they were building dense cities 4,000 years ago on the nile
whatever is lost for moving food to the city is gained and then some by everyone not needing to drive 2 hours and sit in gridlock every day just to do their business
dense cities are the norm for humanity. dense cities make sense when all you have is sailing ships and mules. when oil goes to $15 a gallon, the cities will contract in size and normalcy will return after 50 years of cheap oil fueled insanity. suburban sprawl is an artificial endangered idiocy
buy all the legislators in as many countries as you want. hire as many lawyers as you want. you're working against tens of millions of technically astute, media hungry and most importantly, POOR teenagers
there's nothing you can do: you lose. obfuscation, encryption, obscurity, steganography, darknets, p2p, proxies... we win, assholes. you will not preserve your dead economic model. the economic model of free media on the internet will be foisted on you. adapt, or die. end of fucking story. deal with it
i live in midtown manhattan, i walk everywhere. i don't own a car. no bike: i hate bikes, dangerous
and i am the future. as oil prices creep up inevitably, inexorably, and permanently, the suburbs will die. we'll live like our great granfathers: dense urban centers, lots of public transportation
so you better get used to my smugness, because your children and your grandchildren will be saying exactly what i am saying, "why didn't anyone plan ahead granddad? it was so obvious it was coming. can you walk me to the train granddad?"
additionally, a lot of anti-nuclear opinions are based on 1960s era nuclear tech. new pebble bed reactors, air cooled: the staff can just walk away from these things, no melt down, no china syndrome
thorium can be used as a source (very abundant) if uranium (mined domestically) gets low. and breeder reactors can turn the waste, even old waste that exists today, into 1/10th the volume, that is only mildly radioactive, for only a century
and if we haven't figured out fusion by the time the uranium and thorium and oil runs out, well then we deserve to be doomed to the collapse of civilization
because i hope you realize, if we don't have a coherent energy source plan, as oil gets deeper and more consumed, that that is what we are headed for
i don't own a car, i walk to work. i walk everywhere
city dwellers weigh on average 15 pounds less than suburbanites. because the puss bag fat fucking suv gas guzzling assholes probably get in the car to get their mail at the end of the driveway
this is in fact the future: dense urban living
suburban sprawl, disconnected gridlocked lifestyles and destruction of our forests for plastic mcmansions is the past. already, in the last real estate crash, it has been established that those houses nearest train stations lost less value than those out in car dependent sprawl
so you stfu, ignorant jackass: there is a reckoning coming. as the economy recovers, gas prices will begin a creep up that will never go down
meant to appeal to low iq dimwits as a valid solution to the energy crisis? you know, buy us a couple more months of soccer moms in SUVs in suburban sprawl, before the inevitable? hey, what's a little ecosystem destruction when we need to go to walmart to buy plastic crap and mcdonalds to shovel more calories in our distended waistlines? why's it smell like oil near the beach mommy?
as the economy recovers, as newly rich brazilian, chinese, and indian economies begin to suck energy like the west, as the oil only gets deeper and deeper... welcome to a near future, 2015, 2020: $10 a gallon gas. except those brazilian, chinese, and indians: they are already seeking alternatives. you know like nuclear... NOT IN MY BACKYARD!
you were warned back in the 1970s. but you kept funding the saudis, who kept building wahhabi madrassas in pakistan, and you got 9/11. but you still didn't see the writing on the wall. in fact, you thought it was a good excuse to secure some iraqi oil
now you're destroying your own shorelines, and still living in denial, still a hopeless rationalizing junkie addict
when the inevitable comes, when we can no longer afford the gas guzzling lifestyle, many of you will say "who saw that coming?"
it was going to be 40 TeV (the LHC is only 14 TeV). we would have already had been running it for years now, and the discussion topics here on slashdot could have been equivalent to discussions about columbus sighting land, in terms of amazing new discoveries by mankind
and to make it incredibly freaky, this thing apparently was going to be in texas, way back when in 1993 when texas still believed in science
that's the source of violence: random asshole wackjobs
the state needs a security edifice, or some timothy mcveigh moron is going to kill innocents
the state is a protective mechanism, not the perpetrator
question: is paranoid schizophrenia ever going to go away? no? then we need security from the crazed loonbag. thus, the state. which sends you into a hysterical tizzy only if you have some sort of bizarre persecution complex (which you obviously do)
the usa rules by consensus. you vote, you elect. if you don't like your officials, you vote for new ones. this is in contrast to states like china and iran, which rule strictly by fear, not via consulting with its citizens. that makes nondemocratic governments illegitimate and it makes democratic ones legitimate. the us government, and many others, are legitimate because they genuinely consult the will of their own people. this makes what they do, in the name of the state perfectly acceptable and reasonable. if they fuck up in a way that pisses off the people, they're thrown out of office. yes, really. that's actually the goshdarnit truth. try to fucking understand the fucking rock of gibraltar truth, please
next you'll tell me the media controls all of our brains or its all corporate dollars and everyone who votes is brainwashed. which puts you further into paranoid schizophrenic territory
i am a free man. you? you're not free. you're a slave to demons. not of the state, but in your mind
which says that juveniles cannot get life sentences for nonhomicides. that sounds like progress to me, no?
