Topic: Romney fucked up by pulling that big bird shit.
Anonymous A started this discussion 14 years ago #22,609
Even Republicans are angry. Defunding a non violent, educational program didnt go over so well.
Ks !KansasxqvM joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later[^] [v] #355,097
It was quite a stupid thing for Romney to say. But the implications of what he said are even more important. If that fucktard is gonna gut PBS, what else is at stake? PBS is mostly responsible for my interest in science/documentaries/biographies etc today. Fuck Mitt Romney and all the retards who support him.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,101
Pay for PBS with private funding, I'd be willing to chip in money to keep big bird on the air. Wouldn't you be?
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,102
@previous (C)
I never unerstood why they need taxpayer dollars. The free market provides things like Wikipedia and open source software, but PBS would go bankrupt. Give me a break.
I never unerstood why they need taxpayer dollars. The free market provides things like Wikipedia and open source software, but PBS would go bankrupt. Give me a break.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,103
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,104
@355,101 (C)
pay for wars over seas with private funds. If they're worth it, we should be chipping in.
pay for wars over seas with private funds. If they're worth it, we should be chipping in.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 41 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,106
@355,102 (D)
Its education for poor people and children. the internet costs money, Sesame street is free.
Its education for poor people and children. the internet costs money, Sesame street is free.
Anonymous D replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,107
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,108
@355,106 (A)
Free from mind warping commercials as well.
No PBS & pre school kiddlets will be subjected to KFC & McD's commercials ad infinitum.
Free from mind warping commercials as well.
No PBS & pre school kiddlets will be subjected to KFC & McD's commercials ad infinitum.
Anonymous D replied with this 14 years ago, 9 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,109
@355,103 (E)
The 1% pays for it to keep us comfortably in the basement. Should they ever choose not to, I may have to actually go outside. They wouldn't want that.
The 1% pays for it to keep us comfortably in the basement. Should they ever choose not to, I may have to actually go outside. They wouldn't want that.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,110
@previous (D)
Just a reminder.
> The free market provides things like Wikipedia
Wikipedia requires a bank of servers & costly ISP fees and a paid staff to keep it going. Often running in the red for a few months at a time recently.
Just a reminder.
> The free market provides things like Wikipedia
Wikipedia requires a bank of servers & costly ISP fees and a paid staff to keep it going. Often running in the red for a few months at a time recently.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 51 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,111
@355,104 (A)
Don't be silly! Taxpayer money should be put toward funding overseas wars and giving out no-bid contracts to your wartime profiteer buddies. That's what it's there for! If we start putting citizens' money back into something educational, then it might come back to bite us in the ass one day.
Don't be silly! Taxpayer money should be put toward funding overseas wars and giving out no-bid contracts to your wartime profiteer buddies. That's what it's there for! If we start putting citizens' money back into something educational, then it might come back to bite us in the ass one day.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,112
Anonymous D replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #355,113
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 3 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,118
Seriously, though, the only people who are retarded enough to be put off by that are part of the 47% anyway.
Anonymous D replied with this 14 years ago, 4 hours later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,129
Ash !bbKEtchUp. joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,130
So is anyone going to drop a news link or something?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,131
In case anyone doesnt realize mountainman hates poor people and big bird.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,134
I don't see why they need public funding to survive. Let them do what other channels do, what most websites and apps do, run ads. It can't really need government help unless this "charitiable" "non-profit" "patriotic" or whatever organization has a bunch of hoggish parasites getting huge fatcat salaries. If they are really doing it out of patriotism and caring about their fellow citizens they will be glad to do it on a humble servant's salary of 20k a year or less and have whatever they can covered by volunteer work. This goes even for 'directors', 'CEOs', or whoever else thinks they are so superior that they should get to pick the public's pocket for their selfish fat salary & benefits package. It's not the government's money it's our money. We shouldn't have to pay for crap that we don't necessarily watch. If regular channels can run commercials and make huge profits, PBS can easily slip a few ads in every now and then and cover what it takes to keep this "patriotic" "for-the-children" channel on the air. I'm not trying to be pro-Romney, I am just anti-government-and-"feel-good"-programs-manipulating-and-fleecing-the-populace.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,135
@previous (I)
The point is that it has no child warping advertisment, and provides free educational programming to poor people(not just seasme street). There are a lot of things that I wouldnt want my money going towards, such as religious institutions or the war effort. If I dont want to fight overseas, than why should MY money be used for such things? Why would Romney cut funding to something that actively helps people, instead of hurting them? Why cut something that actually educates poor people?
The point is that it has no child warping advertisment, and provides free educational programming to poor people(not just seasme street). There are a lot of things that I wouldnt want my money going towards, such as religious institutions or the war effort. If I dont want to fight overseas, than why should MY money be used for such things? Why would Romney cut funding to something that actively helps people, instead of hurting them? Why cut something that actually educates poor people?
(Edited 25 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,136
@previous (A)
Also the things he wants to cut such as pbs or planned parenthood, are specifically used and needed by the poor. think about it.
Also the things he wants to cut such as pbs or planned parenthood, are specifically used and needed by the poor. think about it.
(Edited 14 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,137
@355,130 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
Sites that got it right with accuracy beyond accuracy 2004/08
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ (updated 7 days week)
http://electoral-vote.com/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2012-general-election-romney-vs-obama (495 polls showing currently)
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2012/ecalculator#?battleground (Most accurate State forecaster {Pollster} 2004-08)
All great reads YET if Money counts? This one with Many 100's of Millions Bucks riding on accuracy 2004-08 and now 2012 WAS the clear winner as most accurate over all
http://www.intrade.com/v4/misc/scoreboard/
http://www.intrade.com/v4/misc/electoral-map/
Proof of accuracy?
http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/15/news/economy/intrade_election_polling/index.htm
http://www.intrade.com/news/id/256
tl;dr?
OBAMA so fucking far ahead in Electoral Vote nothing else matters.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/pollster_accuracy_and_the_nati.php?nr=1
Sites that got it right with accuracy beyond accuracy 2004/08
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/ (updated 7 days week)
http://electoral-vote.com/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2012-general-election-romney-vs-obama (495 polls showing currently)
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2012/ecalculator#?battleground (Most accurate State forecaster {Pollster} 2004-08)
All great reads YET if Money counts? This one with Many 100's of Millions Bucks riding on accuracy 2004-08 and now 2012 WAS the clear winner as most accurate over all
http://www.intrade.com/v4/misc/scoreboard/
http://www.intrade.com/v4/misc/electoral-map/
Proof of accuracy?
http://money.cnn.com/2011/11/15/news/economy/intrade_election_polling/index.htm
http://www.intrade.com/news/id/256
tl;dr?
OBAMA so fucking far ahead in Electoral Vote nothing else matters.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/pollster_accuracy_and_the_nati.php?nr=1
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,138
@355,135 (A)
@355,136 (A)
If regular channels can make huge profits off of ads, this "for-the-children-not-for-our-own-greed" channel can screen and accept enough non-child warping advertising to stay on the air. They don't need to make huge profits like a greedy television corporation. The thing about ads is that they are free aren't they? You can watch the channel without paying anything even if you are poor. But not everyone who watches big-bird is poor or has poor parents. Ads on websites only have a small click through rate typically. You only need a small percentage of audience actually being influenced by the ads and it only needs to make a small fraction of what regular channels make.
Also nobody is saying you should spend YOUR money on war and religious cults. When did I say that? The whole point was to NOT give the channel YOUR money. People should be free to take their money and donate it to what they want it to go to, not have the government forcibly steal it and spend it on what they think you ought to want it to go to.
> Also the things he wants to cut such as pbs or planned parenthood, are specifically used and needed by the poor. think about it.
