Let's shift the goal posts back then. You want to know how religion in itself contributes to bloodshed and torture? Very simple, by keeping people stupid.
How do they achieve this? By indoctrinating people. Look at Christianity, you are considered to be 'religious' if you go to some building to listen to some dude talk about his interpretation of some ancient moral codex which was designed for the retards of 2000 years ago. Christianity is all about dogma and other pointless BS that has no relation to the modern world.
Just look at Christianity's suppression of sexuality and sex. These kind of policies made sense for the retards of 2000 year ago, but now we have cheap and easy contraception, childbirth is a pretty safe process and in general, people tend to be less fucked up and prone to violence. Why can't the church just fucking admit that the anti-sexuality motifs are redundant and everyone should fuck (using contraception of course) as much as they like.
Same thing can be applied to marriage. Back in the day, dupping people into believing that marriage was holly and something more than a social contact would be a useful for society. Keep families stable, increase chances of survival and all that stuff. But this is 2008. Marriage is no more than glorified name for a social contract that makes it easier for people to live together on a long term basis. There is nothing 'special' about it. It's a fucking contract. Would you care any less about your loved one if you were engaged in a civil union as opposed to official marriage? The special nature of marriage is purely symbolic. But no, Christians have to continue shitting all this bullshit out of their dirty mouths about how marriage is a special bond signed by Jesus H. Christ in person... Furthermore, they also like to enforce their BS on people who having nothing to do with Christianity.
And this is just the surface of the iceberg of Christian bullshit. If you analyze the actually theology behind Christianity, it fails miserably. The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost? WTF? What kind of bullshit is that? What the hell does some ancient populist dude's death have to do with spirituality? How does the whole Jesus story provide insights into the fundamental questions about our existence? If anything it has more to do with economic issues...
Spirituality should involve searching for questions that do not necessarily have any 'easy' or 'meaningful' answers. Things like the nature of reality, existence, love (is it simply biology/cultural evolution?) and time... Why not incorporate new developments such as genetics, astro-physics, brain related research into Christianity? What's wrong with admitting that the Bible is a pile of bullshit and that modern technology has made it redundant? It might have had good qualities back in the day - but now it's useless. Spirituality should be mind-bending, it should be scary as fuck. It should make you think hard about the fundamental questions of existence. It should scare the fuck out of you by pointing out how our whole conception of existence is largely based on some random rules that govern our world. The way we define the world is literally a product of some bunch chemicals doing some bullshit, isn't that crazy? Why do electrons exist? Why the fuck are there number like pi and e? WTF?
Christianity doesn't even approach these kinds of questions. All it has is bullshit and more bullshit. Do you realize how fucked up it is to reduce religion to a bunch of statements: "God hates fags, taxes and baby-killers. God loves America!" What is god? What is love? Why the fuck would an omnipotent (what are the implication of being omnipotent?) being even care about a bunch of random bag of cells, living on a random piece of land, on random planet, on random galaxy. Oh wait, these bags of cells has some level of consciousnesses, so that that must make them special... Yeah right. Christianity doesn't make any sense even in term of its own rules...
Christianity contributes to stupidity and conformism
But at least I don't delude myself by treating socialism as some sort of ultimate evil and I don't engage in fantasies about the evils of the "fairness doctrine". It's just an a ideology, there are times when it makes sense and times when it doesn't. Just like capitalism. None of them are inherently associated with promoting individual liberty.
All that stuff about the founding days of America being a cradle for individual liberty is BS. I dare you to prove me wrong. What the founding 'fathers' understood as individual liberty is very different from how most people would define individual liberty. There is no point in idealizing something that promotes individual liberty only in context of a certain time period. Individual liberty is always a moving target and idealization of certain time period is like day dreaming. The good old times never existed! For every idealistic proclamation about individual liberty, you had a million people who could not make use of these very liberties because of some arbitrary BS.
Have you ever come in contact with people living below the poverty line in a developing nation? Or better yet, have you ever lived in a totalitarian country where the local despots enjoy the support of the American government?
Stop deluding yourself about those 'wonderful times' that are long gone. They only exist in your own mind. If you think first century of America's existence was some kind of paradise of individual liberty, then you are as retarded as those morons who organized the creationist museum that shows how Noah was able to satisfy his passion for zoophilia with just one boat.
All you paulites and wannabe libertarians make use of big words like individual liberty and national sovereignty, but when it comes down it, words is all you have. You have no fucking clue how the world works, you have no idea what the majority of the world is living through. You're just some stupid kid from the suburbs.
So Mr. National Sovereignty, you want to leave UN because the UN does not promote America's interests? Oh yeah? Well fuck you dumb cunt! You can't just revert to isolationism after fucking the lives of countless millions of people.
Let's just look at one little part of the world where America's dedication to maintaining its own national sovereignty and not getting entangled in foreign alliances made the world a better place. Congo. First you guys indiscriminately back Mobutu (even though he's a nutjob despot) just because he opposed to the commies and he was friendly to western exploitation. When the USSR collapsed, you guys left Mobutu go and Congo collapsed into chaos for 15 years and a couple of million people in the process.
Now are you going to tell me that America (and European imperialists for that matter) are not directly responsible for all the shit that went down in Congo? You guys had no regard for the individual liberties of the Congolese population or the national sovereignty of the state of Congo. You guys literally treated the people of Congo like shit. You guy supported a despotic regime when it suited your needs and when you were done you just let things take their course.
The people of Congo have the all the right to expect American national sovereignty to be ignored and American citizens to be taxed to death until you motherfuckers pay back what you owe. You can't have it both ways, interference into the affairs of foreign nations when it suits you and bailing out of the UN when that seems like a better idea.
The vast majority of America's libertarians are just like you. Ignorant, arrogant little fucks who don't know shit about the world and sit and masturbate to Ron Paul and his policies will allow them to spend more money the latest turd that Steve Jobs shat out.
P.S. I am not a Democrat, I take shit from no one. I have no real affiliation to any state/corporation/political organization. I have no particular association with Congo, but it' pretty example of how America fucks with the liberties of other people and then just bails out. I try to avoid excessive language, but I tend to lose it when confronted with dumb suburban 'libertarians' who say stupid shit like how cool it would be to live in the Gilded Age or something like that.
Yeah, the business practices of our wireless providers suck. We don't have the same freedom as Europe. What's your point though? It's not the underlying technology that sucks in the United States. It's the business practices of those that implement that technology. What good is technology if you can't use it in a effective manner? In a capitalist society business practices are what counts, technology alone is worthless. To answer you question, in an open platform I can install a VoIP application like Skype on my phone, in Verizon world I can't do that without Verizon's approval. I am not even going to discuss T-mobile's inbred idea of making you pay per IM message.
Again, what's your point? For better or worse the United States is a "owner pays" model instead of "caller pays". Granted, in Europe you get free incoming calls and texts. But you also pay a premium to call a wireless user. So the person calling you is paying for you to have that cell phone. In the United States you are paying to have that cell phone and for the people calling you it's treated as any other call (i.e: no extra charges). Really, what's this premium you are talking about? Which carrier and in which European country are you talking about? Do you buy any chance remember the exact details of the plan you were signed up to? Or were you using a Pre-paid system?
It's also my understanding that in Europe "all you can eat" plans aren't really that common. I have unlimited SMS for $14.99/mo with T-Mobile. Sprint users have it for $10/mo. $20/mo for Verizon and AT&T. Can you get unlimited text messages? Can you get unlimited nights and weekends and/or mobile to mobile? Umm, I don't know about all you can eat plans in Western Europe. But in Eastern Europe you can definitely get competitively prices 'all you can eat plans'. Same goes for all the weekend stuff and so on... Regarding your $15 unlimited messaging, does that include international text messages? Because if it does I need to sign up for that.