so that's two inches in the win column, which means it's just as i say: fluttering in the breeze, two inches here and there
my advice to you is to save your ammunition for the REAL slides in liberty, such as the post-9/11 bullshit. but if you insist on having a heart attack every time something sounds like a vague few inches in a direction you dislike, you're simply a drama queen. liberty needs defending, not hysterics over mosquitoes
but don't let me stop you from whining and moaning. for some people, that seems to be the only point
this ruling, at worst, is two inches in the direction of tyranny. emphasis: TWO INCHES. for a 200 mile trip to the destination you call "liberty dies". pffffffffft. law is not static. it dithers this way and that like a tree in the breeze. every little perturbation shouldn't send you into hysterical overreaction
you're just a drama queen if you see your government sway slightly this way or slightly that way and you declare its the end of the world, pure tyranny, pure orwell, "liberty dies! OMFG!"...zzz...
look:: a lot of people point at the hysteria of "someone please think of the children!" well, there's a lot of hysteria here about the true meaning of these rulings. they are not instant gateways to an unstoppable slippery slope to our eternal slavery. overreactive bullshit. they are wanderings, meandering. really!
if you are going to fight the good fight for liberty, know your true enemies. if you can't identify your true threats from your mosquitoes, then you're no help to the defense of liberty at all. your'e a spastic child who doesn't even understand the concepts.
learn it: reaction proportional to threat
threat: a guy with a high chance of recidivism for sexual crimes
proportional reaction: **YAWN**
really, drama queens
you may now castigate me and accuse me of the worst of abuses of freedom. go on, spastic twits, you know you want to do it
society, progress, civilty, education, progress: none of this is possible with the state
throughout history, various kinds of states have existed that have wrought great injustices. the usa was the first modern state to say "hey, lets rule by consensus". for simple matters, like taxes, to build your roads, it was expected of everyone to contribute. not contributing means you were freeloading. so then the issue is to come ask "why are you not contributing?"
but certain extremely excitable types like yourself would interpret the knock on the door, the men in suits, as armageddeon, and respond with gunfire of your own: self-fulfilling prophecy, you fail to see your violence as the trigger for their violence. you could have simply chatted, and said "i don't believe i am a part of society, even though i enjoy fruits from it" or "i have no cash currently, could we come to payment plan?"
but no, you overeact violently. this is the contents of what you wrote above
what is an example of such violent overreaction? well, howabout sharia law: you steal a loaf of bread, we cut your hand off. or: you don't bow to the king? then you lose your head
in other words, the injustice you see coming from the state is exactly what you deliver. you look at history and you see injustice from the state, when by your own words and actions, you are revealed to function exactly as such states did: the way you act is exactly how injust states act
meanwhile, the usa, even with rule by consensus, still has its injustices. but the point is to get rid of those injustices, perfect the state. surely you can see that NO state is far worse than the state you live in, even a bad state, no? no state is like mad max or somalia. you do have enough sanity to see we need a state i hope
so to have a just state, without violence or injustice, i ask that you join with us and speak with us and work on ironing those injustices out, to perfect the state, to make a more perfect union of what makes the usa a better (not perfect) country: rule by consensus rather than force
because we are a democracy. we rule by thought, dialog, consensus. we don't rule by force. really, that is genuinely the truth. to believe otherwise is to insist your delusions are more true than plain matter of fact simple facts of the construction of the state known as the usa
rule by force rather than consensus, that is the realm of injust states
and you
stalin fears being overthrown: send millions to the gulag or the cemetary. feds knocking on my door: respond with shotgun. same violent overreaction, same source of injustice in the world
you currently suffer from a massive hypocrisy: you complain about something, and then YOU DO THE SAME THING. you don't reply to violence with violence, you ARE THE ONE INJECTING THE VIOLENCE
you are the villain. you are exactly what you hate
tyrant: know thyself, and go oil your gun, one who complains about force... while implementing it
massive hypocrisy
i sent you a link, a narrative of a separatist shooting in 2003 in south carolina. in that narrative of events is the overreaction i am talking about. you tell me who the villain is in that narrative. now examine your narrative of massive overreaction