As I said, I am not being pro-Romney, just anti-manipulation-and-fleecing. So just because I have this opinion about this specific issue does not mean I automatically support everything Romney thinks or wants.
@355,136 (A)
If regular channels can make huge profits off of ads, this "for-the-children-not-for-our-own-greed" channel can screen and accept enough non-child warping advertising to stay on the air. They don't need to make huge profits like a greedy television corporation. The thing about ads is that they are free aren't they? You can watch the channel without paying anything even if you are poor. But not everyone who watches big-bird is poor or has poor parents. Ads on websites only have a small click through rate typically. You only need a small percentage of audience actually being influenced by the ads and it only needs to make a small fraction of what regular channels make.
Also nobody is saying you should spend YOUR money on war and religious cults. When did I say that? The whole point was to NOT give the channel YOUR money. People should be free to take their money and donate it to what they want it to go to, not have the government forcibly steal it and spend it on what they think you ought to want it to go to.
> Also the things he wants to cut such as pbs or planned parenthood, are specifically used and needed by the poor. think about it.
As I said, I am not being pro-Romney, just anti-manipulation-and-fleecing. So just because I have this opinion about this specific issue does not mean I automatically support everything Romney thinks or wants.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,139
@previous (I)
Most people dont want their children to be exposed to more ads. Why would we cut this, when there are so many harmful things being funded by our money. This will take away aducation (not just big bird, but everything on pbs) from poor people and children. We could cut any number of subsidies from huge companies, the miliatry, fucking state funded creationist muesums, etc. But n, they go after quality, ad free educational programming its sick, and shows how the republicans feel about the poor.
Most people dont want their children to be exposed to more ads. Why would we cut this, when there are so many harmful things being funded by our money. This will take away aducation (not just big bird, but everything on pbs) from poor people and children. We could cut any number of subsidies from huge companies, the miliatry, fucking state funded creationist muesums, etc. But n, they go after quality, ad free educational programming its sick, and shows how the republicans feel about the poor.
(Edited 52 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,140
@355,136 (A)
re Planned Parenthood (Nixon was first to fund it)
Planned Parenthood is thelargest U.S. provider of reproductive health services, including cancer screening, HIV screening and counseling, contraception.
I left out the Abortion part because its a mere 3%
Romney may be looking at this from a Futures perspective. If the poor get cancer and die, they ain't going to be around for future elections. Doubt Obama will have the balls to take Romney on re Planned Parenthood. Question would be - What will you do to replace the Cancer & HIV screenings? Won't re that minor Abortion issue is a Giant Elephant in the Republicans room.
re Planned Parenthood (Nixon was first to fund it)
Planned Parenthood is the
I left out the Abortion part because its a mere 3%
Romney may be looking at this from a Futures perspective. If the poor get cancer and die, they ain't going to be around for future elections. Doubt Obama will have the balls to take Romney on re Planned Parenthood. Question would be - What will you do to replace the Cancer & HIV screenings? Won't re that minor Abortion issue is a Giant Elephant in the Republicans room.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,141
@previous (E)
He'll say something retarded like, "they can just go to the emergency room"!
He'll say something retarded like, "they can just go to the emergency room"!
(Edited 22 seconds later.)
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,142
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 46 seconds later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,143
@355,139 (A)
We need to cut everything possible to get us out of the debt the idiots running our country have buried us in. How about we cut all the things you said and big-bird.
I agree, no big corporation should ever get a cent of government money(our money that they stole).
We need a standing army for defense, but only to use it when we are actually threatened and that's it. We don't need our army fooling around in Iran and the middle east and hundreds of random expensive bases all over the world. Skipping these shenanigans would save us allot of money.
If so many people want to help big bird and the poor so much, you people can donate your money to that and keep it on the air with no ads. Thats the point, if you aren't being taxed to death, you can take that money and actually donate to what YOU think is doing good in the world, not have the government take it and spend it on war and big business or whatever you are against.
Anyhow, not every ad has to be for some brain cell killing toy or obesity-in-a-wrapper. Do you never buy anything for your kids? There must be something your kids want you to buy them that you approve that isn't exposing them to warped war, cults and brainwash or whatever. Let them advertise organic food or something.
We need to cut everything possible to get us out of the debt the idiots running our country have buried us in. How about we cut all the things you said and big-bird.
I agree, no big corporation should ever get a cent of government money(our money that they stole).
We need a standing army for defense, but only to use it when we are actually threatened and that's it. We don't need our army fooling around in Iran and the middle east and hundreds of random expensive bases all over the world. Skipping these shenanigans would save us allot of money.
If so many people want to help big bird and the poor so much, you people can donate your money to that and keep it on the air with no ads. Thats the point, if you aren't being taxed to death, you can take that money and actually donate to what YOU think is doing good in the world, not have the government take it and spend it on war and big business or whatever you are against.
Anyhow, not every ad has to be for some brain cell killing toy or obesity-in-a-wrapper. Do you never buy anything for your kids? There must be something your kids want you to buy them that you approve that isn't exposing them to warped war, cults and brainwash or whatever. Let them advertise organic food or something.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 17 seconds later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,144
Even Bill Oreilly said that if poor people want educational programming, they should spring for cable. thats the mindset of republicans.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,145
@355,143 (I)
60% of funding for pbs comes from private donations, and education helps society as a whole. I would never support something who wants to pump more money into an already over bloated military, but is fine with cutting educational programming for the poor. Its sick, and shows how out of touch Romney is. Why do we need to advertise to children at all? Even organics?
Republicans want to keep poor people ignorant and churning out unwanted children.
60% of funding for pbs comes from private donations, and education helps society as a whole. I would never support something who wants to pump more money into an already over bloated military, but is fine with cutting educational programming for the poor. Its sick, and shows how out of touch Romney is. Why do we need to advertise to children at all? Even organics?
Republicans want to keep poor people ignorant and churning out unwanted children.
Anonymous A (OP) triple-posted this 14 years ago, 53 seconds later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,146
@355,143 (I)
If thats true, than why wouldnt he mention cutting taxpayer funded creationist museums? Do they help poor people more than pbs?
If thats true, than why wouldnt he mention cutting taxpayer funded creationist museums? Do they help poor people more than pbs?
Anonymous A (OP) quadruple-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,148
@355,142 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
lol
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/mitt-romney-big-bird_n_1940400.html
lol
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/mitt-romney-big-bird_n_1940400.html
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,150
Does Mitt Romney want to get rid of the US Postal Service too?
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 13 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,156
@355,145 (A)
@355,146 (A)
> If thats true, than why wouldnt he mention cutting taxpayer funded creationist museums? Do they help poor people more than pbs?
I don't know how many times I have to tell you I'm not a Romney zealot. I simply have an opinion on the topic of this thread, that doesn't make me automatically defend Romney, I just state my opinion. I don't think this thing needs to government money(money taken forcibly from us) to stay on the air.
And we don't need to advertise on this children channel at all, if you people who supposedly care so much about poor children just donate your money to keep it ad-free.
> 60% of funding for pbs comes from private donations, and education helps society as a whole.
If that is the case, it could probably make up the 40% by cutting salaries and benefits of people "working" for PBS and have them do it for free or a humble salary if they are really doing it for the poor and not to pad their pockets. Instead of having a 50K/year(+ benefits) staff member doing some task, have 4 volunteers cover that position. A 80K/year 'director' or 'president' of a department or whatever can do it for free or or 20K/year or less. I don't know the specifics of their staff I am just giving generic randomly guessed examples. Things that are supposedly "non-profit" and "for the children" shouldn't need to guzzle money cause they are doing it for the children, not the money right?
@355,146 (A)
> If thats true, than why wouldnt he mention cutting taxpayer funded creationist museums? Do they help poor people more than pbs?
