Raver's post. I know some users on here have some very fucked up racist, racialist, anti-semitic views, I don't really bother reading their content too much, anyways. I agree that such views are dangerous, if they ever gain legitimacy in the eyes of the pubic (not the case as of now) and/or get political power (this is happening in some parts of the West to an extent).
Patronizing, why? It wasn't patronizing, intepret it how you want though. If telling someone to chill out, when they frankly need to is "patronizing", then grow up, son.
Have you ever watched the movie Twelve Angry Men? It's fiction but goes to show, I think quite well, how one person using reason, and using it well, can win over other people even when outnumbered.
In any case, I agree that racilaist views like those expressed by some in this thread are a problem, but I don't see throwing tantrums as the solution. This is what bothers me, that it only worsens the toxic politcal climate you mention.
Beta ST 6w5 8w9 3w4 sx/so
Every problem on earth can be solved by the liberal application of ordnance
"Ultimately, man should not ask what the meaning of his life is, but rather he must recognize that it is he who is asked. In a word, each man is questioned by life; and he can only answer to life by answering for his own life."
Discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, religion, or age is inefficient. It removes some of the best individuals from consideration, and in doing so, results in lower-performance organizations.
Performance capabilities are represented in a population as a bell curve. Some people are the tallest, some the shortest, some the smartest, and some the dumbest, etc. Populations which have the lowest diversity have very narrow bell curves, and populations which have high diversity have very broad bell curves.
The most genetically diverse local population of humans on the planet live in sub-Saharan Africa. This means that the smartest person in the world is likely to be African, as will be the dumbest person in the world. Same goes for the most ethical and the most evil. The tallest and the shortest. The fattest and the thinnest. The strongest and the weakest.
In any case, a smart organization is going to recruit the best individuals it can find for the job. If it doesn't, it will be left behind in the dust.
The Trump organization is a cautionary tale of this fact.
Do I actually want you to die? No...that is, not if you don't want me to die--I'm very tit for tat, that way.
What you have to understand is that certain points of view are violent in their intentions; I'm sure you can understand that. If you had to walk through a group of men yelling misogynistic slurs at you, even if they didn't physically assault you, I'm sure you'd feel threatened. Being on a site that allows certain types of people to flaunt their marginality is off-putting, but I'm a big boy who can fight unbelievably dirty, if necessary. I just believe that if you don't censor them, I shouldn't be censored either.
2.) AGAIN, for the seats in the back, I'm MORE than capable of proving my points and articulating my views in a way that "wins over" others--I do that shit in my sleep but that's not what set me off. It was being told to "chill out" which I perceived as open hostility. And especially when her comment was being cosigned by far more problematic pieces of shit. Is it possible I overreacted? Of course. I just don't believe my overreaction demands what I think YOUR overreaction is considering the full context of the situation.
The EU is single handedly ruining Europe with their abysmal immigration laws that don't screen anyone and just let them in because they want to come there and are masquerading as refugees. The fact that the EU enforces these laws upon all members of the EU rather than allowing EU nations to choose immigration laws that they believe will benefit them is autocratic and prohibitive of the power of nations to govern themselves independently. This is ignoring all the other economic issues the EU has brought upon the majority of nations with the introduction of the Euro and many other reasons on why the EU dictatorship is single handedly destroying Europe.
Cybernetic is trying to tell you that you should be less hostile and less emotional when it comes to political debates. You have demonstrated on numerous cases that you are perfectly capable of being logical and rational so why you decide to add in hostility and emotion when it's not required is befuddling.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
Source: https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/can...gration-policyCanada is among the world’s most generous nations for immigrants and has one of the highest per capita admission rates. It has, on average, offered residency to about 200,000 immigrants and refugees a year over the past decade, earning a global reputation for an "open arms" attitude.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
I probably shouldn't respond, for my peace of mind that is, but the following needs to be said.Originally Posted by Alonzo
People expressing views over the internet does not directly put you in physical danger, unlike the woman in the example you describe.