look in your heart: you are the tyrant you fear
check yourself before you wreck yourself, paranoid schizophrenic fool
and i do detest those who will sit in their ivory towers and issue condescending cold edicts, and never get out in the mud and roll up their sleeves and actually fight for what is right
what i'm saying is: yes, it is possible to succumb to passion and lose your higher faculties
but its also possible to sit in coldness and never actually fight when it is necessary to do so, and thereby lose the world to those who will fight, regardless of their actual legitimacy
what is that saying? "all that is required for evil to prevail in this world is for good men to do nothing" or something like that
violent passionate flat out WRONG people will always exist. and sometimes a good word won't defeat them
what i'm saying is you should be prepared to fight. not because you want to, but because sometimes the ugly fight is bought to you no matter how good your intentions
but i read somewhere that the simple act of flying is equivalent to getting an x-ray because you're so high in the atmosphere
i also read that living in denver for a year is equivalent to getting an xray (as compared to living in say miami: at sea level, rather than a mile up)
not that i'm justifying these scanners, but if you're worried about extra unnecessary irradiation, then don't fly (or live in the mountains)
its too much of a hassle anyways, even without the scanners, flying sucks
which means you have SOME sort of belief in the power of words
now simply understand that those words are all that you are entitled in your dealings with me, or anyone else in this world
when you introduce guns in the equation, then me, or anyone else, has a right to introduce guns as well
so why don't you calm the fuck down, lose the fucking guns, and TALK TO SOLVE YOUR PROBLEMS. or admit that you're a halfwit who NEEDS guns to solve their problems. then you get this:
some fuckwits picked up a gun rather than opened their mouth to solve their problems
so what is wrong with this world?
THEY ARE
YOU ARE
these sorts of situations: "i'll solve my problems with a gun," are not the fault of the government, THEY ARE THE FAULT OF THE VIOLENT SEPARATIST NUTBAGS LIKE YOURSELF WHO SHOOT RATHER THAN TALK
if you use your gun to back up your words, rather than simple logic and reason and an open mind willing to concede that sometimes you might be WRONG, then you've put yourself on an unerring collision course with a body bag, in your near future. YOUR CHOICE
USE YOUR FUCKING BRAIN, NOT YOUR TRIGGER FINGER, RETARD
or i will be seeing you in the newspaper soon, another pointless death due to an idiot who couldn't use words, but had a gun
i believe in the sovereign sanctity of the usa. i have to, i have ancestors who died in the civil war (both sides), and the revolution. probably killed by tory bastards who fled to britain (what is now canada, but was britain: i can't put much stock in the national pride of country who has the face of some bitch from another country on their money: how can you be proud of an identity you so readily subsume to someone else's identity?)
now i'd like you to take a good hard look at state's rightists: they are the one talking about redrawing borders. not international borders, but for the sake of their agenda, they might as well be, so incompatible they are with american values (by which i mean real american values: separation of church and state, solid education, etc)
see? the above cocksucker was trying to offend me with language. too bad he's too much of a limpdick to make much of an impression, but its the effort that counts!
but somewhere between "I've been spending the last 2 years amassing firepower" and "Clinton and Reno _murdered_ families in Texas and Idaho" i have to reply to you seriously, because even if you are just a well-crafted troll, there actually are people out there who think like you wrote
look: the simple act of "amassing firepower" renders you worse than any problem you are complaining about
a conviction to solve your problems via violence rather than words. that's the problem. this is why clinton and reno PROTECTED us from an apocalyptic cult. it is not possible for civilian society to peacefully coexist with armed cultists. why?
ever here of a self-fulfilling prophecy?
that's when by your actions, you define the terms in which you struggle with the world. in a civil society, you use words. but if you introduce guns because your words don't have an effect, then maybe then you've only proven you don't deserve to be in civil society. then civil society has to call in its own guns to save itself from the likes of you: someone who has to use guns instead of words to get their way
so rightfully, we have to come in and forcefully disarm you. YOU'RE the problem, and frankly, you're a paranoid schizophrenic nutjob (or a really, really good troll: congratulations in that case, you sure fooled me!)