I don't know how many times I have to tell you I'm not a Romney zealot. I simply have an opinion on the topic of this thread, that doesn't make me automatically defend Romney, I just state my opinion. I don't think this thing needs to government money(money taken forcibly from us) to stay on the air.
And we don't need to advertise on this children channel at all, if you people who supposedly care so much about poor children just donate your money to keep it ad-free.
> 60% of funding for pbs comes from private donations, and education helps society as a whole.
If that is the case, it could probably make up the 40% by cutting salaries and benefits of people "working" for PBS and have them do it for free or a humble salary if they are really doing it for the poor and not to pad their pockets. Instead of having a 50K/year(+ benefits) staff member doing some task, have 4 volunteers cover that position. A 80K/year 'director' or 'president' of a department or whatever can do it for free or or 20K/year or less. I don't know the specifics of their staff I am just giving generic randomly guessed examples. Things that are supposedly "non-profit" and "for the children" shouldn't need to guzzle money cause they are doing it for the children, not the money right?
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,174
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 19 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,179
@previous (K)
Thankyou, Anonymous K, for the quality post that adds to the discussion and may sway my viewpoint.
Thankyou, Anonymous K, for the quality post that adds to the discussion and may sway my viewpoint.
doctor dreamworks md !jdTkvovFCQ joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 8 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,181
everyone is so mad
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,182
@355,156 (I)
Many people are happy to pay taxes that go towards things that strengthen us as a nation. It's called a social democracy. I think Somalia is a good representation of your extreme ideology. There is a good reason why no nation in history has ever functioned under the fantasy ideologies you're obsessed with.
Many people are happy to pay taxes that go towards things that strengthen us as a nation. It's called a social democracy. I think Somalia is a good representation of your extreme ideology. There is a good reason why no nation in history has ever functioned under the fantasy ideologies you're obsessed with.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,183
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
It's very considerate of Somalia to be an anarchistic shithole. Makes debating anarchist idiots on the internet so much easier.
It's very considerate of Somalia to be an anarchistic shithole. Makes debating anarchist idiots on the internet so much easier.
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,184
@previous (M)
Most 'anarchists' simply say it's not a true anarchist society. Ideological extremists are basically impossible to debate, it's like a scientist trying to debate a super religious person. When truths are derived from beliefs, rather than facts and evidence, there is no hope.
Most 'anarchists' simply say it's not a true anarchist society. Ideological extremists are basically impossible to debate, it's like a scientist trying to debate a super religious person. When truths are derived from beliefs, rather than facts and evidence, there is no hope.
(Edited 31 seconds later.)
Anonymous M replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,186
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
True, but it's still helpful to have a IRL example to point to. At least it makes them look even more naive.
True, but it's still helpful to have a IRL example to point to. At least it makes them look even more naive.
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,188
@355,184 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
It is not even a fake anarchistic society. There is no anarchism in Somalia, unless you think that just the absence of a modern state is what anarchy is.
It is not even a fake anarchistic society. There is no anarchism in Somalia, unless you think that just the absence of a modern state is what anarchy is.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 23 minutes later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,191
@355,142 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
Ash? Romney saying thanks for what?
There is news about him saying he was wrong on the 47% matter, even though he doubled down for several days after the video was outed.
So thanks for what?
He should say thanks for the big boost in poll changes. Albeit when anyone sees those they see him doing better, UNTIL they look at Electoral map and see him stuck in mud, going nowhere fast.
Ash? Romney saying thanks for what?
There is news about him saying he was wrong on the 47% matter, even though he doubled down for several days after the video was outed.
So thanks for what?
He should say thanks for the big boost in poll changes. Albeit when anyone sees those they see him doing better, UNTIL they look at Electoral map and see him stuck in mud, going nowhere fast.
(Edited 52 seconds later.)
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 43 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,211
@previous (E)
no i am saying thanks not mitt romney
as in thanks for taking the time to make that post even though it was not what i was looking for
no i am saying thanks not mitt romney
as in thanks for taking the time to make that post even though it was not what i was looking for
(Edited 21 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,220
@previous (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
ah thing is I R truly Dyslexic
So you said:
> I mean more like news links about whatever Mitt Romney has said.
He is saying so much now that he is on a Debate winning high. So unless your specify? I remain Dyslexia yours.
ah thing is I R truly Dyslexic
So you said:
> I mean more like news links about whatever Mitt Romney has said.
He is saying so much now that he is on a Debate winning high. So unless your specify? I remain Dyslexia yours.
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,222
@355,131 (A)
You hate religion if you don't want a state church. You hate marriage if you don't want the government picking your partner.
You hate religion if you don't want a state church. You hate marriage if you don't want the government picking your partner.
Anonymous G double-posted this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,227
(Citing a deleted or non-existent reply.)
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous G triple-posted this 14 years ago, 8 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,237
@355,182 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
> Many people are happy to pay taxes that go towards things that strengthen us as a nation.
Well then they should continue to do so. What about the people who aren't?
> strengthen us as a nation
Are you a nationalist?
> I think Somalia is a good representation of your extreme ideology.
There's a government of Somalia, moron. If anything, Somalia is a good representation of your extreme ideology, since the chaos there was brought about by the decades of communism.
> Many people are happy to pay taxes that go towards things that strengthen us as a nation.
Well then they should continue to do so. What about the people who aren't?
> strengthen us as a nation
Are you a nationalist?
> I think Somalia is a good representation of your extreme ideology.
There's a government of Somalia, moron. If anything, Somalia is a good representation of your extreme ideology, since the chaos there was brought about by the decades of communism.
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,240
@355,182 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
How is it democratic if the money is stolen from you and used for stuff you are against or don't care about. Thats the opposite of democracy. Let people vote with their dollars, that would be democracy. Voting on ballots does no good. You only have usually 2 shallow choices. Whoever gets elected, they would both find plenty of stupid and destructive stuff to steal and spend your money on. Check this box or that one. You are in control, you are self governing! "The people" are in control, not behemoth corporations and organizations and parties with power and influence, sure. Mass media and social indoctrination controls how people vote anyways. If people actually picked where their money went, that would be democratic. If people are so happy to have their money go to stuff that strengthens us as a nation, let them freely give it. If it isn't an absolute necessity for national survival (roads/transportation infrastructure/military defense force etc), it is a terrible thievery and injustice to force people to fund it. This is plain common sense and observation of the obvious and sensible.
Your extremist ideology of barbaric plunder of peoples hard earned livelihood to fuel the petty unneeded projects and downright war crimes of the few lording over us is completely sensible? And people choosing what they believe is good for the nation and what their money should go to is extreme? That would just be extreme wouldn't it? Us lowly maggots don't know whats best for us and our community. Turn off your brain before you hurt yourself, the government and social engineers decide whats best for everyone.
How is it democratic if the money is stolen from you and used for stuff you are against or don't care about. Thats the opposite of democracy. Let people vote with their dollars, that would be democracy. Voting on ballots does no good. You only have usually 2 shallow choices. Whoever gets elected, they would both find plenty of stupid and destructive stuff to steal and spend your money on. Check this box or that one. You are in control, you are self governing! "The people" are in control, not behemoth corporations and organizations and parties with power and influence, sure. Mass media and social indoctrination controls how people vote anyways. If people actually picked where their money went, that would be democratic. If people are so happy to have their money go to stuff that strengthens us as a nation, let them freely give it. If it isn't an absolute necessity for national survival (roads/transportation infrastructure/military defense force etc), it is a terrible thievery and injustice to force people to fund it. This is plain common sense and observation of the obvious and sensible.
Your extremist ideology of barbaric plunder of peoples hard earned livelihood to fuel the petty unneeded projects and downright war crimes of the few lording over us is completely sensible? And people choosing what they believe is good for the nation and what their money should go to is extreme? That would just be extreme wouldn't it? Us lowly maggots don't know whats best for us and our community. Turn off your brain before you hurt yourself, the government and social engineers decide whats best for everyone.