I'm the type of guy that is perfectly willing to listen when people feel distressed, but I can't excuse victim mentality.
Someone expressing racist views online does not automatically mean they will go out and attack someone.
I do think such views carry great danger, because it is inevitable that some of the people who hold racist views will act on violence.
But since this is the internet, what dangerous situation are you describing? No offense but you sound like those college kids who claim they feel "unsafe" because of someone else's speech. How silly is that? Honestly.
Free speech is a thing in a free society. This type of behavior you demonstrate which attempts to shut down speech is dangerous in its own way. Now, speech in itself doesn't kill anyone. Ideas lead to actions, and actions can kill people. So it is the ideas we have to fight, not free speech. If you shut down someone else's speech, you are not fighting ideas which you oppose, you are fighting free speech.
So my whole point is that you should fight the ideas being spread in this thread with better ideas, not by shutting down speech and playing victim.
Think about it.
So because you're a low empathy piece of shit that can't manage the extra mirror neurons to imagine being in someone else's shoes, which to a degree I could forgive because I can also be a bit empathy impaired (initially) to situations I can't wholeheartedly relate to at times (SEE, THAT'S COGNITIVE EMPATHY IN ACTION), you've decided to double down on an incomplete (if I were to be diplomatic) stance. That very act is what makes you a piece of shit, not the being unaware of someone's else experience/perception/vantage point and then learning when they attempt to school your evidently hard of learning ass, but doubling down because of your ego. Piss on you.
Not ONCE, have I claimed or conducted myself like a victim--that's not a part of my being, BITCH; if anything, I've been actively fighting, in my own debauched way, against what I perceive to be unjust and irrational, which drew the ire from people like YOU, people who had conveniently overlooked other more problematic things in the thread, and jumped straight down my throat; people who tried to hold me to a standard they were conveniently unwilling to hold others to, others that have mass murdering Hitler in their fucking avatar. I was more than HAPPY to continue on as I was, never asking anyone to back me up, but standing in my own fucking truth.
The only reason why I replied to your comment about "not base T" is because I was already admittedly triggered by others taking issue with my bleach gif whilst they readily ignored WORSE shit, and you seemed to be piling on; based on your earlier comments (that I liked, as I have liked other comments of yours) in the thread, you seemed like a rational, reasonable person whom I not only agreed with but felt some appreciation for your openmindedness--you were one of few, if any, that spoke to another narrative not steeped in utter obtuseness, whether willful or otherwise. But your blind spot is the problem here.
I tried to convey my perspective to you, not from a standpoint of wanting pity, but imparting understanding why, for some people, due to a PTSD of sorts and an accumulation of societal stab wounds and paper cuts, it's harder to be dispassionate about certain phenomena that trigger "fight or flight" impulses. I know far too many people, who in real time, every day, feel the amplification of bigotry that MFers like you don't readily experience. And we see that the root of it is deeply embedded within the current toxic social climate that is pervasive everywhere, and especially on the internet. Hate crimes are steadily on the rise, thanks in part to these (anti)think chambers at the far reaches of the net. These types of ideas amplify and affect my communities, directly and indirectly, every fucking day. I'm constantly pissed OFF lately because I'm doing backflips trying to decide life-altering things like which country is the best for me to be based in right now because the "local" politics directly impact my work and overall life quality. This shit is NOT a game to me. I'm Gamma Quadra motherfucker, we don't like to have our "hands tied" and productivity stymied by outside forces--it makes us want to FIGHT, which is what I do, in my own ways, as evidenced by my responses on this thread.
I'm not saying that what I did was "right," necessarily, but it was DESERVED, and my disagreeable posturing was rooted in what I perceived to be unfair treatment and double standards--if you're going to condemn my act, condemn the other MFers as well. And if you don't condemn them, the shut the fuck up about what I say or do. Keep that same unbothered, apathetic energy. I never asked for any of you to hold my fucking hand so go choke on an unwashed bag of ISIS dick.