get rid of your guns, and start talking to people. the only other alternative is we have to disarm you to protect us from you. because on your current trajectory, a violent armed individual with deep grievances with society is incompatible with society
have faith in words. having faith in guns is a form of intellectual cowardice
stand down son, talk with your mouth, not your gun
if you pretend all struggles can be solved dispassionately, passion still exists
the effort to reach an understanding has it limits, and if the understanding is not reached, then the conflict continues in baser ways
as soon as you erase passion (and all the good things that affords in this world), you will also erase all the bad things passion produces. since this is a fool's errand, you simply need to accept that we are human beings, and we have our limits, and if we have a a passionate belief in something, the struggle can get ugly at times
so brace yourself and stand aside, there's no magic wand to make this all go away, the struggle gets mean, and the cause is worthy
we are suppose to be nice to each other and not offend other people
certain words are swear words because they traffic in ugliness. for example, if i refer to women as bitches, i am comparing females of my own species to female dogs. if i were to do this, i am either: 1.ignorant that i might be offending a woman, and therefore that woman should rightfully avoid me, or 2. i am actually trying to offend a particular woman, in which case: i am hoping she feels a sting (even though of course she will naturally think less of me permanently)
finally, as a new yorker, guess fucking what: i like my fucking swears to be fucking offensive
but if we are to believe what you say, that words cannot offend, well then you've just neutered my ability to attack with words
if a guy cuts me off in the crosswalk, i want to be able to call him a cocksucking bastard and i want him to feel the power of those words. i don't like this idea that i call him a cocksucking bastard and, since according to you words cannot offend, that he feels nothing. i want him to pull over and get out of the car with a tire iron and go at me while i pick up a trash can and pummel him: i WANT my swears to be offensive, thank you fucking much, so don't fucking suggest otherwise
finally, you cocksucking twatstain, you fucking imply one more fucking time that swears aren't fucking offensive, and i'll wipe that smug fucking socially autistic ignorance off your ignorant fucking face, capisce?
alright then, i hope you learned something today. don't make me shove my fucking foot down your throat;-P
however, i have a problem with you if you equate the ignorant bias that is currently in our history books with the outright attempt at propagandization that is going on in texas
he regurgitates mindless negativity. it is your job to ignore him and not respond to him, at your own detriment of being trolled and caught up in the same mindless negativity that fills the anonymous coward's mind
think of an anonymous coward posting the same thing as walking by a schizophrenic homeless person that smells of fungus: "there but for the grace of god go i": what the contents of your thoughts would be like if you let the empty cynicism and negative pessimism, that occur to all of us from time to time, actually win all the battles in your mind
the northeast is trying to move towards canada, and texas and the rest of jesusland is trying to move towards haiti. cut the morons loose, let them revel in their faux news and their religious fundamentalism, and in a few decades, let canada (including the northeastern former usa) provide humanitarian relief for their resurgent diseases (since science is the work of the devil) and their crumbling buildings and highways (since government regulation and taxes is anti-libertarian). all the while their propaganda and rewritten history will keep the southerners happy: their poverty and their ignorance means they are good god-fearing folk, and the decadent north lacks morals and values and only has money because of (insert random historical propaganda humility)
you can have your jesus and your gutted government and your guns. enjoy your trip to poverty and suffering, reactionary morons
that what texas forces the individual to do is no different than what the feds force the individual to do
what does texas, or the fed, force the INDIVIDUAL to do? only at that interface is there any meaning
the logical failure is to suppose that texas is any more or less inclined to do something wrong to individual rights than the feds. that somehow texas is looking out for your interests in a superior, or inferior fashion, than the feds. on what basis can you say this?
both the feds, and texas, are capable of violating your rights. therefore, the idea of state rights as some sort of protector of your individual rights, to any worse or better degree than the feds, is a false idea
what i am saying is that the idea of states rights is a false hope. the state legislator or police can violate your rights just as easily and just as horribly as the feds (and in fact, does). so why look to the state as a protector of anything?
