The videogames thing is a good example of why socialism sucks. You said capitalism is great for videogames. In the free market, you can write and sell video games: the only people making the decisions are those who write them and those who might buy them. This is as it should be. However, in socialism, the government makes the decisions about the videogames.
See, you keep using fallacies.
In videogame devellopement the people who make the decisions are the publishers, the people who write them do so only in the limits imposed by their autocratic rulers, and the people who buy them only get to choose between what the publishers offer.
The government also uses cencorship laws to prevent some freedom being applied, whether in a socialist of capitalist setting.
And stop speaking about "the government" as if its some alien entity.
Although I still say that videogames exist only because the capitalist setting is there for them to be develloped in, and I think its a good thing.
But at least we're making progress, we've gone from "socialism is the second greatest evil the world has ever known" to "socialism sucks".
:)
Chumpsky's stalinistic rants are full of emotionally potent oversimplifications, bigoted accusations, generalizations, and even pinches of anti-semitism
Main Entry: 1totalitarian
Pronunciation: (")tO-"ta-l&-'ter-E-&n
Function: adjective
Etymology: Italian totalitario, from totalità totality
Date: 1926
1 a : of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy : AUTHORITARIAN, DICTATORIAL; especially : DESPOTIC b : of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures (as censorship and terrorism)
2 a : advocating or characteristic of totalitarianism b : completely regulated by the state especially as an aid to national mobilization in an emergency c : exercising autocratic powers : tending toward monopoly
Wow, I didn't know that people working for the governement are always forced to do so at gun point! Thank you for educating me.
And I didn't know that socialism meant "left-wing facism", oh, the learning I do here! I was stupidly believing it meant "any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods".
But now I know better, it actually means "a system in wich mean mean people force to you to do stuff at gun point in a mean way because they are mean", so educational.
Ah, its fun to know that all governments are blood thirsty tyrants, it makes me all warm inside to be so freed of my illusions.
"Emotionaly potent oversimplification"
Oh look, I quoted the left-wing hitler! Ooooh!
Ah, I know I said I wouldnt awnser to cowards on this subject anymore, but I had to repeat my point, just for the vague hope that you'd actually read it and think about it for a second:
Socialism is no more evil than capitalism, its an economic system, nothing more.
-socialism-, not "mean fascist tyranny", so-cia-li-sm. Say it with me now: sooo...ciaaaa...liii...sm. see, doesn't even remotly sound sound like "left-wing despotic tyranny", not even close.
But that might be a notion to complex for you, I'll leave you to your simple thoughts of right and wrong (things like you = right, things not like you = wrong).
and once more, with feeling:
"Emotionaly potent oversimplification"
I love that quote
Can we talk about those who were born in poor conditions (such as myself) and have managed to work my up to a level of what many might consider pretty well off?
Ok, like my dad.
He was born dirt poor, he got sent to an orphinage because his family was too poor to feed him as a child. When I was a kid he worked 6 or seven days a week, 12 hours a day. And he managed to get pretty well off because we're in a semi-socialist country: Canada. When he got laid off because there was a lack of work, he got unemployment checks until things picked up. When I got to spend a month in the hospital as a child to get operated on 2 times in one week, the government paid the bill.
Had we been in the states, I wouldn't have enough money to argue with you about socialism, I'd be as dirt poor and working just as hard as my dad. Now at least I can work hard and not worry about going hungry.
I did not say the Russians were a lazy people. I'm saying, what is the incentive to work harder, faster and better come from if you are'nt going to be able to reap the rewards?
Pretty shallow and selfish way to look at it.
There are rewards, there's the food and clothing and shelter for your family, there's the satisfaction of a job well done, there's fame and recognition. There are other rewards than cash. People are sometimes lazy slobs, even in a capitalist setting (how hard is it to find someone imcompetant at work that doesn't really do anything but look busy when the boss is looking?). Sure, working hard to get rich is a great motivator, but people can find other methods of reward and gratification.