He has the values of a cult leader. Member of my group or not member of my group, and that is based on ethical judgement.
To my perception. Trump is a closed minded, self-important and egoistic person.
My values and his values are rather different.
Well like some people have been saying, Trump is a symptom and not the cause.
The reason why we have Trump and far-right movements is because of all the craziness with terrorism and refugees and immigrants, etc. And the reason why we have terrorism, is because the US aided Al-Qaeda back in the days with weapons and finance to provoke Russia, and now the Al-Qaeda has bitten back them in the ass via 9/11. And the reason why they're provoking Russia, is because after the collapse of the USSR, the NATO, which is a kind of a collective military organization of "the West", needed something to do when they no longer had the big, bad enemy of the Soviets.
The US officially has over 800 bases all over the world. This is no doubt a drain on the US economy, not to mention the trillions of dollars already wasted in the wars in Middle East and other places. Trump no doubt sees this as a waste and one of the reasons for the decline of the US economy, even though the military-industrial complex is part of what's fueling the US economy. Nonetheless, he correctly thought that NATO might had something to do with this, so he talked about dismantling NATO or leaving NATO or something. It's not clear how much he meant it or he just said some bullshit that he doesn't believe in to gain votes, but it's obvious that "the Establishment" did not take kindly to him even mentioning leaving NATO or getting along with Russia or something.
The US and the NATO need enemies to keep its machinery going. That's the entire reason why there's this whole craziness with Russiagate.
If you could lay down some of your own viewpoints in a calm, respectable and precise manner you might have a better chance of getting more people on board you. I'd be interested to hear what exactly those are.
“We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand.” Randy Pausch
This super egoism is created by socially empowering people on the basis of their race. This person openly, vigilantly defines himself in racial terms in order to glean any possible empowerment from identifying as such. Clearly they have a need for racism to exist and be a widespread problem... without racism, who would this person be? A random nobody... without race, beneath it all, this person is nothing. This is why you hear endless cries of "white nationalism" but cannot seem to find any real instances of it. Such professional minorities are infact racists, oddly.
It is done out of desperation for meaning. Nietzsche predicted all these supremacist movements, ... white nationalists, communist revolutionaries, black panther people, Nazis (back when they still existed), etc. the underlying psychological mechanism is the same. Nihilism leads to the formation of the ubermench (superman, supreme man). Here it's just black or latin power, black or latin supremacy, etc.. It is basically an attempt to find meaning and fulfillment through attainment, via exerting superhuman effort. Which is what the thirst for power is all about.
But beneath all this, Alonzo... you're just a sad, empty man, aren't you? Yes you are...
Quite predictable and pathetic but what else is new
Last edited by cR4z3dr4T; 04-03-2019 at 07:24 AM.
Raver is in charge
I hate the left/right dichotomy with a passion, it pushes people to accept idiotic ideas from either side of the spectrum instead of forming their own original ideas that are highly attuned to their belief and value system. This means obtaining an amalgamation of ideas from each side of the political spectrum is necessary. Whether they land on the left, center or right when it is all said and done is irrelevant.
Oops, Raver is left leaning...he's no longer in charge of anything. I do like libertarianism, though...main thing I don't like about libertarianism is its resistance towards the initiation of force and making others do things they don't want to do. These things are often necessary and for me a source of enjoyment. Other than that, I like the fact it emphasizes competition, independence and survival of the fittest/natural selection....libertarianism is essentially social Darwinism minus the initiation of force, so congratulations Raver on embracing social Darwinism.
Last edited by Kill4Me; 04-03-2019 at 06:05 PM.
Both believe in privatized means of production and markets, but left-libertarians tend to view ownership of land as problematic whereas right-libertarians do not. At least, that's how I understand the difference.
I know you don't like labels too much, which I get but they can sometimes be accurate so I wonder if you feel this describes your views.