the only morally or intellectually valid criteria is violation of, or upholding of, individual rights. any measurement of states rights is a completely false idea in regards to individual rights. so what is the point of talking about states rights at all if individual rights are your concern? why do some people equate states rights with individual rights? such an equation is logically incoherent
Slashdot Mirror
they were building dense cities 4,000 years ago on the nile
whatever is lost for moving food to the city is gained and then some by everyone not needing to drive 2 hours and sit in gridlock every day just to do their business
dense cities are the norm for humanity. dense cities make sense when all you have is sailing ships and mules. when oil goes to $15 a gallon, the cities will contract in size and normalcy will return after 50 years of cheap oil fueled insanity. suburban sprawl is an artificial endangered idiocy
high rent and people peeing on your front door, or $15/ gallon gasoline and lyme disease
the suburbs are an endangered species. really. plan ahead now
buy all the legislators in as many countries as you want. hire as many lawyers as you want. you're working against tens of millions of technically astute, media hungry and most importantly, POOR teenagers
there's nothing you can do: you lose. obfuscation, encryption, obscurity, steganography, darknets, p2p, proxies... we win, assholes. you will not preserve your dead economic model. the economic model of free media on the internet will be foisted on you. adapt, or die. end of fucking story. deal with it
i live in midtown manhattan, i walk everywhere. i don't own a car. no bike: i hate bikes, dangerous
and i am the future. as oil prices creep up inevitably, inexorably, and permanently, the suburbs will die. we'll live like our great granfathers: dense urban centers, lots of public transportation
so you better get used to my smugness, because your children and your grandchildren will be saying exactly what i am saying, "why didn't anyone plan ahead granddad? it was so obvious it was coming. can you walk me to the train granddad?"
plan or suffer, your choice
but japan and france have been nuclear dependent for decades, and i don't see many oil spills off their shores
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan
additionally, a lot of anti-nuclear opinions are based on 1960s era nuclear tech. new pebble bed reactors, air cooled: the staff can just walk away from these things, no melt down, no china syndrome
thorium can be used as a source (very abundant) if uranium (mined domestically) gets low. and breeder reactors can turn the waste, even old waste that exists today, into 1/10th the volume, that is only mildly radioactive, for only a century
and if we haven't figured out fusion by the time the uranium and thorium and oil runs out, well then we deserve to be doomed to the collapse of civilization
because i hope you realize, if we don't have a coherent energy source plan, as oil gets deeper and more consumed, that that is what we are headed for
i don't own a car, i walk to work. i walk everywhere
city dwellers weigh on average 15 pounds less than suburbanites. because the puss bag fat fucking suv gas guzzling assholes probably get in the car to get their mail at the end of the driveway
this is in fact the future: dense urban living
suburban sprawl, disconnected gridlocked lifestyles and destruction of our forests for plastic mcmansions is the past. already, in the last real estate crash, it has been established that those houses nearest train stations lost less value than those out in car dependent sprawl
so you stfu, ignorant jackass: there is a reckoning coming. as the economy recovers, gas prices will begin a creep up that will never go down
plan now, or suffer later, your choice
what was that crass slogan again?
why don't i hear it anymore?
meant to appeal to low iq dimwits as a valid solution to the energy crisis? you know, buy us a couple more months of soccer moms in SUVs in suburban sprawl, before the inevitable? hey, what's a little ecosystem destruction when we need to go to walmart to buy plastic crap and mcdonalds to shovel more calories in our distended waistlines? why's it smell like oil near the beach mommy?
as the economy recovers, as newly rich brazilian, chinese, and indian economies begin to suck energy like the west, as the oil only gets deeper and deeper... welcome to a near future, 2015, 2020: $10 a gallon gas. except those brazilian, chinese, and indians: they are already seeking alternatives. you know like nuclear... NOT IN MY BACKYARD!
you were warned back in the 1970s. but you kept funding the saudis, who kept building wahhabi madrassas in pakistan, and you got 9/11. but you still didn't see the writing on the wall. in fact, you thought it was a good excuse to secure some iraqi oil
now you're destroying your own shorelines, and still living in denial, still a hopeless rationalizing junkie addict
when the inevitable comes, when we can no longer afford the gas guzzling lifestyle, many of you will say "who saw that coming?"
plenty of us did, jackass
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider
it was canceled in 1993, now its a data center
it was going to be 40 TeV (the LHC is only 14 TeV). we would have already had been running it for years now, and the discussion topics here on slashdot could have been equivalent to discussions about columbus sighting land, in terms of amazing new discoveries by mankind
and to make it incredibly freaky, this thing apparently was going to be in texas, way back when in 1993 when texas still believed in science
the cop who shot a seven year old was not acting in the name of the state, he was a confused soon to be ex cop asshole
meanwhile, there are other wackjobs who actually INTEND to kill:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Abbeville,_South_Carolina_right-of-way_standoff
that's the source of violence: random asshole wackjobs
the state needs a security edifice, or some timothy mcveigh moron is going to kill innocents
the state is a protective mechanism, not the perpetrator
question: is paranoid schizophrenia ever going to go away? no? then we need security from the crazed loonbag. thus, the state. which sends you into a hysterical tizzy only if you have some sort of bizarre persecution complex (which you obviously do)
the usa rules by consensus. you vote, you elect. if you don't like your officials, you vote for new ones. this is in contrast to states like china and iran, which rule strictly by fear, not via consulting with its citizens. that makes nondemocratic governments illegitimate and it makes democratic ones legitimate. the us government, and many others, are legitimate because they genuinely consult the will of their own people. this makes what they do, in the name of the state perfectly acceptable and reasonable. if they fuck up in a way that pisses off the people, they're thrown out of office. yes, really. that's actually the goshdarnit truth. try to fucking understand the fucking rock of gibraltar truth, please
next you'll tell me the media controls all of our brains or its all corporate dollars and everyone who votes is brainwashed. which puts you further into paranoid schizophrenic territory
i am a free man. you? you're not free. you're a slave to demons. not of the state, but in your mind
the same time the supreme court made this ruling today, they made another ruling:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/18/us/politics/18court.html
which says that juveniles cannot get life sentences for nonhomicides. that sounds like progress to me, no?