I use over 4,000 minutes and >3,000 SMS per month on average. Costs me $54.98/mo before taxes with T-Mobile USA. Could I get the same amount of usage for that price or less in Europe? Even though you can most probably get prices like in Western Europe (definitely in Eastern Europe), why does it matter? Most people don't do that much messaging anyways (especially in North America), if you want to look which region has a better deal, you have to look into a deal for the average consumer, not someone who sends 3000 messages a month and talks two hours a day.
Have you lived in any European countries? Do you have any relatives/friends who live there? Do you have any experience with wireless telecommunication other than choosing a carrier when you arrived somewhere on vacation? Or are you just, um, following anecdotal knowledge/rumors?
Oh please, everyone but suburban American trash knows that your telecommunications market is a pile of shit. Just look at the Verizon and it's use of the BREW platform. How fucked up is that? Verizon actually disables in-built features of various phones and makes you buy their turds (BREW application) to use the same damn features. And doesn't T-mobile make you pay for IM by each message? And the fact that in the USA paying for incoming text messages is the norm, isn't that pretty dumb?
And don't get me started on the immense lock-in that American telecos force on their users. Did you know that in some EU countries it's illegal to sell only locked phones? Americans can't even dream about such rules! All the telecos have to do is mumble some incoherent crap about "fighting government regulation" and you can bet your ass that over 80% will think the telecos are right, even if they don't know shit about the mobile telecommunications industry.
Don't get me wrong, Europe has it's own problems (e.g. roaming within Europe can be fucking expensive, unsubsidized phones can cost a lot), but the American telecommunications industry is a bigger pile of shit. And compared to Japan and South Korea, USA's telecommunication industry is like a 3rd world country.
Don't talk about things you have no knowledge about.
Manhattan and Quebec? Quebec the state? or Quebec city? I've stayed in Montreal and it didn't really seem like Manhattan, although there were certain similarities.
I am sure that there are plenty students that aced the equivalent of CALC IV in the country of Georgia that don't know where the state of Georgia is, or Puerto Rico. No education system in the world can will prevent the creation of idiot savants. I don't know, I'd say the average Georgian's geography skills are probably much better than that of an average American, let alone someone who can ace Calc IV. But that might have to do more with fact the Georgia is the middle of something and people can't afford to live a sheltered, ignorant suburban life.
Regarding the origins of Thanksgiving, its realyl has little to do with celebrating the "Native American Genocide". It's origins were that of English Harvest Festival. The puritans, and later colonists were thankful for their crop. As a matter of fact colonial thanksgiving would be scheduled each year to coincide with harvest. Really, I though that it was celebration of genocide. Like the turkey is meant to represent the Native Americans or something. (read my reply to the poster before you).
One more thing, Georgia, as with all 50 states is of a higher status than "a local administrative region." Of course I don't expect a foriegner on a student visa such as yourself to understand how our government is supposed to work. Since you know so much about foreign students, you might know that most of us have to take the SAT I/II or the ACT. Guess what one of the course for the SAT II is? American History! You know some like learning new things about other cultures/societies. The reason I used the words "local administrative region" is because that's what people in Georgia (and many other parts of the world) would call a state. Not all countries have similar government system to the United States. For instance, I can't imagine anyone who speaks in Russian to use the Russian word for "state" when describing local administrative units.
From the amount of rabid (and normal) replies, I see I've touched a pretty painful spot for Americans. I wonder what that could mean...
Your comments seem to focus on the fact that there was extremely limited permanent structure building in the area occupied by the United States 500 years ago. 500 years ago towns in Europe and other places were building structures using ideas and materials there were essentially isolated from each other. This resulted in cities that look significantly different from each other. The US on the other hand already had decent communication and transport systems in place by the time structures of significance were being built. This resulted in a lot of shared ideas and materials being used to build cities, and so less general diversity. There are still a lot of specific differences due to differences in climate, immediate materials, and cultural differences. Still, it's not like the difference between pyramids and castles.
Of course, if I want to see castles and pyramids, I have to spend a small fortune (by my standards) and travel half way around the world. In the US I can go on a road trip and see quite a bit for significantly less money (but still not that many pyramids). There are places in the US where I can barely understand the spoken language because it is so different. The foods (mostly derivatives from all over Europe) vary quite a bit too. This summer I went to see several sets of American Indian ruins there were thousands of years old. I've seen many different buildings of American cultural significance, and enjoyed the differing city planning and building styles. They are certainly not all ghettos and suburbs (but then suburbs are an American culture that I see other countries try to imitate).
Yeah, I guess when you get to this point, it goes down to a matter of taste. Some ppl might prefer 'the variety' of the USA, while others prefer the 'variety' that the rest of the world has to offer. I am sure the fact that transportation networks in the USA are well developed, the USA is relatively isolated and that Americans are cheap can contribute to people's tastes. Let's put it this way, for me, most of my non-American friends and a majority of my American friends who had the opportunity to travel abroad, USA's cultural level doesn't cut it. I am glad that exploring the USA alone is working out for you and I'd like to check out more of the USA as well, but overall I don't find USA to be as interesting as other places I've been around the world.
You may laugh, but I had to Tallin to find out what/where it was. My geography skills have always been pretty poor, but this isn't surprising. Americans have a hard time learning about the rest of the world because it is so far removed from them. Estonia? Usually you learn about other countries' histories by how they relate to your own. I honestly can't think of how Estonia relates to the US. I've never met anyone from there. I've never knowingly had any economic trading or seen products made in Estonia. It doesn't crop up on movies (except Encino Man from 1992), the news, or TV shows. Relevance of knowing where Estonia is to the American people at large is somewhere close to zero. You have to spend time and effort learning things to live your life, and I'd have to say that most people are better off learning something else.
I would question your assertion about Estonia being removed from USA. I would agree that average American can easily ignore Estonia's (and pretty much 90% of the world's nations') existence and get away with it, but that doesn't mean that it makes sense to ignore it. This kind of attitude is what gets you guys into messes like Afghanistan/Iraq/Vietnam. You guys don't jack shit about these countries and you allow your politicians to do whatever the fuck they want as long as say some BS like "Terror, WMD, Terror, Saddam Hussian, Terror, WMD, Iraq". This kind of attitude is what allowed that fucktard Reagan to get away with the creation of Al-Qaeda/bin Laden. If you want to see how Estonia plays into the bigger picture, just look at what's behind your recent failures in implementing sanctions against
I don't really see how you can say that. It'd be like me saying "Those European countries are all the same. See one castle or palace and you've seen them all." There's more to culture than fancy landmarks. I don't know, go visit Paris for a week and then stay in DC for week. I'll let you decide... Yeah, there is more to culture than fancy landmarks. But there is also more to culture than suburbia, strip malls and commercialized entertainment.
Maybe they took their motivation from the crusades... OMG, didn't I already tell you that I am not promoting any geographical region. I don't give a fuck where you are from, what you believe, as long as you don't engage in any active form of discrimination and don't tell me what's right and wrong I don't care who your are. Btw, I don't recommend you go to any other countries other than Canada or Mexico. I done am with you.
LOL, have you been to Holland? Are you seriously saying that there is bigger difference between Massachusetts and Arizona than between USA and Holland. You have no clue what the fuck you are talking about.
I'd like to check out an authentic Native American reservation, hopefully one that does not include a casino...
Yadda yadda bla bla. I am fool for questioning American cultural diversity... Get the fuck out of your suburb and check out the world. Let me put it this way: compared to every other country I've been to (17 + Uzbekistan where I stayed for a day when I was like 3), USA has a pretty bland culture. For a country this size, it has very little variety and culture in general.
If you think I am wrong in my conclusion, you can go fuck yourself. Spend a fortnight in Paris and a fortnight in say LA and then tell me which experience was better. Having different kinds of immigrants in the ghetto is not culture. USA is good at something and sux for other things. It's in terms of economic opportunity and economic growth. It sux in terms of culture and partying (frats? fuk that shit! And why don't clubs stay open until at least 4am. How can a club close at 2am? Americans really need to stop Christians from enforcing social policies).
