecting their country, they don't really care either. We are losing our position in the world heirarchy because we don't focus our attention on important subjects. Some celebrity getting drunk and stripping at a party gets as much media attention as information about an important diplomatic meeting. Hell, the recent events in Georgia and Israel only made the front page of our local paper when they each started. After that they were relegated to a small article containing casualty figures in the World section. To me, the idea that you can confine all important world events onto a single page shows how much we ignore what's going on in the world. China is pulling ahead of us because they are still in the position where they appreciate what they get. Kids here in the US get offered a great education for free and don't even take advantage of it. It's like what a person said above, "comfort breeds complacency". That is why empires rise and fall. Once your on top, most people and nations don't feel the need to keep improving on their lead. So long as they're on top, and stay there, everyones happy. You can preach the death of capitalism all you want, but it's a good system that's here to stay. Capitalism is not at fault for these latest economic problems. Capitalism is the reason our standard of living is as high as it is today. You seem to think it's either the environment or us, no compromises. I disagree, I choose to think our technology has allowed us to have the best of both worlds. I think that is the fundamental difference between our two viewpoints. Wouldn't you agree? Ben
| |
| Saturday, April 4, 2009 - 09:15 pm I believe "opinion" cannot be proved wrong by definition, while a "fact" can. I was merely curious for the reasons I stated.
|