The cold winter really quieted things down there lately, eh? Amazing what -25 can do for tempers.
Can we talk about how many drug, medication, and health related advertisment is on a typical American TV station?
Every single commercial for 3 hours I watched last night was: Do you suffer from Diabetes? Colitus? Cancer? Herniated Disk? X,Y,Z?
Did you recieve treatment with Hernia grafts and now suffer from urinary tract infections? You might be entitled to compensation.
Now there is a new drug that causes these potential side effects. Talk to your Dr if this treatment is right for you.
Its actually unsettling how barraded you all are with medicine, law suits, health care. A pay for play system looks so neurotic.
You are used to it but, Im telling you it looks neurotic from the outside.
I don't think Trump is all that smart. It's just he rules because he's so self confident and business man alpha and that resonates better with people than Hillary's illuminati reptilian medusa glare thing. People would just rather be ruled by a heartless psycho businessman than somebody in the 'deep state' or whatever. Myself included, although I don't think Trump is the best person for that and I don't really like him as a person because he's a bully, and casts a buff spell on every redneck str8 male jerk in 'murica. The DNC just kind of gaslighted/trolled themselves by thinking Hillary was a good person to run against him. Now they're eternally pissed at Trump, instead of being mad at themselves for not knowing how to strategize or game play effectively. And demonizing Trump and the media always being like 'ooh look at what an asshole he's being, pay attention to it and get upset about it!' they are just giving him more power imo.
UK (according to the 2011 census): English, Scottish, Welsh, Northern Irish, Irish, British (including the Cornish)
Belgium: Flemish, Walloon
Spain: Andalusian, Aragonese, Asturian, Balearic, Basque, Canary Islanders, Galicians, Leonese, Valencian, Cantabrian, Castilian, Catalonian, Extremaduran
Switzerland: German-Swiss, French-Swiss, Italian Swiss, Romanch
France: Alemannic Germans, Arpitan, Basques, Bretons, Catalans, Corsicans, Flemings, Occitans.
That list is by no means exhaustive, but I just wanted to prove three points, that 1.) unsurprisingly, you don’t know what you are talking about; 2.) that you were disingenuously speaking in coded language meant to single out non-ethnic European people as somehow being incapable of integrating with ethnic Europeans without significant strife; 3.) that “social policies” rooted in unifying people through economic incentives, shared values, and laws that codify inalienable human rights can indeed bring peoples together. Don’t believe me? Take a gander:
The thing is this: reasonable people understand that it can take time (with a few bumps and bruises along the way) for different cultures to acclimate to each other and that's ok. Humans are tribal, narcissistic and stubborn--we need time, hell, even when we look alike, speak the same language and come from a similar place (look at early Irish immigrants in the US). Some of you seem to be incapable of understanding that ALL cultures change and evolve over time and that's both normal and ok.
But you know what doesn't help the integration process along? Hatred and fear mongering.
Having said that, I don't believe in unfettered immigration, especially along the lines of what we've recently seen. I think that there must be a healthy respect for the fact that 1.) resources have limitations, 2.) most people need gradual change and time to adjust to "difference," and 3.) with that "difference" comes some potential culture clashes and problems that must be addressed honestly and responsibly. But then again, the migrant crisis is a crisis, and does not reflect normal trends. Sweden is particularly burdened because other countries don't pull their weight, whether from of a lack of desire (Denmark), an inability to handle the load (Serbia and Croatia) or both (Poland)--although Poles don't mind "burdening" other EU nations with their own people, including mine.
Lastly, I believe that most of the current influx of immigrants should go back to their countries once there is greater stability in their lands and that moreover, they actually do want that for themselves. But when people are in dire need, I believe that humanity owes it to ourselves to help, especially when a certain group of humans has literally benefitted off the backs of those now knocking down their doors. It's quite simple really.
Last edited by Alonzo; 04-05-2019 at 01:04 PM.