"I'm not saying that the US is the pinnacle of culture across the globe, but saying they have literally zero diversity? That's beyond ignorant, but you are obviously an idiot and a bigot, so I don't expect any less"
I though you believed that USA is one of the most culturally diverse nations on the planet?
Dude cmon, comparing California to NY? You've been living in the USA for way too long. Yeah, of course their different, but look at the scales involved. For 95% of the world population, it's the same shit. Of course, I am not saying that every part of US is identical. If you want differences, try comparing Cairo with Tallin. We'll see how different New York will feel from California.
Regarding the math vs geography thing, I think not knowing about the existence of nation (let alone actually knowing anything about it) is pretty fucking bad. I mean it's common knowledge. It's not rocket science, it's like not knowing about colonialism or communism. I am pretty sure mathematicians in Georgia wouldn't get confused between a local administrative region and a nation.
Regarding the whole Thanksgiving thing. I forgot to mention that the kid implied that I would be going back home to have Turkey with my family, which pretty stupid considering Thankgiving is more about celebrating 'Native American genocide'.
LOL, I love the comment about India being a shithole. Just shows how much you know foreign countries.
I never said that Europe is the pinnacle of human evolution. They have their own set of problems, they let racism take priority over economic interests unlike Americans who are racist but will let you work in the USA if it economically benefits. Europe has fuckloads of bad things about it. But that's not my point...
My point is that culture within the USA tends to be very similar. It's pretty much the same shit everywhere. Strip malls, ghettos and downtowns. There are very few landmarks worth visiting if you are not American. Compare the landmarks in say Washington with any major European city.
The reason why I study in the USA is because I am not a dumb asshole like you. America has a better University system and it has more economic opportunity if you are a non-citizen (compared to Europe). Unlike you, I am not some mad fanatic who gets insulted by every random thing you say about their country. Get over it man, America has no culture. All your public holidays are just consumerist rage fests, you have no real history, you have very few cool landmarks (with the exception of NY). But that doesn't mean USA is a pile of shit, what it lacks in culture it makes up for in economic competitiveness.
It's funny that you talk about genocide considering that USA was founded on the mass eradication of the Native American population.
Chill out man, nation states are a load of bullshit anyways.
You might have geographic and climatic diversity, but USA has literally zero cultural diversity. It's all the same stuff: dull suburbia, run down urban areas and rural areas. With the exception of NY (Manhattan), DC (downtown area) and a few other places, it's all the same crap. Strip malls, houses, cheap apartment, similar looking downtown areas...
In contrast, other parts of the world are much more diverse. Just take a look at India. Almost every state has it's own language/culture/history. Rajasthan is nothing like northern or southern India. Even a relatively small country like Ukraine has a quite a lot of cultural variety. From the Russian speaking east to the Ukrainian-speaking west.
So stop pretending that Americans don't check out foreign places because they have everything they need in their own country. Americans are so USA-centric because they are largely ignorant of foreign cultures/countries and they tend to be pretty cheap.
I just love when Americans (who know I am foreigner from the other side of the ocean) ask me whether I went back home for Thanksgiving, and I study in one of the top 25 universities in the USA. I can never understand how people can ace Calc IV without studying and yet they are too ignorant to know that Georgia isn't simply a state. It's nation with a 3000 year old history, no less.
Um, I guess you can treat it that way. But how you define opportunistic is irrelevant, opportunism is crucial aspect of the economy and everyone gets fucked by it. From slashdot geeks being fucked by Microsoft's opportunism (fucking standards to initiate lock in) to media companies being fucked by piracy. It's a reality of the market and repeating the sentence "being a copyright infringing, law breaking little prick" isn't going to change it. Opportunism goes both ways you know.
If the media companies don't like this, they can fuck off. Stop producing "music" and stop pursuing copyright infringement, after all that will send the right message to all copyright infringing pricks , right? It will also show how you no one is interested in making music if its not worth anything, right?
Please don't compare physical goods to IP. They are not the same thing and you can't compare the two. No matter how many times you repeat this bullshit about stealing, piracy has nothing to do with stealing. Piracy is copyright infringement, no more no less.
Learn some basic economics. People respond to incentives and people are opportunistic. If they have an opportunity to get something for free (vs paying for it), they will do it. This has nothing to do with being self righteous, it's just the way human nature works.
This has nothing to do about being moral or immoral. The digital age simply increased (by several orders of magnitude) the possibility of being opportunistic with regards to IP. You can't set the clock back and you definitely can't change human nature.
I love when MPAA bitch that they won't make movies because of the risk of piracy. If you're so concerned about, bail out of the media business. Supply and Demand will determine what happens next...
You really need to lay off the theory and try living in the real world.
Now let's pretend for a minute that 'positive liberty' is all BS. Let's pretend that the libertarian ideology on liberty is the most moral one. Let's say UN implements your Libertarian Declaration of Human Rights.
Now how will that be a step in the right direction for the freedom and safety of mankind (pretty big words for statement devoid of any arguments)? Do realize that no one will even care about this document, let alone even paying lip service to it's requirements. The vast majority of the earth couldn't give a flying fuck about your rants on positive and negative liberty. Fuck, most of them are so poor that they can't really have a debate on this issue.
Try explaining the dangers of positive liberty to an illiterate African kid. Try telling him that the government should not be building school or hospitals because that means richer people will have to pay more taxes and it increases government involvement in the individual's life. Most people don't care about your Ivory tower rants. People want education and healthcare. People don't want to see their kids dying from something stupid like malaria. People want at least baseline prosperity.
Don't get me wrong, I am not really arguing against libertarian ideology. I am just pointing out that libertarian views on positive liberty issues is a extreme view than is not shared by the majority of the population of our planet. And it doesn't matter whether they are right or wrong.
Okay, forget positive liberty issues. Let's look at social liberalism, you would think there would be more consensus on this one, right? So how are you planning to force all nations on the planet to ratify a document that would essentially legalize the vast majority of illegal drugs (if not all, I guess it depends how hardcore you are about such things, I don't know, I don't really see the point in recreational use of heroin)? Hell, we have troubles legally enforcing the current declaration because many muslim nations like making exceptions (I am beating your wife is right, no? What kind of barbarian would want to ban something like that?), I am not even talking about practical implementation of the current declaration.
The UN isn't about world peace and prosperity and promoting rights. It's about comprising and trying to find a mutually acceptable solution while at the same time trying to advance freedom/prosperity.
I don't even know why I wrote this. You're just a naive little American, with no understanding of the world around him. Your one size fits all attitude is just laughable. It's because of people like you that I don't like libertarians. Libertarians are kind of like communists in a way, flip side of the same coin.
Bad analogy, car analogies never seem to apply to computing.
While Ferrari owners might be willing to show off to the whole world, that's not how things work with computing. If you have brand new box built, you're not going to brag about it to the whole world. You only going to brag it to your tech-savvy friends. I mean what more could you expect? You'd have to be pretty stupid to brag about getting 60+ FPS with all settings set to high on the latest DX10 game to average joe.
If someone wants to make a game called First Person Rapist or First Person Child Molester it's their right. As far as I am concerned, if no one was actually abused/hurt due to the production of such games then it's none of your business to decided what people can and can't do.
It's ridiculous to say shit like "oh five people got hurt because of X!" How many people died due to Christianity? Perhaps we should ban Christianity?
Oh yes, let's construct a series of ridiculous straw-man arguments and claim I'm an idiot for believeing them. How insightful. Atrocious working conditions were dealt with through unions and legislation. I don't see a direct relationship between that and an income tax.