so that's two inches in the win column, which means it's just as i say: fluttering in the breeze, two inches here and there
my advice to you is to save your ammunition for the REAL slides in liberty, such as the post-9/11 bullshit. but if you insist on having a heart attack every time something sounds like a vague few inches in a direction you dislike, you're simply a drama queen. liberty needs defending, not hysterics over mosquitoes
but don't let me stop you from whining and moaning. for some people, that seems to be the only point
this ruling, at worst, is two inches in the direction of tyranny. emphasis: TWO INCHES. for a 200 mile trip to the destination you call "liberty dies". pffffffffft. law is not static. it dithers this way and that like a tree in the breeze. every little perturbation shouldn't send you into hysterical overreaction
you're just a drama queen if you see your government sway slightly this way or slightly that way and you declare its the end of the world, pure tyranny, pure orwell, "liberty dies! OMFG!" ...zzz...
look:: a lot of people point at the hysteria of "someone please think of the children!" well, there's a lot of hysteria here about the true meaning of these rulings. they are not instant gateways to an unstoppable slippery slope to our eternal slavery. overreactive bullshit. they are wanderings, meandering. really!
if you are going to fight the good fight for liberty, know your true enemies. if you can't identify your true threats from your mosquitoes, then you're no help to the defense of liberty at all. your'e a spastic child who doesn't even understand the concepts.
learn it: reaction proportional to threat
threat: a guy with a high chance of recidivism for sexual crimes
proportional reaction: **YAWN**
really, drama queens
you may now castigate me and accuse me of the worst of abuses of freedom. go on, spastic twits, you know you want to do it
zzz
can be broken by a man
depending upon your current situation in life, this is either a wonderfully hopeful or horribly depressing realization
society, progress, civilty, education, progress: none of this is possible with the state
throughout history, various kinds of states have existed that have wrought great injustices. the usa was the first modern state to say "hey, lets rule by consensus". for simple matters, like taxes, to build your roads, it was expected of everyone to contribute. not contributing means you were freeloading. so then the issue is to come ask "why are you not contributing?"
but certain extremely excitable types like yourself would interpret the knock on the door, the men in suits, as armageddeon, and respond with gunfire of your own: self-fulfilling prophecy, you fail to see your violence as the trigger for their violence. you could have simply chatted, and said "i don't believe i am a part of society, even though i enjoy fruits from it" or "i have no cash currently, could we come to payment plan?"