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,244
@355,220 (E)
I just meant what is the quote this thread was about but i already watched it on youtube now
I just meant what is the quote this thread was about but i already watched it on youtube now
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,246
@previous (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)lol
Sure has expanded in the news. Did you see Big Bird on SNL? If not Big Bird did not let Mitt Ruffle his feathers.
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 18 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,250
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 10 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,254
@previous (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tSPtkRSFCA
http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/big-bird-snl-youtube-video-october-6-2012-full-video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tSPtkRSFCA
http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/big-bird-snl-youtube-video-october-6-2012-full-video
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 4 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,255
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 31 seconds later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,256
> tfw no bb
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 11 minutes later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,258
@355,188 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
> It is not even a fake anarchistic society. There is no anarchism in Somalia, unless you think that just the absence of a modern state is what anarchy is.
an·ar·chy/ˈanərkē/
Noun:
A state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.
Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
Somalians lived in anarchy for a decade.
> It is not even a fake anarchistic society. There is no anarchism in Somalia, unless you think that just the absence of a modern state is what anarchy is.
an·ar·chy/ˈanərkē/
Noun:
A state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.
Absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal.
Somalians lived in anarchy for a decade.
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 24 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,261
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
Somalia has many warlords battling for control. It also has a recognised government (albeit one that only controls the main square and a few nearby streets in Mogadishu) and then there are also places like Somaliland and Puntland as well as Islamic radicals in the south enforcing sharia law. Most anarchists would agree that Anarchism requires absence of leaders, not just absence of government. In Anarchism, every man has equal power, but in Somalia the people with the most guns have the most power.
http://darjeelingzen.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/somalia-is-not-anarchist-utopia.html
damn I really want a milkshake right about now
Somalia has many warlords battling for control. It also has a recognised government (albeit one that only controls the main square and a few nearby streets in Mogadishu) and then there are also places like Somaliland and Puntland as well as Islamic radicals in the south enforcing sharia law. Most anarchists would agree that Anarchism requires absence of leaders, not just absence of government. In Anarchism, every man has equal power, but in Somalia the people with the most guns have the most power.
http://darjeelingzen.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/somalia-is-not-anarchist-utopia.html
damn I really want a milkshake right about now
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,262
@previous (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
> but in Somalia the people with the most guns have the most power.
> but in anarchy the people with the most guns have the most power.
ftfy
It's a pretty simple concept, bud.
> but in Somalia the people with the most guns have the most power.
> but in anarchy the people with the most guns have the most power.
ftfy
It's a pretty simple concept, bud.
Ks !KansasxqvM double-posted this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,265
@355,240 (I)
> How is it democratic if the money is stolen from you and used for stuff you are against or don't care about. Thats the opposite of democracy. Let people vote with their dollars, that would be democracy. Voting on ballots does no good. You only have usually 2 shallow choices. Whoever gets elected, they would both find plenty of stupid and destructive stuff to steal and spend your money on. Check this box or that one. You are in control, you are self governing! "The people" are in control, not behemoth corporations and organizations and parties with power and influence, sure. Mass media and social indoctrination controls how people vote anyways. If people actually picked where their money went, that would be democratic. If people are so happy to have their money go to stuff that strengthens us as a nation, let them freely give it. If it isn't an absolute necessity for national survival (roads/transportation infrastructure/military defense force etc), it is a terrible thievery and injustice to force people to fund it. This is plain common sense and observation of the obvious and sensible.
>
> Your extremist ideology of barbaric plunder of peoples hard earned livelihood to fuel the petty unneeded projects and downright war crimes of the few lording over us is completely sensible? And people choosing what they believe is good for the nation and what their money should go to is extreme? That would just be extreme wouldn't it? Us lowly maggots don't know whats best for us and our community. Turn off your brain before you hurt yourself, the government and social engineers decide whats best for everyone.
There are so many things wrong with your ideology. I am not going to take time out of my day addressing 300 things that are wrong.
> How is it democratic if the money is stolen from you and used for stuff you are against or don't care about.
We the people made it this way democratically. Sometimes tax money is used for things I don't care about, or that I am against. If that is the case, it is because I am a minority. The majority of the people do care about those things, and do support them.
> Voting on ballots does no good.
If you truly believe this, you are deluded beyond reason and there's nothing further to discuss.
> How is it democratic if the money is stolen from you and used for stuff you are against or don't care about. Thats the opposite of democracy. Let people vote with their dollars, that would be democracy. Voting on ballots does no good. You only have usually 2 shallow choices. Whoever gets elected, they would both find plenty of stupid and destructive stuff to steal and spend your money on. Check this box or that one. You are in control, you are self governing! "The people" are in control, not behemoth corporations and organizations and parties with power and influence, sure. Mass media and social indoctrination controls how people vote anyways. If people actually picked where their money went, that would be democratic. If people are so happy to have their money go to stuff that strengthens us as a nation, let them freely give it. If it isn't an absolute necessity for national survival (roads/transportation infrastructure/military defense force etc), it is a terrible thievery and injustice to force people to fund it. This is plain common sense and observation of the obvious and sensible.
>
> Your extremist ideology of barbaric plunder of peoples hard earned livelihood to fuel the petty unneeded projects and downright war crimes of the few lording over us is completely sensible? And people choosing what they believe is good for the nation and what their money should go to is extreme? That would just be extreme wouldn't it? Us lowly maggots don't know whats best for us and our community. Turn off your brain before you hurt yourself, the government and social engineers decide whats best for everyone.
There are so many things wrong with your ideology. I am not going to take time out of my day addressing 300 things that are wrong.
> How is it democratic if the money is stolen from you and used for stuff you are against or don't care about.
We the people made it this way democratically. Sometimes tax money is used for things I don't care about, or that I am against. If that is the case, it is because I am a minority. The majority of the people do care about those things, and do support them.
> Voting on ballots does no good.
If you truly believe this, you are deluded beyond reason and there's nothing further to discuss.
(Edited 42 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,267
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
theyve tried to defund pbs before and it never goes over well. Seems like Repub officials have a hate on for public television, but the populace wants their Masterpiece theatre.
theyve tried to defund pbs before and it never goes over well. Seems like Repub officials have a hate on for public television, but the populace wants their Masterpiece theatre.
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 43 seconds later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,269
@355,262 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
But that must mean you have not actually looked at what anarchy is if you think that.
But that must mean you have not actually looked at what anarchy is if you think that.
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,270
DERRY double-posted this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,271
lol dub poast
(Edited 22 seconds later.)
DERRY triple-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,272
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 25 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,274
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,276
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,277
@355,272 (DERRY)
an·ar·chism
noun /ˈanərˌkizəm/ 
Belief in the abolition of all government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion
Anarchists as a political force or movement
> organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion
It would be against the very fundamentals of anarchism to stop anyone from rising to power through force. Otherwise you'd be forcing anarchism on everyone, which is also obviously against the fundamentals. Anarchy only works in the minds of people who reject all of history and human nature.
I have a hard time accepting people actually buy into the anarchy shit, but I know they do, and I feel really bad about their level of intelligence.
an·ar·chism
noun /ˈanərˌkizəm/ 
Belief in the abolition of all government and the organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion
Anarchists as a political force or movement
> organization of society on a voluntary, cooperative basis without recourse to force or compulsion
It would be against the very fundamentals of anarchism to stop anyone from rising to power through force. Otherwise you'd be forcing anarchism on everyone, which is also obviously against the fundamentals. Anarchy only works in the minds of people who reject all of history and human nature.
I have a hard time accepting people actually buy into the anarchy shit, but I know they do, and I feel really bad about their level of intelligence.