Unions during the Gilded Age? WTF? Do you even know what you're talking about or are you just taking shit out of the blue. I mentioned standards of living, so you come up with Unions. Learn some history, unions where a non-issue at that point, employers did not tolerate unions and the government was more than happy to even use the military to destroy unionization attempts.
To try to prove your point about small government you used a stupid example that did nothing to prove your point. Once confronted, you come with unions right out of the blue. It just sounds like you don't know what your talking about. The "[the Gilded Age] sounds good to me" comment is what I am aiming at. Your "No income tax, no military-industrial complex = good times" theorem is gross generalization that makes you look stupid. If you want to argue about the benefits of a nano-government, you're going to have to do better.
I am going to ask you to articulate your point again. As I understand, your comment on no social security implies that a small government is less restrictive in that it doesn't take your money away in form of taxes. Thus in effect you get more liberty.
No how is an argument like that related to the American government at the turn of the century? Do you know anything about that time period? Do you realize that for the vast majority of the population the income tax was a non-issue? The vast majority of the population was so dirt poor that there would be no liberation effect from not having to pay income taxes. The implications of having an income tax during that period where completely different then what they are now. If if a president wanted to repeal the income tax, it be stupid to just do it. How are you going to pay for existing social security requirements, government bonds, how would the repealing of the income tax affect the global economy and trade. The current structure of the world's economy might mean that in the end you might have less money than you initially with the income tax in place. Stop thinking in such a simplistic manner.
The US military was rather small in the 1800's up until the Civil War... look at the Mexican-American war, where the US army had a few thousand soldiers (still sufficient for us to take Mexico City). The military and supporting industry expanded tremendously in the 20th century.
Thank you for stating a fact! Now how does this prove your theory that the military industrial-complex is solely a product of a large government. Have you considered why it expanded in the 20th century? Have you heard of communism? The cold war? WW1 and WW2? You think a nano-government would continue to pursue a isolationist policy with Hitler on the verge of destroying one of America's most crucial markets (let alone Hitler's dislike of international trade and pursuit of self sufficiency)? You think a nano-goverment would ignore communism, something that aims to destroy the American economic system? What about the rise imperialist policy? And you still haven't addressed technology. You do understand that the expenses involved in maintaining a few thousands soldiers on horseback differs developing a stealth fighter? The whole social fabric of America would contribute to the creation of the military-industrial complex. Americans are hawkish when it comes to military and nano-government won't change that. Just look at so called pro-small government presidents, Reagan was cheap on spending money on the poor, but he had no issues with spending stupid amounts of cash on the military.
Once upon a time, even cocaine was legal in this country. I'm not saying that's necessarily a good idea, mind you. My problem with
While you might perceive Russia's foreign policy to be product of economic and social necessities of developing democracy, this obviously not the case. While the ideology of communism had become defunct, Russia has not been capable of developing institutions such as an independent judiciary, multi-party elections (not just United Russia vs pro-government party B) and a civil society. Just changing economic systems isn't good enough, society itself has drop the Soviet/Nationalist mentality. The fact that Putin considers the government sponsored assault on the Estonian Embassy an element of civil society just shows how he doesn't really care about a real civil society or human rights.
You really don't access a lot of Western media sources if you think that Western media ignored the whole memorial scandal. Just read Google News from time to time. Even if CNN didn't mention it (which I highly doubt is this case) that doesn't mean the West ignored the whole incident, what did you want them to do, condemn Estonia for managing its own affairs and not listening to Russia? USSR is dead, Russians in Estonia need to learn that they are in a foreign country and they have to abide by Estonian laws. If they don't like, they can always come back to Russia, Putin definitely prefers Russian to immigrate back home as opposed to non-Russian immigration.
"And of course Russia is destined to protect her compatriots even if they reside in that country or somewhere else."
BS, the whole issue is highly political. It's not about her compatriots suffering, it's about them suffering in country like Estonia. You never hear bout Russians suffering in Turkmenistan. So it's okay to abuse Russians as long as the party in question is friendly towards Russia? I don't get your logic. The whole monument thing was a huge farce, Putin and Co couldn't care less about the fallen soldiers, just watch they way they clear monument in Russia itself to make way for highways.
"Much the same goes with Georgia and Poland. Russia doesn't profit from importing rotten re-exported meat, cheep wine and other stuff like that."
Please, the whole thing was obviously political. Georgian and Polish products might not be that good by Western standards, but this is Russia we are talking about, the kind of shit they sell in some places is just beyond. You're not seriously saying that banning Georgian/Polish products was simply an economic/health policy. It was obviously political, punish Georgia for moving towards the West.
"As for your attitude to the language issue then, try to suggest forbidding French (or English) in Canada and see the result;-)"
Your comparing French Canada to Estonia? Significant French presence in Canada dates back to the 17th century. The British gave Quebec independence during the American war from independence. Compare that to Estonia which has been under Russian occupation for around 50 years but still maintains a majority Estonian population (what did you say about ignoring the minority for the better good of the majority - the Estonians should apply Russia's policy towards homosexuals towards the Russians in Estonia).
"Things are developing gradually. For that development Russia needs Peace, that is why it will suppress any violence within and will try to maintain peace abroad."
You think the Chechen people don't need peace and economic development? What makes you think that Russia has the right to decide what's right for Chechnya? The Chechens obviously don't want to be part of Russia, they've been fighting you guys for the better part of the last 200 years. Why not let them go? Why assassinate the few Chechen separatists that are moderate? Why hold their families hostage? Why associate with scum like Ramzan? Russians obviously don't care about Chechens, they are fine with them being abused at all levels. So why should Chechens care about whether Russia needs stability or not?
"That's why from now on neither the USA, nor other countries will get a free hand or a
Your an idiot if you think that US at the turn of the century was a good place to live for the average American.
The reality is much more complex than "before income tax and large government everything was good!" The lack of social security was the least of the problems of the average American. Thing like complete lack job security and atrocious working conditions where a much larger concern.
I would question your assumption that the lack of military-industrial complex did not exist (as it does in its current form) because of the smaller government. Technological development are core aspect of the military industrial complex. At the turn of the century, military technology was a joke, now we are entering an era where remote controlled aircraft/droids are nothing new. Secondly, the US was much more isolationist pre-1900 than it is now. Bring imperialism into the equation and now there is a market for the military industrial complex.
You think there would be no war on drugs with limited government? Please, drugs are an easy target for politicians and the dominance of social conservatism in American society would mean that vast majority of states would continue to prosecute drug use. The whole anti-drug thing is less to do with a government having socialist traits (just look at Europe, they have some of the most liberal drug laws/attitudes towards drug use on the planet) and more to do with social conservatism. With less government you might have had a few states that would legalize marijuana/LSD/psilocybe sooner, but you would also have like 20 states where they would continue to give people 15/20 years for something as stupid as a joint. You can't really take the population attitude towards drugs seriously when LSD and marijuana are schedule I, but cocaine is schedule II. Vast majority of people don't know shit about drugs and it is easy to convince them that drugs along with homosexual are the root of all evil.
You're really naive if you think that the war of terror is simply product of an expanded bureaucracy. The war on terror is a technique used by the elite to achieve its aims. They took current geopolitical developments and exploited them to their own advantage using techniques applicable to modern day American society. They might not have had a "war on X" during the Gilded Age, but they didn't need to, they didn't have to sell a certain policy, they just straight up did what the influential people of the time wanted them to do. In principle, the war on terror is just another manipulation technique and all governments do this kind of shit, from socialist governments in Europe to the nano-government that you advocate.
Occasional crimes? Racism is institutionalized in Russian institutions. Why does every single cop call me a 'Hohol'? He is supposed to be respectful for wasting my time. And this is just the tip of the iceberg, lets not start about arson in dorms full of foreigners. And ignoring skin head organization. These issues really don't seem too important to you. Try talking to some non-white expats (although white expats get their own share of Russian xenophobia).