And you don't like the two examples? I could find plenty more, but I won't bother, not unless you pay me.;-)
I will attempt to do just that. I realize that there is a difference between Canada and the former USSR. When I reacted to the comment on socialism being evil, I was reacting mainly with totalitarian, communistic governments, which is unfair.
Well, thank you.
I'm glad I at least reached somebody with the notion that socialism and totalitarian states are separate things (even if they sometimes coincide).
The thing is that capitalism has its good sides (videogames for a start), but socialism is also great, and there is a way to let them coexist if you LET them coexist. Unfortunatly there are plenty of corrupt people in the world who are working hard at not letting them coexist because they've found a way for either system to work at their advantage. And some of these people say things like "socialism is evil", wich is a convenient lie.
Or, as Chomsky would put it:
"An emotionally potent oversimplification."
A situation where the people do not control the means of production (which they do control in capitalism): the means are owned 100% by the rulers
The People are the "demo" in democracy.
In capitalism, CORPORATIONS own and therefore controll the means of production, NOT the people. Corporations are owned by the rich, the rich are a minority. These corporations are more often than not foreign powers who funnel the money out of the country.
The rulers are, in a democratic socialist setting, awnserable to the people, unlike the owners of the corporations in a capitalist setting (and don't say the shareholders have power too, they ARE the owners).
You make no sense Bub, try to see this in a rational way: First, get a dictionary, and read the definitions of Socialism, Capitalism, and Totalitarian (and why not facism while you're at it).
Second, read you post again, and see where you went wrong.
Third, try to imagine for an instant that if you were educated in the US you were subjected to anti-socialism propaganda that has been refined over the last 50 years and that this might affect your understanding of the issue (and since you state that The People control the means of production in a capitalist setting, you clearly don't understand what you're talking about).
I'll stop awnsering to you cowards now, since I'm beginning to repeat myself and you bunch clearly don't know what you're talking about.
Main Entry: 1totalitarian
Pronunciation: (")tO-"ta-l&-'ter-E-&n
Function: adjective
Etymology: Italian totalitario, from totalità totality
Date: 1926
1 a : of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy : AUTHORITARIAN, DICTATORIAL; especially : DESPOTIC b : of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures (as censorship and terrorism)
2 a : advocating or characteristic of totalitarianism b : completely regulated by the state especially as an aid to national mobilization in an emergency c : exercising autocratic powers : tending toward monopoly
Now say it with me boys:
Socialism regimes are not by definition totalitarian.
Totalitarian regimes can and often are capitalist regimes.
And write a hundred times:
I will look up words in the dictionary before I go around explaining them.
No, you coward, that's TOTALITARISM, not socialism!
Sheesh!
Main Entry: socialism
Pronunciation: 'sO-sh&-"li-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1837
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
the things they have worked for taken away and given to those who have not worked as hard
Oh yes, the great myth that the rich deserve it because they worked so hard for it. Ah, the stories of Bush growing up poor and...no, wait, he was born rich...
er...
Ah, yes, Bill Gates, the most succesfull self-made...oh wait...born rich too...
Ah, well, at least we can safely say that the people who work the hardest are the best paid, and the ones who's job is the most important are the best paid...oh wait...hitting a ball with a stick and then running around a field gets you millions, while taking care of kids leaves you dirt poor...my mistake.
Practically, we could talk about the results of taking away the incentive to innovate and work hard away from a populace.
Yeah, those lazy russians never worked hard ever! Never invented anything! I mean, its not as if they were the first in space or anything, not like they were the first to land a probe on the moon or anything like that. They didn't come up with a better way to do open heart surgery or anything...
Please, stop being a blind tool of your leader's propaganda and try to understand the difference between socialism and totalitarism.
You can have a socialist democracy...well, you could if the US didn't kill everyone that tried to.
Hmm, "lets share the wealth and not let the rich screw over the poor so much"...yup...sounds evil.
As opposed to "let nothing stop you in your greedy quest for wealth and power, MIGHT MAKES RIGHT"...this is clearly pure good and saintly.
And BTW, the CIA's guns are what brought the american ideas of "freedom" to the world.
