Print

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

[Truean]

Take a look at Wall St./Banks right now and how they've screwed up the entire country. We need a lot more rules for those people... rather than less rules.

Those are exactly the people I see as part of the ruling class...

Meh, they are the unregulated who advocate less regulation as the panacea for all ills. O, and lower taxes.... Have problem? Lower taxes. How will that help.... Screw you commie that's how....

Strangely they are trying to escape what they see as a ruling class, government. I think the government needs a larger role.... Given that it picks up the pieces when the "free market" inevitably overextends itself and courts failure. We the courts force people to accept their losses via bankruptcy filing and telling creditors to screw off. At least that was the theory before 2005. Fuck Bush and the Credit Card Industry Lobby who rewrote the law under BAPCPA.

[Phmcw]

I believe Salmon advocate taking right away from the ruling class or giving some to the laboring class to restore the equilibrium, or something like that.
Basically Socialism.

On the WBC just follow that link. You'll understand.

[SalmonGod]

I believe Salmon advocate taking right away from the ruling class to restore the equilibrium, or something like that.
Basically Socialism.

Well, not exactly... given that this is purely an economic statement, and the concept of property is exactly what I blame as giving rise to the existence of a ruling class...

Also, I blame much of the crazyness of people on the structure of our society.  Authority figures who have unequal status in society can make crazy claims and get away with doing crazy things, which makes people believe crazy things and do crazy things to survive or otherwise cope with being subject to people who are abusive or crazy simply because they can be.  Also, I'm sure you're aware of the Stanford Prison and Milgram Experiments...

[Truean]

I believe Salmon advocate taking right away from the ruling class or giving some to the laboring class to restore the equilibrium, or something like that.
Basically Socialism.

On the WBC just follow that link. You'll understand.

No dude. I'm talking about Margie J. Phelps <-- Daughter of Freddy.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/10/06/101701/westboro-attorney-unflappable.html

[Hiiri]

hehehe... you've never seen me talk about my beliefs before, apparently

Disclaimer:  This post is to mitigate the likelihood of incidents such as this in the future.

Anarchy literally means "Without Rulers"

I believe in equal rights for everyone, which means absolute freedom for no one.  Note the distinction in terms here.  Rights = How society allows people to act, and acts that society promises to protect people against.  Freedom = The intrinsic ability of every person to act however they choose, even in the face of illegality and overwhelming consequences... the choice always remains.  This is too often forgotten.

We live in a society that is built on social hierarchies which grant small portions of the population greater rights than the rest, and even the ability to get away with acting outside of their supposed rights.  I am opposed to this.  That is the core of what I mean when I say that I'm an anarchist.  When I say that I believe in freedom to a greater extent than most, it's because the vast majority of people don't enjoy the rights that they deserve and often aren't even aware of what they're missing.  I believe that we should be exercising our freedoms to secure the rights that we deserve, which is only possible in a world with "no rulers".

I see. Sounds a bit like the utopia so many are working towards. Realist in me (what?) has a hard time imagining a world where everyone is truly equal; but I can imagine a world where the difference in equality between the rich and the poor, man and female is minimal.

Stupid hypothetical question...  In a world without rulers, would you accept an objective artificial intelligence as a ruler? An AI that has the only job of making sure everyone has equal rights and freedoms regardless of wealth or social status? Pure mathematics, no emotions or personal pleasure.

(Then again.. who is the one that maintains and/or programs the AI? lol)

[Phmcw]

To Truean : Yes, but after what she had to live through in her youth... the level of emotional, and physical abuse provided by her father had been huge.

To SalmonGod : Authority is strictly tied with the basic component of human tough process and behavior. No matter what is your social system, you won't abolish it. The best you can do is to guarantee basic right and to try to build a relatively fair society.
But peoples will crave authority figures if you don't give them some.

[SalmonGod]

Yeah, I get accused of being utopian a lot.  I don't believe a world without rulers would be perfect.  Removing them wouldn't make everyone "equal" in every sense of the world.  Humans will still socially behave as humans do.  Kids will still bully each other, etc.

But billionaires and politicians who decide the rules by which 99.99% of the population must live by are a massive examples of existing inequality, and continually work to sustain and increase the amount of inequality in the world.