I have to say that your perception on Estonia's actions is result of Russian FUD.
What's wrong with requiring knowledge of Estonian to get a job? It's their country, they want their language back. If you live in a foreign country, you need to know the language to get a job, that sounds fair. Certainly fairer than Russia's policy of issuing job permits. It is not viable for me to get an official part time job in Russia, even though I speak perfect Russian. The actual documents costs something like $500, that would be waste considering I need part time job for the summer before University starts.
Your comment about the SS is full of shit, unlike Moscow, Nazi organizations aren't really an issue in Talin. You won't get beat of for being black and walking in the wrong neighborhood. And police will never bother you, especially if you are tourist (this includes Russian tourists). In general, this kind of attitude undermines what little validity there is your argument. You are obviously bullshitting about the SS revival.
Russians need to realize the Estonia is not part of Russia, the USSR is over. They want their language and country back, don't like it, go back to Russia. Russia certainly has no problems with this kind of attitude with regards to kicking out Georgian nationals and job permits. Although I come from the Russian-speaking part of Ukraine and my Ukrainian is almost non-existant, I think it's stupid that children in Lugansk are taught Russian. Why? We are Ukrainian not Russian! And I am not even very nationalistic, I simply have Ukrainian passport by the virtue of my mother being Ukrainian, my father is from A different continent and it looks like my permanent home is going to be in the US.
P.S. US is great in some ways, like the way their institutions interact and their adherence to basic civil liberties, but on the social front the US has a lot of catching up to do. Homosexuals can't even get civil-unions let alone marriages. Marijuana consumption is prosecuted in an an reasonable manner. Theres seem to be very little checks and balances with regards to corporate activity, but I guess that's required to remain competitive in a globalized world.
If it's a community building game, why does it include the name Simcity? There is certain core aspect of the gamplay that makes any given simcity game a simcity game. EA are just leaching of Simcity's branding in order to make a mediocre game that is more accessible to the average gamer. If it's not a simcity game, don't call it simcity societies, call it "Urban Socities" or SimSociety. I wish EA never bought Maxis, before the purchase they where much more willing to make interesting new games. I still play SimTower from time to time, too bad nowadays all you see is "Simcity Lite" and Sims X + Expansion Packs. Though hopefully Spore will prove me wrong.
Though I guess that's the way everything is supposed to be, EA's approach is much more financially successful judging from the state Maxis was in before the purchase. Too bad that EA's approach leads to shitty spinoffs, cough C&C Generals cough.
I can't believe Will Wright let EA do this, Simcity was his masterpiece, his claim to fame. I guess he got bored of the city building thing and he prefers to work on Sims expansion packs nowadays.
Bla Bla Bla, saying "You've got it all wrong!" doesn't add anything to your argument. What has culture got to do with this argument? Or are you justifying attacks on foreigners as method of preserving Russians culture?
Ad hominem attacks also don't add to your argument, on the contrary they underline that you've lost this argument. Of course life is more complex than my quick post. You're a random person on slashdot talking some BS, I am not going to go into a lengthy analysis with links to relevant sources. As far as I am concerned, you're not worth it.
Losing 20 million people doesn't stop the government from institutionalizing racism and ignoring neo-Nazi organizations. What was it that the chief of the Moscow police said? There are no skinheads in Moscow? This is Russia for you:
I am only technically quarter Russian, luckily I have a Ukrainian passport.:) I don't know if I would be able to tolerate being a citizen of Nazi Russia.
Merciless terrorists? Are you talking about the Russian army and Ramzan Kadyrov (who is a former rebel himself, no less)? So when you supporting Russia, you stop being a merciless terrorist? I like the way that works. Is institutionalized kidnappings by the Russian army normal? Do you even know whats going in Chechnya? Ramzan Kadyrov is like a warlord. Don't agree with him, vote for Yabloka, you get beat up or better yet, you disappear in Kadyrov private palace to never be seen again.
You think Nord Ost and Beslan where just random acts? You think people do this kind of shit just for fun? Bah, Russians are as much to blame for those events as the Chechen separatists. I'd like to see how you would react when your parents are abducted by the Russian military and you never see them again. Nord Ost and Beslan will happen again because the vast majority of Russians are racists assholes who are willing to let the Russian forces slaughter Chechens as long as they can masturbate to Putin saying "how great Russia is and how they will point their missiles against Europe." I always feel bad for the few Russians who try to bring true democracy to Russia, they were prosecuted under the Soviet regime and they continue to be prosecuted now.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's shift the goal posts back then. You want to know how religion in itself contributes to bloodshed and torture? Very simple, by keeping people stupid.
How do they achieve this? By indoctrinating people. Look at Christianity, you are considered to be 'religious' if you go to some building to listen to some dude talk about his interpretation of some ancient moral codex which was designed for the retards of 2000 years ago. Christianity is all about dogma and other pointless BS that has no relation to the modern world.
Just look at Christianity's suppression of sexuality and sex. These kind of policies made sense for the retards of 2000 year ago, but now we have cheap and easy contraception, childbirth is a pretty safe process and in general, people tend to be less fucked up and prone to violence. Why can't the church just fucking admit that the anti-sexuality motifs are redundant and everyone should fuck (using contraception of course) as much as they like.
Same thing can be applied to marriage. Back in the day, dupping people into believing that marriage was holly and something more than a social contact would be a useful for society. Keep families stable, increase chances of survival and all that stuff. But this is 2008. Marriage is no more than glorified name for a social contract that makes it easier for people to live together on a long term basis. There is nothing 'special' about it. It's a fucking contract. Would you care any less about your loved one if you were engaged in a civil union as opposed to official marriage? The special nature of marriage is purely symbolic. But no, Christians have to continue shitting all this bullshit out of their dirty mouths about how marriage is a special bond signed by Jesus H. Christ in person... Furthermore, they also like to enforce their BS on people who having nothing to do with Christianity.
And this is just the surface of the iceberg of Christian bullshit. If you analyze the actually theology behind Christianity, it fails miserably. The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost? WTF? What kind of bullshit is that? What the hell does some ancient populist dude's death have to do with spirituality? How does the whole Jesus story provide insights into the fundamental questions about our existence? If anything it has more to do with economic issues...
Spirituality should involve searching for questions that do not necessarily have any 'easy' or 'meaningful' answers. Things like the nature of reality, existence, love (is it simply biology/cultural evolution?) and time... Why not incorporate new developments such as genetics, astro-physics, brain related research into Christianity? What's wrong with admitting that the Bible is a pile of bullshit and that modern technology has made it redundant? It might have had good qualities back in the day - but now it's useless. Spirituality should be mind-bending, it should be scary as fuck. It should make you think hard about the fundamental questions of existence. It should scare the fuck out of you by pointing out how our whole conception of existence is largely based on some random rules that govern our world. The way we define the world is literally a product of some bunch chemicals doing some bullshit, isn't that crazy? Why do electrons exist? Why the fuck are there number like pi and e? WTF?
Christianity doesn't even approach these kinds of questions. All it has is bullshit and more bullshit. Do you realize how fucked up it is to reduce religion to a bunch of statements: "God hates fags, taxes and baby-killers. God loves America!" What is god? What is love? Why the fuck would an omnipotent (what are the implication of being omnipotent?) being even care about a bunch of random bag of cells, living on a random piece of land, on random planet, on random galaxy. Oh wait, these bags of cells has some level of consciousnesses, so that that must make them special... Yeah right. Christianity doesn't make any sense even in term of its own rules...
Christianity contributes to stupidity and conformism
Maybe...
But at least I don't delude myself by treating socialism as some sort of ultimate evil and I don't engage in fantasies about the evils of the "fairness doctrine". It's just an a ideology, there are times when it makes sense and times when it doesn't. Just like capitalism. None of them are inherently associated with promoting individual liberty.