Why don't you be a nice soldier and read about Pinochet, how he came to power, and what he did when he had it. THAT was the american ideas of freedom winning over the "evil" of socialism.
(That would be something that happened outside the US, so you'll be hard pressed to know about it, but I'll give you a hint: Chile...the country, not the meal.)
Re:Speaking of retards.
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 1
jumping clear of an accident will be much easier.
The elderly...
The handicapped...
I personnaly can't wait for a piece of dirt to jam the whells on that bayby and see some old hadiccaped fly off in traffic.
...I was JOKING.
See, the thing is basically a very expensive useless pice of cool tech, its not pure crap, nor is it a revolution in transport, its a gadget, a toy for rich kids.
It might be hard to fall off that thing, but I assure you it'll be real easy to roll into traffic as it stabilises itself.
Re:What it'll do for me
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 1
Generating no pollution???
Please tell me me where your electricity comes from.
I don't know about boston, but most of the US electricity comes from BURNING FUEL, coal and whatnot. That pollutes quite a hell of a lot.
Around here we have hydroelectricity. A bit of pollution when starting up (cutting down trees and stuff), but in the long-run its clean clean clean.
And as for public transportation, forget it, you'll never get on a crowded bus carrying that big heavy thing, you'd get linched.
Re:It's a damn scooter
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 1
Hmmm...make it covered...bigger...longer "battery" life...it would BE a car!:)
Seriously, you keep making comparisons with a bicycle, don't. Make comparisons with a freakin scooter: An aluminium scooter weights less than 5 pounds, is about 200 bucks, folds up nicely, and will get you you 12mph.
One odd thing, though, unlike Pompeii, they haven't found bodies in Nola.
No, that's normal, what is odd is that we found bodies in Pompeii in the first place.
See, when that volcano made the nasty in Pompeii, it gave plenty of warning. First it rained little hot pieces of very light rocks for hours, the volcano was visibly active, and the fools stayed home.
I figure the people of Nola had a tad more survival instinc and got out of harms way in time.
Of course, with all the idiots we meet everyday, I guess its understandable that we would expect them to stay put while a volcano erupted near by...
What I would like to see is 2 separate parallel olympics:
SuperOlympics
Take all the drugs you want, upgrade your genes, add some cyborg parts, and do the 100 meter dash flat under 4 seconds. (I would love to see a marathonian on coke!)
NormalOlympics
Just like they are now, no drugs, no gene therapy, no implants, BUT with snipers! If you fail a drug test, they don't tell you, you get shot in mid-race!
I loved futurama, back when I knew when it was on.
But Malcom in the middle came and the lil' bastard bumbed futurama to the null-zone of tv schedules: It was moved to the football overtime slot (it played about 2 every 3 months...I hate football!) and now it moved again, and I have -no- idea when its on.
I think its a conspiracy to stop us from watching something good on tv...
But I was affraid it had been cancelled (they can't get good ratings when noboy knows when its on, can they?)...of course, it might have been cancelled HERE...local tv stations like to play evangelical specials and not play sci-fi.
Slashdot Mirror
YES!
I can't wait to see Steve Irwin tackle elephants!
/poke poke/
"Oh, its grumpy!"
My point is, that a totalitarian regime has by definition an autocratic leader or hierarchy.
A socialist regime, however, does not.
See, separate things, not the same notion, idependant ideas.
So, stop saying that they one and the same, they are not.
Is that so hard to understand?
Socialism is not the same thing as totalitarian.
2 separate words, 2 separate concepts.
A socialist state can be totalitarian, but its NOT THE SAME FREAKING THING! They can be democracy, or a monarchy or whatever! Sheesh!
The videogames thing is a good example of why socialism sucks. You said capitalism is great for videogames. In the free market, you can write and sell video games: the only people making the decisions are those who write them and those who might buy them. This is as it should be. However, in socialism, the government makes the decisions about the videogames.
See, you keep using fallacies.
In videogame devellopement the people who make the decisions are the publishers, the people who write them do so only in the limits imposed by their autocratic rulers, and the people who buy them only get to choose between what the publishers offer.
