right, i'm insane. because all we hear from the right is how wonderful and trustworthy government is. got it
i have some words for you: intelligent conservatism is dead. william f buckley is rolling over in his grave. the right is dominated by a bunch of ignorant, screechy, reality denying, close my eyes and plug my ears and go "nahnahnahnah" types. climate change. economic policy. popular opinion on social policies: facts must be denied!
and that attitude reaps rewards: the diminishment of the right in terms of influence
don't worry, they'll come back, the pendulum always swings back and forth
but this is twilight friend, and it's going to be a long night, there's a lot of crazy on the right
good luck to you. you're going to have a very sobering morning on nov. 7
i'm sorry. are you saying republicans trust the government? and if they don't trust the government the reason given is... (use your boundless intellect to imagine the reasons they would give)
so how can an accurate description of a mindset be a slur?
after richie rich sends your well-paying job to china and makes a bundle on the deal, someday you will get lucky, standing outside his gates, that he needs someone to wash his car. he'll give you a whole dollar for the privilege
and as the soapy water drips off his rolls royce, he'll make a witty joke about trickle down economics, and you'll laugh heartily and smile, because you need that dollar to eat
unless there are enough assholes who believe it does not matter, then self-fulfilling prophecy happens
in which case, in the name of someone who loves his democracy and cherishes the people who died to make it happen: fuck you you ignorant shitbag
i will not be a slave, because there's a critical mass of people like you, who think like a slave ("i have no way to control my government, waaah"... yes, you do moron: vote, it's that simple)
you can cheat with paper ballots, but it's hard and you need a lot of effort and cooperation between many saboteurs
with electronic voting, magnitudes of order more attack vectors are introduced, because it's more complicated, unnecessarily. and one well-placed hacker can untraceably and silently cheat in milliseconds over a broad swath of votes
if people don't believe their government represents the popular will, then we have all sorts of problems
so paper voting only. now and forever, no matter how rich or technophilic the society. the voting in finland should be the same as in bangladesh as in brazil as in the usa: paper ballots only. to preserve the integrity of the process, people trusting their vote matters
then when the major storm hits, the idiots DON'T LEAVE and blame the gubmint/ evil science/ liberals for not giving them fair warning, and the sue them
what happens if they cry wolf?
then when the major storm hits, the idiots DON'T LEAVE because the gubmint/ evil science/ liberals are just hyping their global warming agenda
so the idiots are never going to leave, no matter what experts or the media say
so you cover your ass from frivolous lawsuits and make dire warnings
and i won't be intellectually dishonest by failing to notice once in a century storms now happen every year, because of mankind pumping CO2 into the atmosphere
money naturally gravitates to money. the best and easiest way to make more money is to already have it. without any interference, money naturally gravitates in a market system to preexisting stores of money
so to have a fair society, we HAVE to "redistribute" wealth. or we have a society of a few ultrarich and a sea of poor after a generation to, no middle class. this happens completely naturally in market systems. the lie of free market fundamentalists is that a market left to itself will somehow balance itself. no, you need government regulation to keep a market actually free and fair, or the largest players in a market collude and crush the smaller players
in a market based society and the legal and cultural structures associated with that, the force of money to accumulate with itself is a pretty amazing force. it's almost this natural gravity of money then, to find a new way to fight the regulation: corrupt the regulators, by weakening popular support for regulation, against the population's best interests. how? with bad memes, propaganda: ayn rand's bullshit
ayn rand's stroke of propaganda magic is that it convinces the poor idiot to sympathize with the rich asshole. wish fulfillment and denial of reality
if you could convince the poor to think they are amongst the chosen few captains of industry, and holding him back are all the other poor assholes around them and their "socialist" needs to eat and breathe and have shelter, you can convince a poor person to act against their own self-interest and weaken their own standard of living by convincing them they are not who they actually are
rand's bullshit it's basically the psychology of self-hatred, projected on those around you, and imaging you are meant to be rich and powerful, and transporting you away from your misery. it's an opiate of the masses, a form of fundamentalist religion in a capitalist society. and it's a cancerous belief that will destroy the middle class
why can't you do both? why must you ignore the bad parts? i think lovecraft was a great writer. and i think he was an asshole racist. i can balance both thoughts in my head. why do i have to discount that he was an asshole racist because he was a good writer? because asshole racism was the dominant opinion of his time? well then i simply say the entire culture of that time is brutal and ugly. there's no intellectual dishonesty in that. what is intellectually dishonest is ignoring the bad parts or excusing the bad parts or minimizing the bad parts
1. there were plenty of people who were not racist in lovecraft's time, or any time period or culture before that. that the majority had bad beliefs doesn't excuse anyone from any time. in the future, if they condemn our time as a bunch of crass plutocrats and people worshipping money and selfishness, i'd be pissed if they grouped me in with the loud ignorant assholes of our time. guilt by temporal association?