Ks !KansasxqvM double-posted this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,278
@355,276 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
I showed you the very definition of anarchy, and you implied it's somehow different than that. You implied that I somehow didn't understand the very clear and simple definition. The problem is that I do understand it. Maybe you don't. Or maybe you do, and you just don't like it.
I showed you the very definition of anarchy, and you implied it's somehow different than that. You implied that I somehow didn't understand the very clear and simple definition. The problem is that I do understand it. Maybe you don't. Or maybe you do, and you just don't like it.
(Edited 24 seconds later.)
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 8 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,279
@355,277 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
anarchy is uncontrolled chaos and the "do what you want" attitude enbraced by punks and thugs
anarchism is equal rule by all involved
anarchy is uncontrolled chaos and the "do what you want" attitude enbraced by punks and thugs
anarchism is equal rule by all involved
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 15 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,280
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,281
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,283
@355,278 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
> Reads a one sentence summary of the word "anarchy"
> Claims to understand what Anarchism is at even a basic level
> Reads a one sentence summary of the word "anarchy"
> Claims to understand what Anarchism is at even a basic level
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,284
@355,281 (DERRY)
Wait, what happens if a mob of people find some woman to be attractive...
Sucks to be her, I guess.
Wait, what happens if a mob of people find some woman to be attractive...
Sucks to be her, I guess.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,285
Also, rememeber what can happen when mobs of angry people make legal decisions? its called lynching. loldamn.
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,290
@355,284 (A)
@previous (A)
your assuming that the group of people involved would be sociopaths or religious nutters, very poor form bro
@previous (A)
your assuming that the group of people involved would be sociopaths or religious nutters, very poor form bro
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,292
@previous (DERRY)
No, only human. We've all seen what happened at the puerto rican day festival, they werent all crazy or religious lol.
No, only human. We've all seen what happened at the puerto rican day festival, they werent all crazy or religious lol.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 43 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,293
lol hopefully my mob will be bigger than yours, otherwise I'd be fucked right?
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,297
@355,283 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
> Reads the very definition of anarchy and anarchism.
> obviously trying to redefine them
Cool ideology, bro. Reject fact and replace it with your preferred definitions.
> Reads the very definition of anarchy and anarchism.
> obviously trying to redefine them
Cool ideology, bro. Reject fact and replace it with your preferred definitions.
Ks !KansasxqvM double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,299
@355,292 (A)
You're being rational and logical with an ideology that is not rational or logical. It's not gonna work.
You're being rational and logical with an ideology that is not rational or logical. It's not gonna work.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,301
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,302
@355,281 (DERRY)
btw, Mountainman believes that the police need not be called on child rapists because their peers will just cast them out. lol How well has that worked in the past?
btw, Mountainman believes that the police need not be called on child rapists because their peers will just cast them out. lol How well has that worked in the past?
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 14 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,303
@355,301 (A)
They must...
I can't even fully understand how they arrive at their conclusions, other than great leaps of faith.
They must...
I can't even fully understand how they arrive at their conclusions, other than great leaps of faith.
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,304
@355,292 (A)
> police being police used as evidence that people cant work together to replace police
oh, okay
@355,297 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
@355,293 (A)
ah, so your intentionally being stupid. carry on then.
> police being police used as evidence that people cant work together to replace police
oh, okay
@355,297 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
@355,293 (A)
ah, so your intentionally being stupid. carry on then.
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 4 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,305
@355,303 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
it kills me, because we had mob rule before government existed. Thats why people choose to form a government! Because some people kept getting fucked over!
it kills me, because we had mob rule before government existed. Thats why people choose to form a government! Because some people kept getting fucked over!
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 2 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,306
@355,297 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/anarchism
I could say more but really, you are embarrassing yourself. How can you argue against something if you don't even know what it is?
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/anarchism
I could say more but really, you are embarrassing yourself. How can you argue against something if you don't even know what it is?
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,307
@355,304 (DERRY)
Police being police? Check your references bro. This had nothing to do with the cops.
That's how mob mentality works. Jeeze you're slow.
Police being police? Check your references bro. This had nothing to do with the cops.
That's how mob mentality works. Jeeze you're slow.
(Edited 18 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,309
@355,306 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
Um, thats exactly what he was referring to. Turns out, most people dont like to willingly cooperate.
Um, thats exactly what he was referring to. Turns out, most people dont like to willingly cooperate.
Anonymous A (OP) triple-posted this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,311
You guys do know, that the biggest and strongest mob rules, right?
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,312
@355,309 (A)
You're using the actions of non-Anarchists in a non-Anarchistic society as evidence that Anarchism does not work.
You're using the actions of non-Anarchists in a non-Anarchistic society as evidence that Anarchism does not work.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,313
A better question for all of the anarchists out there: Why were laws created?
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 51 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,314
@355,312 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
What? Tell me, how did people act before government was created? Were they, violent perhaps?
What? Tell me, how did people act before government was created? Were they, violent perhaps?
Panda Boners !kldhmVJ03A replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,315
@355,302 (A)
obviously mountainman will be truly fucked in a modern world of tribes.
unless he happens upon a pedo tribe, in which case IRL RAID PARTIES YALL LOL
obviously mountainman will be truly fucked in a modern world of tribes.
unless he happens upon a pedo tribe, in which case IRL RAID PARTIES YALL LOL
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 32 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,316
@355,313 (A)
No seriously, no one wants to give a crack at this? At a time before government, why might a group of people work together to make laws?
No seriously, no one wants to give a crack at this? At a time before government, why might a group of people work together to make laws?
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,317
@355,315 (Panda Boners !kldhmVJ03A)
Many anarchists here would be fucked in a modern world of tribes, they just dont understand it. Its like talking to people who have had no interaction with humans in the real world. lol
Many anarchists here would be fucked in a modern world of tribes, they just dont understand it. Its like talking to people who have had no interaction with humans in the real world. lol
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 32 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,318
@355,314 (A)
I don't, know when, government was created or, how people acted beforeh,and. I assume, that,,, people perhaps, banded, together in tribes (itself a form of government thanks). But, I don't,,,, know, what your point is,.
I don't, know when, government was created or, how people acted beforeh,and. I assume, that,,, people perhaps, banded, together in tribes (itself a form of government thanks). But, I don't,,,, know, what your point is,.
(Edited 20 seconds later.)
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 3 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,319
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,320
@355,315 (Panda Boners !kldhmVJ03A)
I've found that people who are anarchists (like MM) feel that way because a specific law that exists now, keeps them from doing some favored activity. For MM, its child fucking but it could be anthing really.
I've found that people who are anarchists (like MM) feel that way because a specific law that exists now, keeps them from doing some favored activity. For MM, its child fucking but it could be anthing really.
Panda Boners !kldhmVJ03A replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,321
@355,317 (A)
many anarchists would rather die for there beliefs than live in a decaying system as is this
many anarchists would rather die for there beliefs than live in a decaying system as is this
Panda Boners !kldhmVJ03A double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,322
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 16 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,323
@355,318 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
@355,319 (DERRY)
Laws were created so that the weaker people would stop being hurt by the more powerful groups. In a tribal world, if your wife is murdered and you dont have a large family, you're fucked and the preperators will roam free.
@355,319 (DERRY)
Laws were created so that the weaker people would stop being hurt by the more powerful groups. In a tribal world, if your wife is murdered and you dont have a large family, you're fucked and the preperators will roam free.