The government also uses cencorship laws to prevent some freedom being applied, whether in a socialist of capitalist setting.
And stop speaking about "the government" as if its some alien entity.
Although I still say that videogames exist only because the capitalist setting is there for them to be develloped in, and I think its a good thing.
But at least we're making progress, we've gone from "socialism is the second greatest evil the world has ever known" to "socialism sucks".
:)
LOL
HAHAHahahaHAHAHahahahaHAHAHa!
Chumpsky's stalinistic rants are full of emotionally potent oversimplifications, bigoted accusations, generalizations, and even pinches of anti-semitism
Hihihi!
Main Entry: 1totalitarian
Pronunciation: (")tO-"ta-l&-'ter-E-&n
Function: adjective
Etymology: Italian totalitario, from totalità totality
Date: 1926
1 a : of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy : AUTHORITARIAN, DICTATORIAL; especially : DESPOTIC b : of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures (as censorship and terrorism)
2 a : advocating or characteristic of totalitarianism b : completely regulated by the state especially as an aid to national mobilization in an emergency c : exercising autocratic powers : tending toward monopoly
Note the word "autocratic".
Wow, I didn't know that people working for the governement are always forced to do so at gun point! Thank you for educating me.
And I didn't know that socialism meant "left-wing facism", oh, the learning I do here! I was stupidly believing it meant "any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods".
But now I know better, it actually means "a system in wich mean mean people force to you to do stuff at gun point in a mean way because they are mean", so educational.
Ah, its fun to know that all governments are blood thirsty tyrants, it makes me all warm inside to be so freed of my illusions.
"Emotionaly potent oversimplification"
Oh look, I quoted the left-wing hitler! Ooooh!
Ah, I know I said I wouldnt awnser to cowards on this subject anymore, but I had to repeat my point, just for the vague hope that you'd actually read it and think about it for a second:
Socialism is no more evil than capitalism, its an economic system, nothing more.
-socialism-, not "mean fascist tyranny", so-cia-li-sm. Say it with me now: sooo...ciaaaa...liii...sm. see, doesn't even remotly sound sound like "left-wing despotic tyranny", not even close.
But that might be a notion to complex for you, I'll leave you to your simple thoughts of right and wrong (things like you = right, things not like you = wrong).
and once more, with feeling:
"Emotionaly potent oversimplification"
I love that quote
Can we talk about those who were born in poor conditions (such as myself) and have managed to work my up to a level of what many might consider pretty well off?
;-)
Ok, like my dad.
He was born dirt poor, he got sent to an orphinage because his family was too poor to feed him as a child. When I was a kid he worked 6 or seven days a week, 12 hours a day. And he managed to get pretty well off because we're in a semi-socialist country: Canada. When he got laid off because there was a lack of work, he got unemployment checks until things picked up. When I got to spend a month in the hospital as a child to get operated on 2 times in one week, the government paid the bill.
Had we been in the states, I wouldn't have enough money to argue with you about socialism, I'd be as dirt poor and working just as hard as my dad. Now at least I can work hard and not worry about going hungry.
I did not say the Russians were a lazy people. I'm saying, what is the incentive to work harder, faster and better come from if you are'nt going to be able to reap the rewards?
Pretty shallow and selfish way to look at it.
There are rewards, there's the food and clothing and shelter for your family, there's the satisfaction of a job well done, there's fame and recognition. There are other rewards than cash. People are sometimes lazy slobs, even in a capitalist setting (how hard is it to find someone imcompetant at work that doesn't really do anything but look busy when the boss is looking?). Sure, working hard to get rich is a great motivator, but people can find other methods of reward and gratification.
And you don't like the two examples? I could find plenty more, but I won't bother, not unless you pay me.
I will attempt to do just that. I realize that there is a difference between Canada and the former USSR. When I reacted to the comment on socialism being evil, I was reacting mainly with totalitarian, communistic governments, which is unfair.
Well, thank you.
I'm glad I at least reached somebody with the notion that socialism and totalitarian states are separate things (even if they sometimes coincide).