2. it is entirely possible to discount lovecraft as an asshole racist and not commit any sort of intellectual dishonesty. how? by discounting the entire era as a dimmer darker time of humanity. mankind is progressing. progress is real. to progress requires a past where we were dumber, less moral, and more brutal. it's entirely accurate and intellectually coherent to see progress and therefore discount the entirety of civilization that came before (and discount individuals who swam with the dominant opinions, and reward those iconoclasts who held beliefs ahead of their time like race equality, when that was a minority belief)
in a complex society, all institutions are compromised somewhat and have some dirt on them. you will never have the choice of a credible political party or credible corporation that is squeaky clean
what you are left with, is the choice of the lesser evil. those who hate this fact are not making a valid intelligent opposition to something that they can change, they are throwing a temper tantrum because they are unwilling to accept a simple fact of life that will never change
so someone saying there is no difference between something more evil than something less evil is what we call an idiot
Slashdot Mirror
or the banks of the mississippi or red river or west coast earthquake zones and brush fire areas near the rockies and desert southwest, etc., etc.
or anywhere really that people live in communities and want to rebuild and expect their government that they pay taxes to to help
i know, what a crazy concept
hears your challenge, and accepts your offer to bust your pipes
right, i'm insane. because all we hear from the right is how wonderful and trustworthy government is. got it
i have some words for you: intelligent conservatism is dead. william f buckley is rolling over in his grave. the right is dominated by a bunch of ignorant, screechy, reality denying, close my eyes and plug my ears and go "nahnahnahnah" types. climate change. economic policy. popular opinion on social policies: facts must be denied!
and that attitude reaps rewards: the diminishment of the right in terms of influence
don't worry, they'll come back, the pendulum always swings back and forth
but this is twilight friend, and it's going to be a long night, there's a lot of crazy on the right
good luck to you. you're going to have a very sobering morning on nov. 7
i'm sorry. are you saying republicans trust the government? and if they don't trust the government the reason given is... (use your boundless intellect to imagine the reasons they would give)
so how can an accurate description of a mindset be a slur?
'I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilization.'
- Oliver Wendell Holmes
after richie rich sends your well-paying job to china and makes a bundle on the deal, someday you will get lucky, standing outside his gates, that he needs someone to wash his car. he'll give you a whole dollar for the privilege
and as the soapy water drips off his rolls royce, he'll make a witty joke about trickle down economics, and you'll laugh heartily and smile, because you need that dollar to eat
ah, the enemy browses slashdot
people are stupid. everywhere. are you implying that rich white republican areas would trust government prognosticators?
your vote matters, obviously
unless there are enough assholes who believe it does not matter, then self-fulfilling prophecy happens
in which case, in the name of someone who loves his democracy and cherishes the people who died to make it happen: fuck you you ignorant shitbag
i will not be a slave, because there's a critical mass of people like you, who think like a slave ("i have no way to control my government, waaah"... yes, you do moron: vote, it's that simple)
the weather is becoming more violent as the earth warms up
that's the issue. but thanks for the meandering bloviating crap
we should always use paper ballots
you can cheat with paper ballots, but it's hard and you need a lot of effort and cooperation between many saboteurs
with electronic voting, magnitudes of order more attack vectors are introduced, because it's more complicated, unnecessarily. and one well-placed hacker can untraceably and silently cheat in milliseconds over a broad swath of votes
if people don't believe their government represents the popular will, then we have all sorts of problems
so paper voting only. now and forever, no matter how rich or technophilic the society. the voting in finland should be the same as in bangladesh as in brazil as in the usa: paper ballots only. to preserve the integrity of the process, people trusting their vote matters
then when the major storm hits, the idiots DON'T LEAVE and blame the gubmint/ evil science/ liberals for not giving them fair warning, and the sue them
what happens if they cry wolf?