If you're ill, you don't refuse treatment on the basis that it won't prevent you from ever getting sick again.  Society is very ill...

Phmcw:  I'd rather say that authority, at least in my general use of the word, is more tied to the concept of property... but that's not for this thread.

Edit:  Oh and as for the AI thing... Not until we can make an AI that fundamentally understands human experience and what gives it value.

[Siquo]

"I want to be offensive without anyone taking offense to my offensiveness."

Uhh, no. If I'm being offensive people better be offended, otherwise it's wasted effort.
I want to be seen as a person and not as a colour.

I grew up surrounded by people who would tell me "You're such a nerd" and meant that it as a way to elevate their social stature relative to mine, and isolate me from groups by assigning me a label that separated me from everyone else.  It was devastating.
And I can still recognize when someone is using the word against me, rather than with me.
Make sense?

Yeah, but non-nerds can call me a nerd, positively or negatively. If used negatively, I can't forbid them or blame them for using a word that I use myself.
For instance, the previous tenants of my house, in my bedroom there used to live a 16 yr old girl, who had written "forbidden for nerds" on the door, with a typical nerd caricature, in permanent fucking marker. We pasted some shit on there so it's no longer visible, but it's still there, and having such a "fuer Juden verboten" sign on my own bedroom door still doesn't bother me. And do not presume I have not received my fair share of labeling and associated abuse

[Truean]

To Truean : Yes, but after what she had to live through in her youth... the level of emotional, and physical abuse provided by her father had been huge.

We can never know can we? I went through an immense amount of those things and bigotry. Took me a while but I got over it. I don't know what that means in the larger scheme of things.

[Vattic]

I've been following only the last 15 or so pages so forgive me if it's been covered but I've a question. What's it called when a someone uses bigoted/offensive slurs/language in order to make the audience think about these words and related issues? Saying a word because it's shocking without meaning to deride anyone, imitation for example. Should this kind of thing be acceptable?

I have to admit that I like comedy that many deem offensive but then I find humour in many things without taking them less seriously. Even offensive word play can be amusing so long as no harm is intended but it is difficult as it still might cause harm I suppose. I know someone who thinks all satire should be banned because it makes light of the serious while I think good satire does a great service in illuminating difficult issues.

Semi-related: During my first weeks of college a group of white guys were in the canteen when a group of dark skinned guys approached them. The white guys greeted them using the N-word, I panicked inside thinking there could be trouble, the dark skinned guys greeted them likewise and no harm was done. It turned out they all knew each other and used said word freely. I knew another dark skinned guy in the last year of secondary when I was in the first who collected racist jokes and I never knew if it was appropriate to laugh. Looking back it was kind of ironic that those jokes seemed to offend his white friends more than anyone.

I wanted to start a topic about the rights and wrongs of offensive humour but was worried it would turn into a cesspit. This topic and it's patrons seem level headed enough to discus and I've not started many topics of my own.

[Vector]

Eh... I think we usually call it mocking or derision, though I don't know of any technical term for it.  I'm a strong proponent of satire.

Thanks for bringing up the topic, Vattic.  Maybe I'll think of something a bit later.

[Vattic]

That's the thing my gut tells me it's more like reclamation but when the protagonist is part of the group that traditionally used the terms offensively it's more complicated. It's also almost self depreciation but again not quite.

One example where inappropriate language is used in an arguably appropriate way would be a certain song(Warning offensive language and themes) by the anti-racism band Clawfinger. They certainly mean no offence although they clearly disagree with reclamation of a certain word. A fair few friends of the family got offended by this track before my Dad got them to listen to the lyrics properly.

[Phmcw]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1082559/The-GM-genocide-Thousands-Indian-farmers-committing-suicide-using-genetically-modified-crops.html

Holomodor in coming, GM edition? Well this is "just" 125 000 Indian farmer who seems to have comited suicide after GM crop failure. But I wonder how it'll impact the food supply on the long term.

Edit :Warning, unreliable news source.

[Vector]

Oh my god.

That is appalling.

[alway]

It's also the daily mail. Is there a more reputable source for the article?
It looks like a plain and simple hit piece to me.