The thing is that capitalism has its good sides (videogames for a start), but socialism is also great, and there is a way to let them coexist if you LET them coexist. Unfortunatly there are plenty of corrupt people in the world who are working hard at not letting them coexist because they've found a way for either system to work at their advantage. And some of these people say things like "socialism is evil", wich is a convenient lie.
Or, as Chomsky would put it:
"An emotionally potent oversimplification."
Please make sense.
A situation where the people do not control the means of production (which they do control in capitalism): the means are owned 100% by the rulers
The People are the "demo" in democracy.
In capitalism, CORPORATIONS own and therefore controll the means of production, NOT the people. Corporations are owned by the rich, the rich are a minority. These corporations are more often than not foreign powers who funnel the money out of the country.
The rulers are, in a democratic socialist setting, awnserable to the people, unlike the owners of the corporations in a capitalist setting (and don't say the shareholders have power too, they ARE the owners).
You make no sense Bub, try to see this in a rational way: First, get a dictionary, and read the definitions of Socialism, Capitalism, and Totalitarian (and why not facism while you're at it).
Second, read you post again, and see where you went wrong.
Third, try to imagine for an instant that if you were educated in the US you were subjected to anti-socialism propaganda that has been refined over the last 50 years and that this might affect your understanding of the issue (and since you state that The People control the means of production in a capitalist setting, you clearly don't understand what you're talking about).
I'll stop awnsering to you cowards now, since I'm beginning to repeat myself and you bunch clearly don't know what you're talking about.
Main Entry: 1totalitarian
Pronunciation: (")tO-"ta-l&-'ter-E-&n
Function: adjective
Etymology: Italian totalitario, from totalità totality
Date: 1926
1 a : of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy : AUTHORITARIAN, DICTATORIAL; especially : DESPOTIC b : of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures (as censorship and terrorism)
2 a : advocating or characteristic of totalitarianism b : completely regulated by the state especially as an aid to national mobilization in an emergency c : exercising autocratic powers : tending toward monopoly
Now say it with me boys:
Socialism regimes are not by definition totalitarian.
Totalitarian regimes can and often are capitalist regimes.
And write a hundred times:
I will look up words in the dictionary before I go around explaining them.
Chile
No, you coward, that's TOTALITARISM, not socialism!
Sheesh!
Main Entry: socialism
Pronunciation: 'sO-sh&-"li-z&m
Function: noun
Date: 1837
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
people killed by their own government in the 20th century thanks to their communist and socialistic setup.
As opposed to people killed by capitalist governements?
the things they have worked for taken away and given to those who have not worked as hard
Oh yes, the great myth that the rich deserve it because they worked so hard for it. Ah, the stories of Bush growing up poor and...no, wait, he was born rich...
er...
Ah, yes, Bill Gates, the most succesfull self-made...oh wait...born rich too...
Ah, well, at least we can safely say that the people who work the hardest are the best paid, and the ones who's job is the most important are the best paid...oh wait...hitting a ball with a stick and then running around a field gets you millions, while taking care of kids leaves you dirt poor...my mistake.
Practically, we could talk about the results of taking away the incentive to innovate and work hard away from a populace.
Yeah, those lazy russians never worked hard ever! Never invented anything! I mean, its not as if they were the first in space or anything, not like they were the first to land a probe on the moon or anything like that. They didn't come up with a better way to do open heart surgery or anything...
Please, stop being a blind tool of your leader's propaganda and try to understand the difference between socialism and totalitarism.
You can have a socialist democracy...well, you could if the US didn't kill everyone that tried to.
Ok, how EXACTLY, is socialism evil?
...the country, not the meal.)
Hmm, "lets share the wealth and not let the rich screw over the poor so much"...yup...sounds evil.
As opposed to "let nothing stop you in your greedy quest for wealth and power, MIGHT MAKES RIGHT"...this is clearly pure good and saintly.
And BTW, the CIA's guns are what brought the american ideas of "freedom" to the world.