then when the major storm hits, the idiots DON'T LEAVE because the gubmint/ evil science/ liberals are just hyping their global warming agenda
so the idiots are never going to leave, no matter what experts or the media say
so you cover your ass from frivolous lawsuits and make dire warnings
i won't be surprised at all if it happens again
and i won't be intellectually dishonest by failing to notice once in a century storms now happen every year, because of mankind pumping CO2 into the atmosphere
would those be the people who died or are currently without power or heat around NYC you are referring to?
hey man, there's plenty of times i see a brilliant comment and the guy saying it is marked "foe". usually i just go and switch that person to "friend"
it's a complicated world. people can viciously despise each other on some views, and be in awesome agreement on other views
don't worry, i'll probably piss you off on some other future comment, i apologize beforehand ;-)
Al Gore would have invaded Iraq.
You are grade-aa bona fida fucking moron, or just a really shitty troll
money naturally gravitates to money. the best and easiest way to make more money is to already have it. without any interference, money naturally gravitates in a market system to preexisting stores of money
so to have a fair society, we HAVE to "redistribute" wealth. or we have a society of a few ultrarich and a sea of poor after a generation to, no middle class. this happens completely naturally in market systems. the lie of free market fundamentalists is that a market left to itself will somehow balance itself. no, you need government regulation to keep a market actually free and fair, or the largest players in a market collude and crush the smaller players
in a market based society and the legal and cultural structures associated with that, the force of money to accumulate with itself is a pretty amazing force. it's almost this natural gravity of money then, to find a new way to fight the regulation: corrupt the regulators, by weakening popular support for regulation, against the population's best interests. how? with bad memes, propaganda: ayn rand's bullshit
ayn rand's stroke of propaganda magic is that it convinces the poor idiot to sympathize with the rich asshole. wish fulfillment and denial of reality
if you could convince the poor to think they are amongst the chosen few captains of industry, and holding him back are all the other poor assholes around them and their "socialist" needs to eat and breathe and have shelter, you can convince a poor person to act against their own self-interest and weaken their own standard of living by convincing them they are not who they actually are
rand's bullshit it's basically the psychology of self-hatred, projected on those around you, and imaging you are meant to be rich and powerful, and transporting you away from your misery. it's an opiate of the masses, a form of fundamentalist religion in a capitalist society. and it's a cancerous belief that will destroy the middle class
altruism and selfishness are the same thing. all you have to do is change the definition of self to include family/ clan/ tribe/ nation/ humanity
why can't you do both? why must you ignore the bad parts? i think lovecraft was a great writer. and i think he was an asshole racist. i can balance both thoughts in my head. why do i have to discount that he was an asshole racist because he was a good writer? because asshole racism was the dominant opinion of his time? well then i simply say the entire culture of that time is brutal and ugly. there's no intellectual dishonesty in that. what is intellectually dishonest is ignoring the bad parts or excusing the bad parts or minimizing the bad parts
1. there were plenty of people who were not racist in lovecraft's time, or any time period or culture before that. that the majority had bad beliefs doesn't excuse anyone from any time. in the future, if they condemn our time as a bunch of crass plutocrats and people worshipping money and selfishness, i'd be pissed if they grouped me in with the loud ignorant assholes of our time. guilt by temporal association?
2. it is entirely possible to discount lovecraft as an asshole racist and not commit any sort of intellectual dishonesty. how? by discounting the entire era as a dimmer darker time of humanity. mankind is progressing. progress is real. to progress requires a past where we were dumber, less moral, and more brutal. it's entirely accurate and intellectually coherent to see progress and therefore discount the entirety of civilization that came before (and discount individuals who swam with the dominant opinions, and reward those iconoclasts who held beliefs ahead of their time like race equality, when that was a minority belief)
we lose
why can't they transmit it with lasers
(mental image of toddler looking into the power transmitter)
never mind
tesla was the genuine article: a mad genius
so there's the genius
but there's also the crazy part to
tell me with a straight face al gore would have invaded iraq
go ahead
in a complex society, all institutions are compromised somewhat and have some dirt on them. you will never have the choice of a credible political party or credible corporation that is squeaky clean
what you are left with, is the choice of the lesser evil. those who hate this fact are not making a valid intelligent opposition to something that they can change, they are throwing a temper tantrum because they are unwilling to accept a simple fact of life that will never change
so someone saying there is no difference between something more evil than something less evil is what we call an idiot