All that stuff about the founding days of America being a cradle for individual liberty is BS. I dare you to prove me wrong. What the founding 'fathers' understood as individual liberty is very different from how most people would define individual liberty. There is no point in idealizing something that promotes individual liberty only in context of a certain time period. Individual liberty is always a moving target and idealization of certain time period is like day dreaming. The good old times never existed! For every idealistic proclamation about individual liberty, you had a million people who could not make use of these very liberties because of some arbitrary BS.
Have you ever come in contact with people living below the poverty line in a developing nation? Or better yet, have you ever lived in a totalitarian country where the local despots enjoy the support of the American government?
Stop deluding yourself about those 'wonderful times' that are long gone. They only exist in your own mind. If you think first century of America's existence was some kind of paradise of individual liberty, then you are as retarded as those morons who organized the creationist museum that shows how Noah was able to satisfy his passion for zoophilia with just one boat.
All you paulites and wannabe libertarians make use of big words like individual liberty and national sovereignty, but when it comes down it, words is all you have. You have no fucking clue how the world works, you have no idea what the majority of the world is living through. You're just some stupid kid from the suburbs.
So Mr. National Sovereignty, you want to leave UN because the UN does not promote America's interests? Oh yeah? Well fuck you dumb cunt! You can't just revert to isolationism after fucking the lives of countless millions of people.
Let's just look at one little part of the world where America's dedication to maintaining its own national sovereignty and not getting entangled in foreign alliances made the world a better place. Congo. First you guys indiscriminately back Mobutu (even though he's a nutjob despot) just because he opposed to the commies and he was friendly to western exploitation. When the USSR collapsed, you guys left Mobutu go and Congo collapsed into chaos for 15 years and a couple of million people in the process.
Now are you going to tell me that America (and European imperialists for that matter) are not directly responsible for all the shit that went down in Congo? You guys had no regard for the individual liberties of the Congolese population or the national sovereignty of the state of Congo. You guys literally treated the people of Congo like shit. You guy supported a despotic regime when it suited your needs and when you were done you just let things take their course.
The people of Congo have the all the right to expect American national sovereignty to be ignored and American citizens to be taxed to death until you motherfuckers pay back what you owe. You can't have it both ways, interference into the affairs of foreign nations when it suits you and bailing out of the UN when that seems like a better idea.
The vast majority of America's libertarians are just like you. Ignorant, arrogant little fucks who don't know shit about the world and sit and masturbate to Ron Paul and his policies will allow them to spend more money the latest turd that Steve Jobs shat out.
P.S. I am not a Democrat, I take shit from no one. I have no real affiliation to any state/corporation/political organization. I have no particular association with Congo, but it' pretty example of how America fucks with the liberties of other people and then just bails out. I try to avoid excessive language, but I tend to lose it when confronted with dumb suburban 'libertarians' who say stupid shit like how cool it would be to live in the Gilded Age or something like that.
Have you lived in any European countries? Do you have any relatives/friends who live there? Do you have any experience with wireless telecommunication other than choosing a carrier when you arrived somewhere on vacation? Or are you just, um, following anecdotal knowledge/rumors?
Oh please, everyone but suburban American trash knows that your telecommunications market is a pile of shit. Just look at the Verizon and it's use of the BREW platform. How fucked up is that? Verizon actually disables in-built features of various phones and makes you buy their turds (BREW application) to use the same damn features. And doesn't T-mobile make you pay for IM by each message? And the fact that in the USA paying for incoming text messages is the norm, isn't that pretty dumb?
And don't get me started on the immense lock-in that American telecos force on their users. Did you know that in some EU countries it's illegal to sell only locked phones? Americans can't even dream about such rules! All the telecos have to do is mumble some incoherent crap about "fighting government regulation" and you can bet your ass that over 80% will think the telecos are right, even if they don't know shit about the mobile telecommunications industry.
Don't get me wrong, Europe has it's own problems (e.g. roaming within Europe can be fucking expensive, unsubsidized phones can cost a lot), but the American telecommunications industry is a bigger pile of shit. And compared to Japan and South Korea, USA's telecommunication industry is like a 3rd world country.
Don't talk about things you have no knowledge about.
From the amount of rabid (and normal) replies, I see I've touched a pretty painful spot for Americans. I wonder what that could mean...
Your comments seem to focus on the fact that there was extremely limited permanent structure building in the area occupied by the United States 500 years ago. 500 years ago towns in Europe and other places were building structures using ideas and materials there were essentially isolated from each other. This resulted in cities that look significantly different from each other. The US on the other hand already had decent communication and transport systems in place by the time structures of significance were being built. This resulted in a lot of shared ideas and materials being used to build cities, and so less general diversity. There are still a lot of specific differences due to differences in climate, immediate materials, and cultural differences. Still, it's not like the difference between pyramids and castles.
Of course, if I want to see castles and pyramids, I have to spend a small fortune (by my standards) and travel half way around the world. In the US I can go on a road trip and see quite a bit for significantly less money (but still not that many pyramids). There are places in the US where I can barely understand the spoken language because it is so different. The foods (mostly derivatives from all over Europe) vary quite a bit too. This summer I went to see several sets of American Indian ruins there were thousands of years old. I've seen many different buildings of American cultural significance, and enjoyed the differing city planning and building styles. They are certainly not all ghettos and suburbs (but then suburbs are an American culture that I see other countries try to imitate).
Yeah, I guess when you get to this point, it goes down to a matter of taste. Some ppl might prefer 'the variety' of the USA, while others prefer the 'variety' that the rest of the world has to offer. I am sure the fact that transportation networks in the USA are well developed, the USA is relatively isolated and that Americans are cheap can contribute to people's tastes. Let's put it this way, for me, most of my non-American friends and a majority of my American friends who had the opportunity to travel abroad, USA's cultural level doesn't cut it. I am glad that exploring the USA alone is working out for you and I'd like to check out more of the USA as well, but overall I don't find USA to be as interesting as other places I've been around the world.
You may laugh, but I had to Tallin to find out what/where it was. My geography skills have always been pretty poor, but this isn't surprising. Americans have a hard time learning about the rest of the world because it is so far removed from them. Estonia? Usually you learn about other countries' histories by how they relate to your own. I honestly can't think of how Estonia relates to the US. I've never met anyone from there. I've never knowingly had any economic trading or seen products made in Estonia. It doesn't crop up on movies (except Encino Man from 1992), the news, or TV shows. Relevance of knowing where Estonia is to the American people at large is somewhere close to zero. You have to spend time and effort learning things to live your life, and I'd have to say that most people are better off learning something else.
I would question your assertion about Estonia being removed from USA. I would agree that average American can easily ignore Estonia's (and pretty much 90% of the world's nations') existence and get away with it, but that doesn't mean that it makes sense to ignore it. This kind of attitude is what gets you guys into messes like Afghanistan/Iraq/Vietnam. You guys don't jack shit about these countries and you allow your politicians to do whatever the fuck they want as long as say some BS like "Terror, WMD, Terror, Saddam Hussian, Terror, WMD, Iraq". This kind of attitude is what allowed that fucktard Reagan to get away with the creation of Al-Qaeda/bin Laden. If you want to see how Estonia plays into the bigger picture, just look at what's behind your recent failures in implementing sanctions against
LOL, have you been to Holland? Are you seriously saying that there is bigger difference between Massachusetts and Arizona than between USA and Holland. You have no clue what the fuck you are talking about.
I'd like to check out an authentic Native American reservation, hopefully one that does not include a casino...
Yadda yadda bla bla. I am fool for questioning American cultural diversity... Get the fuck out of your suburb and check out the world. Let me put it this way: compared to every other country I've been to (17 + Uzbekistan where I stayed for a day when I was like 3), USA has a pretty bland culture. For a country this size, it has very little variety and culture in general.