Why don't you be a nice soldier and read about Pinochet, how he came to power, and what he did when he had it. THAT was the american ideas of freedom winning over the "evil" of socialism.
(That would be something that happened outside the US, so you'll be hard pressed to know about it, but I'll give you a hint: Chile
jumping clear of an accident will be much easier.
The elderly...
The handicapped...
I personnaly can't wait for a piece of dirt to jam the whells on that bayby and see some old hadiccaped fly off in traffic.
...I was JOKING.
See, the thing is basically a very expensive useless pice of cool tech, its not pure crap, nor is it a revolution in transport, its a gadget, a toy for rich kids.
It might be hard to fall off that thing, but I assure you it'll be real easy to roll into traffic as it stabilises itself.
Generating no pollution???
Please tell me me where your electricity comes from.
I don't know about boston, but most of the US electricity comes from BURNING FUEL, coal and whatnot. That pollutes quite a hell of a lot.
Around here we have hydroelectricity. A bit of pollution when starting up (cutting down trees and stuff), but in the long-run its clean clean clean.
And as for public transportation, forget it, you'll never get on a crowded bus carrying that big heavy thing, you'd get linched.
Hmmm...make it covered...bigger...longer "battery" life...it would BE a car! :)
Seriously, you keep making comparisons with a bicycle, don't. Make comparisons with a freakin scooter: An aluminium scooter weights less than 5 pounds, is about 200 bucks, folds up nicely, and will get you you 12mph.
This thing is a useless piece of very cool tech.
One odd thing, though, unlike Pompeii, they haven't found bodies in Nola.
No, that's normal, what is odd is that we found bodies in Pompeii in the first place.
See, when that volcano made the nasty in Pompeii, it gave plenty of warning. First it rained little hot pieces of very light rocks for hours, the volcano was visibly active, and the fools stayed home.
I figure the people of Nola had a tad more survival instinc and got out of harms way in time.
Of course, with all the idiots we meet everyday, I guess its understandable that we would expect them to stay put while a volcano erupted near by...
Oh how I yearn for the days of yore, when my Mac II cx had quicktime and could do multimedia while my friend's PCs didn't. Oh, how I bragged...
Well, we already have olypic athletes dying of heart attacks at age 38...
Hey, if they want to live to see their 42nd birthday, we got the no-drugs-or-anything-we-mean-it olympics, if they wanna win...well...
;-)
I've been waiting for this for years.
What I would like to see is 2 separate parallel olympics:
SuperOlympics
Take all the drugs you want, upgrade your genes, add some cyborg parts, and do the 100 meter dash flat under 4 seconds. (I would love to see a marathonian on coke!)
NormalOlympics
Just like they are now, no drugs, no gene therapy, no implants, BUT with snipers! If you fail a drug test, they don't tell you, you get shot in mid-race!
Now THAT I would watch!
I loved futurama, back when I knew when it was on.
But Malcom in the middle came and the lil' bastard bumbed futurama to the null-zone of tv schedules: It was moved to the football overtime slot (it played about 2 every 3 months...I hate football!) and now it moved again, and I have -no- idea when its on.
I think its a conspiracy to stop us from watching something good on tv...
But I was affraid it had been cancelled (they can't get good ratings when noboy knows when its on, can they?)...of course, it might have been cancelled HERE...local tv stations like to play evangelical specials and not play sci-fi.
Guess I'll have to wait for the DVDs
If Redhat were to donate $1 billion in free software
How do you donate money in the form of free stuff?
Dammit, I wanna see! Anybody got any links to them dar perrty pictures? You call this a review? Exercise fair use man! Show me something!
And am I the only one that thinks its humanly impossible for one man to put out books that fast? I mean, this has to be a team effort...
I finally saw about 6 of 'em at around 4:30 am after having frozen for hours in the night.
Mental note: Must build weather-controlling machine.
Damn!
Me and a couple of buddies are road-tripping our way to a spot in the country far from light pollution today to catch the leonids, and its cloudy!
Damn you weather!
It was one of my biggest problems with nintendo until I saw that they had stopped being idiots...