but no, you overeact violently. this is the contents of what you wrote above
what is an example of such violent overreaction? well, howabout sharia law: you steal a loaf of bread, we cut your hand off. or: you don't bow to the king? then you lose your head
in other words, the injustice you see coming from the state is exactly what you deliver. you look at history and you see injustice from the state, when by your own words and actions, you are revealed to function exactly as such states did: the way you act is exactly how injust states act
meanwhile, the usa, even with rule by consensus, still has its injustices. but the point is to get rid of those injustices, perfect the state. surely you can see that NO state is far worse than the state you live in, even a bad state, no? no state is like mad max or somalia. you do have enough sanity to see we need a state i hope
so to have a just state, without violence or injustice, i ask that you join with us and speak with us and work on ironing those injustices out, to perfect the state, to make a more perfect union of what makes the usa a better (not perfect) country: rule by consensus rather than force
because we are a democracy. we rule by thought, dialog, consensus. we don't rule by force. really, that is genuinely the truth. to believe otherwise is to insist your delusions are more true than plain matter of fact simple facts of the construction of the state known as the usa
rule by force rather than consensus, that is the realm of injust states
and you
stalin fears being overthrown: send millions to the gulag or the cemetary. feds knocking on my door: respond with shotgun. same violent overreaction, same source of injustice in the world
you currently suffer from a massive hypocrisy: you complain about something, and then YOU DO THE SAME THING. you don't reply to violence with violence, you ARE THE ONE INJECTING THE VIOLENCE
you are the villain. you are exactly what you hate
tyrant: know thyself, and go oil your gun, one who complains about force... while implementing it
massive hypocrisy
i sent you a link, a narrative of a separatist shooting in 2003 in south carolina. in that narrative of events is the overreaction i am talking about. you tell me who the villain is in that narrative. now examine your narrative of massive overreaction
look in your heart: you are the tyrant you fear
check yourself before you wreck yourself, paranoid schizophrenic fool
i kind of enjoy ideological bloodsport
and i do detest those who will sit in their ivory towers and issue condescending cold edicts, and never get out in the mud and roll up their sleeves and actually fight for what is right
what i'm saying is: yes, it is possible to succumb to passion and lose your higher faculties
but its also possible to sit in coldness and never actually fight when it is necessary to do so, and thereby lose the world to those who will fight, regardless of their actual legitimacy
what is that saying? "all that is required for evil to prevail in this world is for good men to do nothing" or something like that
violent passionate flat out WRONG people will always exist. and sometimes a good word won't defeat them
what i'm saying is you should be prepared to fight. not because you want to, but because sometimes the ugly fight is bought to you no matter how good your intentions
but i read somewhere that the simple act of flying is equivalent to getting an x-ray because you're so high in the atmosphere
i also read that living in denver for a year is equivalent to getting an xray (as compared to living in say miami: at sea level, rather than a mile up)
not that i'm justifying these scanners, but if you're worried about extra unnecessary irradiation, then don't fly (or live in the mountains)
its too much of a hassle anyways, even without the scanners, flying sucks
you're talking to me, over the internet
which means you have SOME sort of belief in the power of words
now simply understand that those words are all that you are entitled in your dealings with me, or anyone else in this world
when you introduce guns in the equation, then me, or anyone else, has a right to introduce guns as well
so why don't you calm the fuck down, lose the fucking guns, and TALK TO SOLVE YOUR PROBLEMS. or admit that you're a halfwit who NEEDS guns to solve their problems. then you get this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbeville_Standoff
some fuckwits picked up a gun rather than opened their mouth to solve their problems
so what is wrong with this world?
THEY ARE
YOU ARE
these sorts of situations: "i'll solve my problems with a gun," are not the fault of the government, THEY ARE THE FAULT OF THE VIOLENT SEPARATIST NUTBAGS LIKE YOURSELF WHO SHOOT RATHER THAN TALK
if you use your gun to back up your words, rather than simple logic and reason and an open mind willing to concede that sometimes you might be WRONG, then you've put yourself on an unerring collision course with a body bag, in your near future. YOUR CHOICE
USE YOUR FUCKING BRAIN, NOT YOUR TRIGGER FINGER, RETARD
or i will be seeing you in the newspaper soon, another pointless death due to an idiot who couldn't use words, but had a gun
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY
back up your words with THOUGHT, not LEAD
i believe in the sovereign sanctity of the usa. i have to, i have ancestors who died in the civil war (both sides), and the revolution. probably killed by tory bastards who fled to britain (what is now canada, but was britain: i can't put much stock in the national pride of country who has the face of some bitch from another country on their money: how can you be proud of an identity you so readily subsume to someone else's identity?)
now i'd like you to take a good hard look at state's rightists: they are the one talking about redrawing borders. not international borders, but for the sake of their agenda, they might as well be, so incompatible they are with american values (by which i mean real american values: separation of church and state, solid education, etc)
see? the above cocksucker was trying to offend me with language. too bad he's too much of a limpdick to make much of an impression, but its the effort that counts!
words CAN offend, don't forget that
thank you lowiq (is that your sig?)
high five! (hugs)
but somewhere between "I've been spending the last 2 years amassing firepower" and "Clinton and Reno _murdered_ families in Texas and Idaho" i have to reply to you seriously, because even if you are just a well-crafted troll, there actually are people out there who think like you wrote
look: the simple act of "amassing firepower" renders you worse than any problem you are complaining about
a conviction to solve your problems via violence rather than words. that's the problem. this is why clinton and reno PROTECTED us from an apocalyptic cult. it is not possible for civilian society to peacefully coexist with armed cultists. why?
ever here of a self-fulfilling prophecy?