If you think I am wrong in my conclusion, you can go fuck yourself. Spend a fortnight in Paris and a fortnight in say LA and then tell me which experience was better. Having different kinds of immigrants in the ghetto is not culture. USA is good at something and sux for other things. It's in terms of economic opportunity and economic growth. It sux in terms of culture and partying (frats? fuk that shit! And why don't clubs stay open until at least 4am. How can a club close at 2am? Americans really need to stop Christians from enforcing social policies).
"I'm not saying that the US is the pinnacle of culture across the globe, but saying they have literally zero diversity? That's beyond ignorant, but you are obviously an idiot and a bigot, so I don't expect any less"
I though you believed that USA is one of the most culturally diverse nations on the planet?
Dude cmon, comparing California to NY? You've been living in the USA for way too long. Yeah, of course their different, but look at the scales involved. For 95% of the world population, it's the same shit. Of course, I am not saying that every part of US is identical. If you want differences, try comparing Cairo with Tallin. We'll see how different New York will feel from California.
Regarding the math vs geography thing, I think not knowing about the existence of nation (let alone actually knowing anything about it) is pretty fucking bad. I mean it's common knowledge. It's not rocket science, it's like not knowing about colonialism or communism. I am pretty sure mathematicians in Georgia wouldn't get confused between a local administrative region and a nation.
Regarding the whole Thanksgiving thing. I forgot to mention that the kid implied that I would be going back home to have Turkey with my family, which pretty stupid considering Thankgiving is more about celebrating 'Native American genocide'.
LOL, I love the comment about India being a shithole. Just shows how much you know foreign countries.
I never said that Europe is the pinnacle of human evolution. They have their own set of problems, they let racism take priority over economic interests unlike Americans who are racist but will let you work in the USA if it economically benefits. Europe has fuckloads of bad things about it. But that's not my point...
My point is that culture within the USA tends to be very similar. It's pretty much the same shit everywhere. Strip malls, ghettos and downtowns. There are very few landmarks worth visiting if you are not American. Compare the landmarks in say Washington with any major European city.
The reason why I study in the USA is because I am not a dumb asshole like you. America has a better University system and it has more economic opportunity if you are a non-citizen (compared to Europe). Unlike you, I am not some mad fanatic who gets insulted by every random thing you say about their country. Get over it man, America has no culture. All your public holidays are just consumerist rage fests, you have no real history, you have very few cool landmarks (with the exception of NY). But that doesn't mean USA is a pile of shit, what it lacks in culture it makes up for in economic competitiveness.
It's funny that you talk about genocide considering that USA was founded on the mass eradication of the Native American population.
Chill out man, nation states are a load of bullshit anyways.
You might have geographic and climatic diversity, but USA has literally zero cultural diversity. It's all the same stuff: dull suburbia, run down urban areas and rural areas. With the exception of NY (Manhattan), DC (downtown area) and a few other places, it's all the same crap. Strip malls, houses, cheap apartment, similar looking downtown areas...
In contrast, other parts of the world are much more diverse. Just take a look at India. Almost every state has it's own language/culture/history. Rajasthan is nothing like northern or southern India. Even a relatively small country like Ukraine has a quite a lot of cultural variety. From the Russian speaking east to the Ukrainian-speaking west.
So stop pretending that Americans don't check out foreign places because they have everything they need in their own country. Americans are so USA-centric because they are largely ignorant of foreign cultures/countries and they tend to be pretty cheap.
I just love when Americans (who know I am foreigner from the other side of the ocean) ask me whether I went back home for Thanksgiving, and I study in one of the top 25 universities in the USA. I can never understand how people can ace Calc IV without studying and yet they are too ignorant to know that Georgia isn't simply a state. It's nation with a 3000 year old history, no less.
Um, I guess you can treat it that way. But how you define opportunistic is irrelevant, opportunism is crucial aspect of the economy and everyone gets fucked by it. From slashdot geeks being fucked by Microsoft's opportunism (fucking standards to initiate lock in) to media companies being fucked by piracy. It's a reality of the market and repeating the sentence "being a copyright infringing, law breaking little prick" isn't going to change it. Opportunism goes both ways you know.
If the media companies don't like this, they can fuck off. Stop producing "music" and stop pursuing copyright infringement, after all that will send the right message to all copyright infringing pricks , right? It will also show how you no one is interested in making music if its not worth anything, right?
Please don't compare physical goods to IP. They are not the same thing and you can't compare the two. No matter how many times you repeat this bullshit about stealing, piracy has nothing to do with stealing. Piracy is copyright infringement, no more no less.
Learn some basic economics. People respond to incentives and people are opportunistic. If they have an opportunity to get something for free (vs paying for it), they will do it. This has nothing to do with being self righteous, it's just the way human nature works.
This has nothing to do about being moral or immoral. The digital age simply increased (by several orders of magnitude) the possibility of being opportunistic with regards to IP. You can't set the clock back and you definitely can't change human nature.
I love when MPAA bitch that they won't make movies because of the risk of piracy. If you're so concerned about, bail out of the media business. Supply and Demand will determine what happens next...
You really need to lay off the theory and try living in the real world.
Now let's pretend for a minute that 'positive liberty' is all BS. Let's pretend that the libertarian ideology on liberty is the most moral one. Let's say UN implements your Libertarian Declaration of Human Rights.
Now how will that be a step in the right direction for the freedom and safety of mankind (pretty big words for statement devoid of any arguments)? Do realize that no one will even care about this document, let alone even paying lip service to it's requirements. The vast majority of the earth couldn't give a flying fuck about your rants on positive and negative liberty. Fuck, most of them are so poor that they can't really have a debate on this issue.
Try explaining the dangers of positive liberty to an illiterate African kid. Try telling him that the government should not be building school or hospitals because that means richer people will have to pay more taxes and it increases government involvement in the individual's life. Most people don't care about your Ivory tower rants. People want education and healthcare. People don't want to see their kids dying from something stupid like malaria. People want at least baseline prosperity.
Don't get me wrong, I am not really arguing against libertarian ideology. I am just pointing out that libertarian views on positive liberty issues is a extreme view than is not shared by the majority of the population of our planet. And it doesn't matter whether they are right or wrong.
Okay, forget positive liberty issues. Let's look at social liberalism, you would think there would be more consensus on this one, right? So how are you planning to force all nations on the planet to ratify a document that would essentially legalize the vast majority of illegal drugs (if not all, I guess it depends how hardcore you are about such things, I don't know, I don't really see the point in recreational use of heroin)? Hell, we have troubles legally enforcing the current declaration because many muslim nations like making exceptions (I am beating your wife is right, no? What kind of barbarian would want to ban something like that?), I am not even talking about practical implementation of the current declaration.
The UN isn't about world peace and prosperity and promoting rights. It's about comprising and trying to find a mutually acceptable solution while at the same time trying to advance freedom/prosperity.
I don't even know why I wrote this. You're just a naive little American, with no understanding of the world around him. Your one size fits all attitude is just laughable. It's because of people like you that I don't like libertarians. Libertarians are kind of like communists in a way, flip side of the same coin.
Bad analogy, car analogies never seem to apply to computing.
While Ferrari owners might be willing to show off to the whole world, that's not how things work with computing. If you have brand new box built, you're not going to brag about it to the whole world. You only going to brag it to your tech-savvy friends. I mean what more could you expect? You'd have to be pretty stupid to brag about getting 60+ FPS with all settings set to high on the latest DX10 game to average joe.
If someone wants to make a game called First Person Rapist or First Person Child Molester it's their right. As far as I am concerned, if no one was actually abused/hurt due to the production of such games then it's none of your business to decided what people can and can't do.
It's ridiculous to say shit like "oh five people got hurt because of X!" How many people died due to Christianity? Perhaps we should ban Christianity?