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 13 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,324
> Notice: The page requested could not be located on the server. (Page: new_reply/22609/6cc98425c4d76ec00a3080fa2a8dd734)
> Notice: The page requested could not be located on the server. (Page: new_reply/22609/6cc98425c4d76ec00a3080fa2a8dd734)
> Notice: The page requested could not be located on the server. (Page: new_reply/22609/6cc98425c4d76ec00a3080fa2a8dd734)
> Notice: The page requested could not be located on the server. (Page: new_reply/22609/6cc98425c4d76ec00a3080fa2a8dd734)
fuck this
http://jim.com/anarchy/law_in_anarchy.htm
> Notice: The page requested could not be located on the server. (Page: new_reply/22609/6cc98425c4d76ec00a3080fa2a8dd734)
> Notice: The page requested could not be located on the server. (Page: new_reply/22609/6cc98425c4d76ec00a3080fa2a8dd734)
> Notice: The page requested could not be located on the server. (Page: new_reply/22609/6cc98425c4d76ec00a3080fa2a8dd734)
fuck this
http://jim.com/anarchy/law_in_anarchy.htm
Ash !bbKEtchUp. double-posted this 14 years ago, 20 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,325
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,326
@355,321 (Panda Boners !kldhmVJ03A)
@355,323 (A)
They can go ahead and move to a tribal area. lol I love how most of them just assume that they'd be some independent bad ass in these type of environments. lol We're having a fun night.
@355,323 (A)
They can go ahead and move to a tribal area. lol I love how most of them just assume that they'd be some independent bad ass in these type of environments. lol We're having a fun night.
Panda Boners !kldhmVJ03A replied with this 14 years ago, 57 seconds later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,327
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,328
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 30 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,330
@355,326 (A)
your the only one thinking anarchists think of themselves as "some independent bad ass", when in truth anarchists are just people sick of the bullshit.
your the only one thinking anarchists think of themselves as "some independent bad ass", when in truth anarchists are just people sick of the bullshit.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,331
@previous (DERRY)
No no no. Many "anarchists" would not thrive in such an environment. Only the powerful would survive. If you think you would like living in such a situation, kindly move to Africa, and see how it tastes.
No no no. Many "anarchists" would not thrive in such an environment. Only the powerful would survive. If you think you would like living in such a situation, kindly move to Africa, and see how it tastes.
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 29 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,332
@355,306 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
You are desperately clinging to this notion that I don't understand anarchism. You seem to think anarchism can be achieved without anarchy. Perhaps you should read the definitions again and again until you can grasp the simple concepts.
I've seen this shit painted by people on the net in every shade of color since the 90's, man. I get that you believe something, despite logic, reason, facts, and history. You believe.
You are desperately clinging to this notion that I don't understand anarchism. You seem to think anarchism can be achieved without anarchy. Perhaps you should read the definitions again and again until you can grasp the simple concepts.
I've seen this shit painted by people on the net in every shade of color since the 90's, man. I get that you believe something, despite logic, reason, facts, and history. You believe.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 10 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,333
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 5 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,334
@355,328 (A)
the type of people that agrees to an idea because its popular; i forget the exact term atm.
the type of people that agrees to an idea because its popular; i forget the exact term atm.
Anonymous E replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,336
@355,321 (Panda Boners !kldhmVJ03A)
> many anarchists would rather die for there beliefs than live in a decaying system as is this
USA States are loaded with Anarchists who are loaded on Meth with teeth decaying. All they care about is their next load on.
> many anarchists would rather die for there beliefs than live in a decaying system as is this
USA States are loaded with Anarchists who are loaded on Meth with teeth decaying. All they care about is their next load on.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 51 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,337
@355,334 (DERRY)
Stupid people? What if people in your town decided that they could rape all of the women that they wanted? If no bigger group stepped in to "police" them, well your town would not be safe to inhabit.
Stupid people? What if people in your town decided that they could rape all of the women that they wanted? If no bigger group stepped in to "police" them, well your town would not be safe to inhabit.
(Edited 26 seconds later.)
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,338
@355,332 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
"Anarchy" the word has two different meanings (Hence the two different definitions). Only the second one permanently applies to Anarchism. An anarchy would of course result in anarchy for a while, but not forever. Either the anarchy would give way to anarchy or rule from above would re-establish itself.
"Anarchy" the word has two different meanings (Hence the two different definitions). Only the second one permanently applies to Anarchism. An anarchy would of course result in anarchy for a while, but not forever. Either the anarchy would give way to anarchy or rule from above would re-establish itself.
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 28 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,339
@355,332 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
you are disparately drinking the government koolaid. anarchy is little more than a simple bastardization of anarchism. it survives only because the words sound similar and people are too lazy to attempt to distinguish.
you are disparately drinking the government koolaid. anarchy is little more than a simple bastardization of anarchism. it survives only because the words sound similar and people are too lazy to attempt to distinguish.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 26 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,340
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,341
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 49 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,342
@355,340 (A)
Why? What's the point? I'd rather go play Skyrim. Also @Previous please read the link I dropped up there^^^
Why? What's the point? I'd rather go play Skyrim. Also @Previous please read the link I dropped up there^^^
(Edited 27 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,344
@previous (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
Of course you would. Thats why so many anarchists are morons.they dont take the time to evaluate their ideas.
Of course you would. Thats why so many anarchists are morons.they dont take the time to evaluate their ideas.
(Edited 19 seconds later.)
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,345
Tell us, in a anarchist world, what would you do if someone popular murdered one of your family members? Peer pressure wouldnt drive them out, and you wouldnt be able to get together your own large mob to seek justice. What could you do?
Anonymous A (OP) triple-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,346
@355,330 (DERRY)
A lot of us are sick of the bullshit, but that doesnt mean that anarchy is a valid solution.
A lot of us are sick of the bullshit, but that doesnt mean that anarchy is a valid solution.
Anonymous A (OP) quadruple-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,347
@355,304 (DERRY)
Did you ever look this up btw? just a mob, doing their mob thing.
Did you ever look this up btw? just a mob, doing their mob thing.
(Edited 19 seconds later.)
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 12 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,350
(◣_◢)┌∩┠!ZZZYzLybAc joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,351
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,352
@355,339 (DERRY)
> you are disparately drinking the government koolaid. anarchy is little more than a simple bastardization of anarchism. it survives only because the words sound similar and people are too lazy to attempt to distinguish.
The problem is that you think there is a difference between anarchy and anarchism. Anarchism is an idea, anarchy is the reality. If you believe my statement to be untrue, please, by all means simply cite one single example of anarchism working in a society. Alternatively cite one single example of anarchy resulting in anarchism.
> you are disparately drinking the government koolaid. anarchy is little more than a simple bastardization of anarchism. it survives only because the words sound similar and people are too lazy to attempt to distinguish.
The problem is that you think there is a difference between anarchy and anarchism. Anarchism is an idea, anarchy is the reality. If you believe my statement to be untrue, please, by all means simply cite one single example of anarchism working in a society. Alternatively cite one single example of anarchy resulting in anarchism.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 50 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,353
@355,350 (DERRY)
I just read that cute anarchist government in law article. Basically if someone commits a crime against you, in order to punish the person you would not only needs funds, but the mental ability to do so. little children with torn and bleeding anuses, could not have daddy locked up because they're not mentally aware enough to press charges. That would be a blast.
I just read that cute anarchist government in law article. Basically if someone commits a crime against you, in order to punish the person you would not only needs funds, but the mental ability to do so. little children with torn and bleeding anuses, could not have daddy locked up because they're not mentally aware enough to press charges. That would be a blast.
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 9 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,354
@355,347 (A)
that is an example of an idiot provoking the police, why would you even keep bringing it up, it is irrelevant to the discussion
that is an example of an idiot provoking the police, why would you even keep bringing it up, it is irrelevant to the discussion
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,355
@355,350 (DERRY)
Maybe we can think of something better, or modify what we already have. The next step isnt automatically anarchy.
Maybe we can think of something better, or modify what we already have. The next step isnt automatically anarchy.
