Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ChairmanPoo]

That's a pretty bad analogy. Who are the stem cells in this scenario? Children? The unemployed?

[PTTG??]

And here we see an example of the moral degeneracy of the working class, to remind us all of why nobility has maintained its rightful place in the social hierarchy for all these generations.

you jest but ruling oligarchy is the natural state toward which states tends to, because the vast majority hates managing and has other goals in life than political bickering. then they go on a power trip, famine ensues, people revolt etc, and the cycle continues.

Wow, you actually are an authoritarian.

Everybody has ideals they wish for, even just material goals or simply "to be left alone." Government is a tool to help all achieve their goals, as anarchy inevitably leads to despotism. In that way, all people have interest in seeing that the government serves their interests. Government is not something superior to the people, but rather subordinate. It does not manage, it serves. The nationalist, authoritarian ideology is what corrupts governments and weakens them, turns them away from their sole goal of serving the people, creates wars of conquest.

The genetic code metaphor is apt; each and every cell contains within it the potential to take on any role -- the entire DNA strand. The cell's life conditions determine its ultimate destiny.

However, a body is not a state. Cells cannot reconfigure themselves, move between bodies, and only occasionally split off to form new people entirely. Unlike a body, a government does not have an identity worth considering. There is no "genius," as the Greeks saw it, behind a state.

As society automates, the government will either become more authoritarian as it serves the interests of those who own automation and do not wish to share, or it will become more egalitarian as it takes control of the automation and distributes the fruits of its labor to all. I believe that the fluid flow of information will ensure that, eventually, society will be fully egalitarian, fully automated, and the wealthy will be no better off than the rest of us. And if there's one thing that Trump's election shows, it's that loss of a relative privilege, even as quality of life increases, feels like deprivation to those who have never been truly hungry.

Perhaps this is what Trump seeks to do: to slow the advance to this future. His trade isolationism, his military posturing with China, his invigoration of Terrorism, could be incompetence, or it could be a carefully-engineered attempt to fracture the world's economic and technological advancement. All so his sons and his grandsons can play King for a little while longer.

[ChairmanPoo]

Cells cannot reconfigure themselves, move between bodies, and only occasionally split off to form new people entirely.

Well... worth noting there are exceptions :p

[wobbly]

But I like zucchini dammit.

You could come to Australia then. We've still got cheap zucchini! _{It's probably actually chinese zucchini though...}

[ChairmanPoo]

Zucchini!

[Lord Shonus]

Two GOP senators have declared that they intend to vote against DeVos. If all Democrats vote against her, this will require Pence to cast a vote. If one more GOP senator breaks ranks, her confirmation will fail.


EDIT: Quote is not URL

[smjjames]

The Senate confirmed Rex Tillerson for Secretary of State.

Going to be interesting to see how this plays out with his, *ahem*, background, in diplomacy, not to mention effectively skydiving into a hurricane rather than with a clean start.

[Sergarr]

Would anyone believe just one year ago, that a person who was granted a highest medal that Russian government could grant a foreigner, would be approved to hold one of the most highest positions in USA government?

[smjjames]

Would anyone believe just one year ago, that a person who was granted a highest medal that Russian government could grant a foreigner, would be approved to hold one of the most highest positions in USA government?

We don't really know his actual relationship with Putin. It might not be a 'drinking buddies who are practically bros' (excuse the drinking metaphor) type relationship and more of a 'publicly trust, but privately wary' type relationship. Or rather, it might not be as mutual as it sounds like.

On the upside though, the level of trust between him and Putin is an asset, as Tillerson will be able to talk with Putin more easily than say, Clinton or Kerry, neither of which Putin is on particularily friendly terms with.

Either way, there are Republicans who are wary of Tillerson, so, it won't likely be totally free reign.

[PTTG??]

Would anyone believe just one year ago, that a person who was granted a highest medal that Russian government could grant a foreigner, would be approved to hold one of the most highest positions in USA government?

As a thought experiment, if Hillary Clinton was otherwise nearly identical, but had received the medal, I would assume that it was a friendly gesture from Russia and actually was a useful qualifying gesture. I want the world to progress away from nationalism and closer to universal peace, and close ties between the US and Russia are good for that broadly, especially if the USA can import liberal ideals to Russia.

However, in the light of Russian hacking both political parties' emails, of the necessity of an unbiased investigation of the tampering, then Russian connections are alarming. If, in my hypothetical, it was Hillary with the ROF, then I would't want her to be secretary of state right now either.

All that aside from the fact that Tillerson isn't Hillary Clinton. Aside from even a potential Russian connection, I don't see any particular reason to believe that his policies are going to match my ideas of good governance.

[Loud Whispers]

Does anyone remember the time when Putin praised Bush and wanted to join NATO

Good times

[smjjames]

Does anyone remember the time when Putin praised Bush and wanted to join NATO

No I didn't missed that.

I do remember how Bush 'looked into Putins eyes and declared that Putin was a good guy'.

[TempAcc]

How would you not, tho?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Damned KGB charisma training, gets me every time.

[Loud Whispers]

Does anyone remember the time when Putin praised Bush and wanted to join NATO

No I didn't missed that.
I do remember how Bush 'looked into Putins eyes and declared that Putin was a good guy'.

And no one blew up Saddam and kids in Yurop didn't know what jihad was

Great times lmao

They both kill you. You don't want to ACTUALLY respect your enemies.

You want to say something that seems like a compliment but is really a biting insult

...What

Why on Earth would you respond to your enemies with passive aggressiveness?!!
I thought the Trudeau jokes on how "if you kill your enemies they win" were just memes but I guess it always is the case that yesterday's irony is tomorrow's sincerity
If you have no respect for your enemies then you are not looking at their abilities, strengths, virtuous qualities or even the ways they are similar to you. If you don't know who they are and what their strengths are, you are that much less able to defeat them. If you know them well, you are also better able to turn enemies into allies, all very basic and useful stuff.
If you buy into the whole we're angels and our enemies are motivated by pure evil stuff, not only are you forcing your people to destroy the enemy when better alternatives could be available for your people, but your chance of destroying your enemy will be lower because you don't know how they think. Hence why it's hilarious that all this time we still got loads of people asking how no one could stop Trump, instead of asking how so many support Trump. We in the West for example may one day have to kill many in Russia or the ME, as has been the case in the past. That does not mean one has to abandon basic respect for even the most hostile of enemies, goodness it's intriguing how few are even aware of ISIS's objectives; the British paid no respect to their Japanese foe and were soundly defeated by strengths underestimated, the British paid respect to their German foe and faced that war with full knowledge of what was needed to win.

This is not a world war. This is two political sides having a disagreement. Yet somehow, it seems as if this is the aftermath of a civil war, where all respect is gone. Of course, I am referring to both camps, which while an easy thing to say, is a worthwhile thing to say.

[TempAcc]

Its contagious, too. It gets hard to not think of your enemy as the devil incarnate when he insists on thinking that way about you.

The hard thing is to overcoming that and learning to understand and respect your enemy. History has often took the easy path, though, that is, turning enemies into allies by throwing a mutual, greater enemy at them. The biggest political entities of our age came about due to that, at least initially.

But there's no obvious greater threat around anymore, or at least not one most want to recognize. Will our world burn in the firefight between hypocritical dweebs that are too dense to realize that they are not the sole guardians of truth, and the people who disagree with them?

Lord in heavens, bring us a new satan, because hell is other people.