that's when by your actions, you define the terms in which you struggle with the world. in a civil society, you use words. but if you introduce guns because your words don't have an effect, then maybe then you've only proven you don't deserve to be in civil society. then civil society has to call in its own guns to save itself from the likes of you: someone who has to use guns instead of words to get their way
so rightfully, we have to come in and forcefully disarm you. YOU'RE the problem, and frankly, you're a paranoid schizophrenic nutjob (or a really, really good troll: congratulations in that case, you sure fooled me!)
get rid of your guns, and start talking to people. the only other alternative is we have to disarm you to protect us from you. because on your current trajectory, a violent armed individual with deep grievances with society is incompatible with society
have faith in words. having faith in guns is a form of intellectual cowardice
stand down son, talk with your mouth, not your gun
there is still a struggle
if you pretend all struggles can be solved dispassionately, passion still exists
the effort to reach an understanding has it limits, and if the understanding is not reached, then the conflict continues in baser ways
as soon as you erase passion (and all the good things that affords in this world), you will also erase all the bad things passion produces. since this is a fool's errand, you simply need to accept that we are human beings, and we have our limits, and if we have a a passionate belief in something, the struggle can get ugly at times
so brace yourself and stand aside, there's no magic wand to make this all go away, the struggle gets mean, and the cause is worthy
we are suppose to be nice to each other and not offend other people
certain words are swear words because they traffic in ugliness. for example, if i refer to women as bitches, i am comparing females of my own species to female dogs. if i were to do this, i am either: 1.ignorant that i might be offending a woman, and therefore that woman should rightfully avoid me, or 2. i am actually trying to offend a particular woman, in which case: i am hoping she feels a sting (even though of course she will naturally think less of me permanently)
finally, as a new yorker, guess fucking what: i like my fucking swears to be fucking offensive
but if we are to believe what you say, that words cannot offend, well then you've just neutered my ability to attack with words
if a guy cuts me off in the crosswalk, i want to be able to call him a cocksucking bastard and i want him to feel the power of those words. i don't like this idea that i call him a cocksucking bastard and, since according to you words cannot offend, that he feels nothing. i want him to pull over and get out of the car with a tire iron and go at me while i pick up a trash can and pummel him: i WANT my swears to be offensive, thank you fucking much, so don't fucking suggest otherwise
finally, you cocksucking twatstain, you fucking imply one more fucking time that swears aren't fucking offensive, and i'll wipe that smug fucking socially autistic ignorance off your ignorant fucking face, capisce?
alright then, i hope you learned something today. don't make me shove my fucking foot down your throat ;-P
however, i have a problem with you if you equate the ignorant bias that is currently in our history books with the outright attempt at propagandization that is going on in texas
he regurgitates mindless negativity. it is your job to ignore him and not respond to him, at your own detriment of being trolled and caught up in the same mindless negativity that fills the anonymous coward's mind
think of an anonymous coward posting the same thing as walking by a schizophrenic homeless person that smells of fungus: "there but for the grace of god go i": what the contents of your thoughts would be like if you let the empty cynicism and negative pessimism, that occur to all of us from time to time, actually win all the battles in your mind
the northeast is trying to move towards canada, and texas and the rest of jesusland is trying to move towards haiti. cut the morons loose, let them revel in their faux news and their religious fundamentalism, and in a few decades, let canada (including the northeastern former usa) provide humanitarian relief for their resurgent diseases (since science is the work of the devil) and their crumbling buildings and highways (since government regulation and taxes is anti-libertarian). all the while their propaganda and rewritten history will keep the southerners happy: their poverty and their ignorance means they are good god-fearing folk, and the decadent north lacks morals and values and only has money because of (insert random historical propaganda humility)
you can have your jesus and your gutted government and your guns. enjoy your trip to poverty and suffering, reactionary morons
that what texas forces the individual to do is no different than what the feds force the individual to do
what does texas, or the fed, force the INDIVIDUAL to do? only at that interface is there any meaning
the logical failure is to suppose that texas is any more or less inclined to do something wrong to individual rights than the feds. that somehow texas is looking out for your interests in a superior, or inferior fashion, than the feds. on what basis can you say this?
both the feds, and texas, are capable of violating your rights. therefore, the idea of state rights as some sort of protector of your individual rights, to any worse or better degree than the feds, is a false idea
what i am saying is that the idea of states rights is a false hope. the state legislator or police can violate your rights just as easily and just as horribly as the feds (and in fact, does). so why look to the state as a protector of anything?
the only morally or intellectually valid criteria is violation of, or upholding of, individual rights. any measurement of states rights is a completely false idea in regards to individual rights. so what is the point of talking about states rights at all if individual rights are your concern? why do some people equate states rights with individual rights? such an equation is logically incoherent