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,357
@355,352 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
> by all means simply cite one single example of anarchism working in a society.
ok, in fact ill do one better.
> by all means simply cite one single example of anarchism working in a society.
ok, in fact ill do one better.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,359
@355,354 (DERRY)
No, its was a series of mob sex attacks by large groups of mne. Totally spontaneous.
No, its was a series of mob sex attacks by large groups of mne. Totally spontaneous.
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,361
@355,357 (DERRY)
not all of these are positive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiteway_Colony failed experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia,_Ohio ghost town
Also it seems like none discuss what they do for a police force or how they punish crime.
not all of these are positive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiteway_Colony failed experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia,_Ohio ghost town
Also it seems like none discuss what they do for a police force or how they punish crime.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 40 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,362
@355,357 (DERRY)
You just cited small communities living under the protection of non-anarchism society. One of them is even a whole 7 acres. Wow, anarchism should go global.
Since I refuse to move the goalposts and ask for evidence of anarchism working on a large scale, I will concede that you have shown anarchism to work at the macro level.
However, I can't help but point out that those societies do in fact live under government rule and protection. The article cites other example of failed anarchism. I'm assuming it's because they weren't protected by a non-anarchism government.
You just cited small communities living under the protection of non-anarchism society. One of them is even a whole 7 acres. Wow, anarchism should go global.
Since I refuse to move the goalposts and ask for evidence of anarchism working on a large scale, I will concede that you have shown anarchism to work at the macro level.
However, I can't help but point out that those societies do in fact live under government rule and protection. The article cites other example of failed anarchism. I'm assuming it's because they weren't protected by a non-anarchism government.
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 7 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,363
@355,357 (DERRY)
an dam, edit limit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freetown_Christiania
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trumbullplex
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stapleton_Colony
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_Moresnet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brentwood,_New_York
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_and_Labor_Commune
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_Oaks_Community,_Virginia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia,_Ohio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiteway_Colony
http://www.kibbutz.org.il/eng/
http://mises.org/daily/1121
The Free Software community
an dam, edit limit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freetown_Christiania
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trumbullplex
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stapleton_Colony
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_Moresnet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brentwood,_New_York
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_and_Labor_Commune
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_Oaks_Community,_Virginia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utopia,_Ohio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiteway_Colony
http://www.kibbutz.org.il/eng/
http://mises.org/daily/1121
The Free Software community
DERRY double-posted this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,364
@355,361 (A)
@355,362 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
you asked for anarchistic communities and i gave them.
the failures of them due to outside forces do not mean anarchism in the real world is stuck at anarchy.
@355,362 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
you asked for anarchistic communities and i gave them.
the failures of them due to outside forces do not mean anarchism in the real world is stuck at anarchy.
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,365
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,366
@355,364 (DERRY)
I know but these communities lived under the protection of the government. I do apreaciate though, seeing villages working together to make better lives together. I would love to live in such a place.
I know but these communities lived under the protection of the government. I do apreaciate though, seeing villages working together to make better lives together. I would love to live in such a place.
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 12 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,367
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,368
@previous (DERRY)
The Civil War, as well as new residents that did not share the colony's philosophy, is said to have contributed to its eventual dissolution.
DERRY replied with this 14 years ago, 25 minutes later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #355,372
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,390
> Anarchy
lol
lol
(Edited 38 seconds later.)
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,391
Anonymous G replied with this 14 years ago, 2 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,409
Ks... save face... bow out now... lol
Anonymous G double-posted this 14 years ago, 40 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,410
Canon law prevents sex with children so I wouldn't be doing that anyway... stupid argument...
Anonymous G triple-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,412
The idea of the non-aggression principle (NAP) is that you can't initiate force. Retaliatory force is acceptable.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 37 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,415
Handle !tYHPZ2dvu6 joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,416
TV is a luxury not a right, if you can't afford TV (I.e. Borrowing millions off China) then you shouldn't be watching it
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,425
@355,265 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
> There are so many things wrong with your ideology. I am not going to take time out of my day addressing 300 things that are wrong.
Compelling argument. Essentially 'No U'.
> > How is it democratic if the money is stolen from you and used for stuff you are against or don't care about.
> We the people made it this way democratically. Sometimes tax money is used for things I don't care about, or that I am against. If that is the case, it is because I am a minority. The majority of the people do care about those things, and do support them.
We the people made it this way democratically? I had no say in setting up how this 'democratic' system works. You are a 'minority' because the power is concentrated into a monolithic federal abomination. If people could form their own sovereign armed city-states and have freedom instead of federal government oppression, then nobody would have to be a minority. Those who think alike could band together. Federal concentration of power is a crime against humanity. India and other places brutally colonized by the British stood up and broke away. We need to stand up and take inspiration from that.
> > Voting on ballots does no good.
> If you truly believe this, you are deluded beyond reason and there's nothing further to discuss.
Another 'No U'.
@previous (Handle !tYHPZ2dvu6)
> TV is a luxury not a right, if you can't afford TV (I.e. Borrowing millions off China) then you shouldn't be watching it
So true. Sadly this out of delusional illegitimate government won't realize things like this until it crumbles.
And to the OP that doesn't want kids to have to 'be exposed to advertising', why do you want your children to be trained to be couch potatoes at all? How about giving kids books, even e-books that could be free and delivered on a cheap-ass android tablet? Have them read instead of sitting them at the idiot box and training them to be swelling couch ornaments riddled with diabeetus.
> There are so many things wrong with your ideology. I am not going to take time out of my day addressing 300 things that are wrong.
Compelling argument. Essentially 'No U'.
> > How is it democratic if the money is stolen from you and used for stuff you are against or don't care about.
> We the people made it this way democratically. Sometimes tax money is used for things I don't care about, or that I am against. If that is the case, it is because I am a minority. The majority of the people do care about those things, and do support them.
We the people made it this way democratically? I had no say in setting up how this 'democratic' system works. You are a 'minority' because the power is concentrated into a monolithic federal abomination. If people could form their own sovereign armed city-states and have freedom instead of federal government oppression, then nobody would have to be a minority. Those who think alike could band together. Federal concentration of power is a crime against humanity. India and other places brutally colonized by the British stood up and broke away. We need to stand up and take inspiration from that.
> > Voting on ballots does no good.
> If you truly believe this, you are deluded beyond reason and there's nothing further to discuss.
Another 'No U'.
@previous (Handle !tYHPZ2dvu6)
> TV is a luxury not a right, if you can't afford TV (I.e. Borrowing millions off China) then you shouldn't be watching it
So true. Sadly this out of delusional illegitimate government won't realize things like this until it crumbles.
And to the OP that doesn't want kids to have to 'be exposed to advertising', why do you want your children to be trained to be couch potatoes at all? How about giving kids books, even e-books that could be free and delivered on a cheap-ass android tablet? Have them read instead of sitting them at the idiot box and training them to be swelling couch ornaments riddled with diabeetus.
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 5 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,447
@355,409 (G)
> Ks... save face... bow out now... lol
Few people over the age of 25 thinks anarchism is anything but a joke. People ITT showed anarchism can work at the super macro level with government protection. Not exactly a solid argument. Go on any regular political forum with this anarchism stuff and get laughed off...
@previous (I)
The majority of people disagree with you about almost everything political. Majority rule doesn't mean you're wrong, it just means your ideas are wrong for most people. Your ideas are right for you and your philosophies, and the minority who share your views. I really don't think spending time debating with each other is going to change either of our minds about anything. Talking about issues we agree about is the way to go, if more people did that rather than focusing on the things that divide them perhaps things would change.
> Ks... save face... bow out now... lol
Few people over the age of 25 thinks anarchism is anything but a joke. People ITT showed anarchism can work at the super macro level with government protection. Not exactly a solid argument. Go on any regular political forum with this anarchism stuff and get laughed off...
@previous (I)
The majority of people disagree with you about almost everything political. Majority rule doesn't mean you're wrong, it just means your ideas are wrong for most people. Your ideas are right for you and your philosophies, and the minority who share your views. I really don't think spending time debating with each other is going to change either of our minds about anything. Talking about issues we agree about is the way to go, if more people did that rather than focusing on the things that divide them perhaps things would change.
(Edited 58 seconds later.)
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,448
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
The only reason the majority of people don't agree with me is because mass media mind control and public education system indoctrination mind control has programmed them how to think and act. There is no haven away from this circus of government. People should get to define their own values to live by not have governments tell then what they should think and what they ought to support. The majority are extremests who don't realize the charade they are taking part in.
The only reason the majority of people don't agree with me is because mass media mind control and public education system indoctrination mind control has programmed them how to think and act. There is no haven away from this circus of government. People should get to define their own values to live by not have governments tell then what they should think and what they ought to support. The majority are extremests who don't realize the charade they are taking part in.
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,449
@355,415 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Not very. I need to steal 500 gold worth of items from Riften now though otherwise that London guy will be disappointed with me.
Not very. I need to steal 500 gold worth of items from Riften now though otherwise that London guy will be disappointed with me.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 20 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,452
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,453
@355,410 (G)
canon law? Who made this law? would the same laws stand in this sort of government and who would enforce them?
canon law? Who made this law? would the same laws stand in this sort of government and who would enforce them?
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,455
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 14 years ago, 5 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,456
@355,449 (Ash !bbKEtchUp.)
Those repeatable quests in the Theives Guild are fun. Actually gives you a reason to keep going back after you've done their main quest.
Also, bandit hideouts are quite anarchistic.
Those repeatable quests in the Theives Guild are fun. Actually gives you a reason to keep going back after you've done their main quest.
Also, bandit hideouts are quite anarchistic.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx double-posted this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,458
@355,452 (A)
From what I've read ITT, "real" anarchy is just another ideological utopia which isn't actually attainable.
From what I've read ITT, "real" anarchy is just another ideological utopia which isn't actually attainable.
Ash !bbKEtchUp. replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,460
@355,456 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Yes I'm glad they did that. For the Dark Brotherhood as well, I was bored in Oblivion when you couldn't do any more.
Not really there is always a Bandit Leader or something at the end of the dungeon.
Yes I'm glad they did that. For the Dark Brotherhood as well, I was bored in Oblivion when you couldn't do any more.
Not really there is always a Bandit Leader or something at the end of the dungeon.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 14 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,463
@355,458 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
it isnt, its just the type of government that would shun child rapists instead of arresting them. No wonder some people promote it.
it isnt, its just the type of government that would shun child rapists instead of arresting them. No wonder some people promote it.
Anonymous R joined in and replied with this 14 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,535
@355,458 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Anarchy is a self-destructive proposition, as is every one size fits all solution. The rule of law only works because we have so many laws they can be interpreted in such a way as to harshly punish the undesirables while giving the right kind of people a slap on the wrist. Seriously, if we applied laws equally half of our leaders would be in jail.
Anarchy is a self-destructive proposition, as is every one size fits all solution. The rule of law only works because we have so many laws they can be interpreted in such a way as to harshly punish the undesirables while giving the right kind of people a slap on the wrist. Seriously, if we applied laws equally half of our leaders would be in jail.
Anonymous F replied with this 14 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,543
@355,447 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
I think you have really hit on something important there. Lots of people, especially when they are younger, latch on to some philosophy or ideology that they fervently believe will work if only people could be made to think or act like they do. Well, any political philosophy can work if you can make everybody believe the same thing. A lack of experience or youthful idealism or not being fully acquainted with the realities of life keeps these people from seeing that others hardly ever think or act in lockstep as they would wish. They can argue for their "one true philosophy" and yell "Wake up sheeple!" all day long without seeing that each person who disagrees with them is just one more reason that their ideology isn't going to work. They make excuses that others are too lazy or stupid to see the logic or brilliance of their plan, but they can only do this for so long. Eventually, they get caught up in the realities of life or realize that they are just about the only person who is on board with their plan for a better world. I think what we have here is just another case of someone playing the youthful Internet anarchist. Thankfully, most people mature out of this "the world would be better if everybody did what I said" kind of phase. Some people don't mature out of it and become nutty hermits or conspiracy theorists. Ho-hum. Such is life.
@355,448 (I)
> The only reason the majority of people don't agree with me is because mass media mind control and public education system indoctrination mind control has programmed them how to think and act.
Don't forget about reptilian brainwashing and fluoride in the water.
I think you have really hit on something important there. Lots of people, especially when they are younger, latch on to some philosophy or ideology that they fervently believe will work if only people could be made to think or act like they do. Well, any political philosophy can work if you can make everybody believe the same thing. A lack of experience or youthful idealism or not being fully acquainted with the realities of life keeps these people from seeing that others hardly ever think or act in lockstep as they would wish. They can argue for their "one true philosophy" and yell "Wake up sheeple!" all day long without seeing that each person who disagrees with them is just one more reason that their ideology isn't going to work. They make excuses that others are too lazy or stupid to see the logic or brilliance of their plan, but they can only do this for so long. Eventually, they get caught up in the realities of life or realize that they are just about the only person who is on board with their plan for a better world. I think what we have here is just another case of someone playing the youthful Internet anarchist. Thankfully, most people mature out of this "the world would be better if everybody did what I said" kind of phase. Some people don't mature out of it and become nutty hermits or conspiracy theorists. Ho-hum. Such is life.
@355,448 (I)
> The only reason the majority of people don't agree with me is because mass media mind control and public education system indoctrination mind control has programmed them how to think and act.
Don't forget about reptilian brainwashing and fluoride in the water.
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,544
@previous (F)
Well said. Sometimes I wish I were more eloquent (like you), but it's just not my style.
Well said. Sometimes I wish I were more eloquent (like you), but it's just not my style.
(Edited 13 seconds later.)
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 57 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,568
@355,543 (F)
> > The only reason the majority of people don't agree with me is because mass media mind control and public education system indoctrination mind control has programmed them how to think and act.
> Don't forget about reptilian brainwashing and fluoride in the water.
Implying with some 2/10 wit, which KS will laud and fellate you for, that I am paranoid and unreasonable for observing the obvious and telling it like it is rather than sticking my head in the sand.
> > The only reason the majority of people don't agree with me is because mass media mind control and public education system indoctrination mind control has programmed them how to think and act.
> Don't forget about reptilian brainwashing and fluoride in the water.
Implying with some 2/10 wit, which KS will laud and fellate you for, that I am paranoid and unreasonable for observing the obvious and telling it like it is rather than sticking my head in the sand.
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 22 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,574
Anonymous I replied with this 14 years ago, 51 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,580
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)
I don't recall saying I believe in god in this conversation. And if I do believe in god, does that make my comments automatically wrong? If I reveal myself as an atheist, will you take my side?
I don't recall saying I believe in god in this conversation. And if I do believe in god, does that make my comments automatically wrong? If I reveal myself as an atheist, will you take my side?
Ks !KansasxqvM replied with this 14 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,582
@previous (I)
Wrong. The correct answer is ad hominem.
How you think things may be are only how you see them from your perspective in life. You have much to learn, grasshoppa.
Wrong. The correct answer is ad hominem.
How you think things may be are only how you see them from your perspective in life. You have much to learn, grasshoppa.
(◣_◢)┌∩┠!ZZZYzLybAc replied with this 14 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #355,583
@355,580 (I)
If you believe in the Christian god, then how can I believe that you are anything but criminally insane?
If you believe in the Christian god, then how can I believe that you are anything but criminally insane?