Oh yes, let's construct a series of ridiculous straw-man arguments and claim I'm an idiot for believeing them. How insightful. Atrocious working conditions were dealt with through unions and legislation. I don't see a direct relationship between that and an income tax.
Unions during the Gilded Age? WTF? Do you even know what you're talking about or are you just taking shit out of the blue. I mentioned standards of living, so you come up with Unions. Learn some history, unions where a non-issue at that point, employers did not tolerate unions and the government was more than happy to even use the military to destroy unionization attempts.
To try to prove your point about small government you used a stupid example that did nothing to prove your point. Once confronted, you come with unions right out of the blue. It just sounds like you don't know what your talking about. The "[the Gilded Age] sounds good to me" comment is what I am aiming at. Your "No income tax, no military-industrial complex = good times" theorem is gross generalization that makes you look stupid. If you want to argue about the benefits of a nano-government, you're going to have to do better.
I am going to ask you to articulate your point again. As I understand, your comment on no social security implies that a small government is less restrictive in that it doesn't take your money away in form of taxes. Thus in effect you get more liberty.
No how is an argument like that related to the American government at the turn of the century? Do you know anything about that time period? Do you realize that for the vast majority of the population the income tax was a non-issue? The vast majority of the population was so dirt poor that there would be no liberation effect from not having to pay income taxes. The implications of having an income tax during that period where completely different then what they are now. If if a president wanted to repeal the income tax, it be stupid to just do it. How are you going to pay for existing social security requirements, government bonds, how would the repealing of the income tax affect the global economy and trade. The current structure of the world's economy might mean that in the end you might have less money than you initially with the income tax in place. Stop thinking in such a simplistic manner.
The US military was rather small in the 1800's up until the Civil War... look at the Mexican-American war, where the US army had a few thousand soldiers (still sufficient for us to take Mexico City). The military and supporting industry expanded tremendously in the 20th century.
Thank you for stating a fact! Now how does this prove your theory that the military industrial-complex is solely a product of a large government. Have you considered why it expanded in the 20th century? Have you heard of communism? The cold war? WW1 and WW2? You think a nano-government would continue to pursue a isolationist policy with Hitler on the verge of destroying one of America's most crucial markets (let alone Hitler's dislike of international trade and pursuit of self sufficiency)? You think a nano-goverment would ignore communism, something that aims to destroy the American economic system? What about the rise imperialist policy? And you still haven't addressed technology. You do understand that the expenses involved in maintaining a few thousands soldiers on horseback differs developing a stealth fighter? The whole social fabric of America would contribute to the creation of the military-industrial complex. Americans are hawkish when it comes to military and nano-government won't change that. Just look at so called pro-small government presidents, Reagan was cheap on spending money on the poor, but he had no issues with spending stupid amounts of cash on the military.
Once upon a time, even cocaine was legal in this country. I'm not saying that's necessarily a good idea, mind you. My problem with
While you might perceive Russia's foreign policy to be product of economic and social necessities of developing democracy, this obviously not the case. While the ideology of communism had become defunct, Russia has not been capable of developing institutions such as an independent judiciary, multi-party elections (not just United Russia vs pro-government party B) and a civil society. Just changing economic systems isn't good enough, society itself has drop the Soviet/Nationalist mentality. The fact that Putin considers the government sponsored assault on the Estonian Embassy an element of civil society just shows how he doesn't really care about a real civil society or human rights.
;-)"
You really don't access a lot of Western media sources if you think that Western media ignored the whole memorial scandal. Just read Google News from time to time. Even if CNN didn't mention it (which I highly doubt is this case) that doesn't mean the West ignored the whole incident, what did you want them to do, condemn Estonia for managing its own affairs and not listening to Russia? USSR is dead, Russians in Estonia need to learn that they are in a foreign country and they have to abide by Estonian laws. If they don't like, they can always come back to Russia, Putin definitely prefers Russian to immigrate back home as opposed to non-Russian immigration.
"And of course Russia is destined to protect her compatriots even if they reside in that country or somewhere else."
BS, the whole issue is highly political. It's not about her compatriots suffering, it's about them suffering in country like Estonia. You never hear bout Russians suffering in Turkmenistan. So it's okay to abuse Russians as long as the party in question is friendly towards Russia? I don't get your logic. The whole monument thing was a huge farce, Putin and Co couldn't care less about the fallen soldiers, just watch they way they clear monument in Russia itself to make way for highways.
"Much the same goes with Georgia and Poland. Russia doesn't profit from importing rotten re-exported meat, cheep wine and other stuff like that."
Please, the whole thing was obviously political. Georgian and Polish products might not be that good by Western standards, but this is Russia we are talking about, the kind of shit they sell in some places is just beyond. You're not seriously saying that banning Georgian/Polish products was simply an economic/health policy. It was obviously political, punish Georgia for moving towards the West.
"As for your attitude to the language issue then, try to suggest forbidding French (or English) in Canada and see the result
Your comparing French Canada to Estonia? Significant French presence in Canada dates back to the 17th century. The British gave Quebec independence during the American war from independence. Compare that to Estonia which has been under Russian occupation for around 50 years but still maintains a majority Estonian population (what did you say about ignoring the minority for the better good of the majority - the Estonians should apply Russia's policy towards homosexuals towards the Russians in Estonia).
"Things are developing gradually. For that development Russia needs Peace, that is why it will suppress any violence within and will try to maintain peace abroad."
You think the Chechen people don't need peace and economic development? What makes you think that Russia has the right to decide what's right for Chechnya? The Chechens obviously don't want to be part of Russia, they've been fighting you guys for the better part of the last 200 years. Why not let them go? Why assassinate the few Chechen separatists that are moderate? Why hold their families hostage? Why associate with scum like Ramzan? Russians obviously don't care about Chechens, they are fine with them being abused at all levels. So why should Chechens care about whether Russia needs stability or not?
"That's why from now on neither the USA, nor other countries will get a free hand or a
Your an idiot if you think that US at the turn of the century was a good place to live for the average American.
The reality is much more complex than "before income tax and large government everything was good!" The lack of social security was the least of the problems of the average American. Thing like complete lack job security and atrocious working conditions where a much larger concern.
I would question your assumption that the lack of military-industrial complex did not exist (as it does in its current form) because of the smaller government. Technological development are core aspect of the military industrial complex. At the turn of the century, military technology was a joke, now we are entering an era where remote controlled aircraft/droids are nothing new. Secondly, the US was much more isolationist pre-1900 than it is now. Bring imperialism into the equation and now there is a market for the military industrial complex.
You think there would be no war on drugs with limited government? Please, drugs are an easy target for politicians and the dominance of social conservatism in American society would mean that vast majority of states would continue to prosecute drug use. The whole anti-drug thing is less to do with a government having socialist traits (just look at Europe, they have some of the most liberal drug laws/attitudes towards drug use on the planet) and more to do with social conservatism. With less government you might have had a few states that would legalize marijuana/LSD/psilocybe sooner, but you would also have like 20 states where they would continue to give people 15/20 years for something as stupid as a joint. You can't really take the population attitude towards drugs seriously when LSD and marijuana are schedule I, but cocaine is schedule II. Vast majority of people don't know shit about drugs and it is easy to convince them that drugs along with homosexual are the root of all evil.
You're really naive if you think that the war of terror is simply product of an expanded bureaucracy. The war on terror is a technique used by the elite to achieve its aims. They took current geopolitical developments and exploited them to their own advantage using techniques applicable to modern day American society. They might not have had a "war on X" during the Gilded Age, but they didn't need to, they didn't have to sell a certain policy, they just straight up did what the influential people of the time wanted them to do. In principle, the war on terror is just another manipulation technique and all governments do this kind of shit, from socialist governments in Europe to the nano-government that you advocate.
Occasional crimes? Racism is institutionalized in Russian institutions. Why does every single cop call me a 'Hohol'? He is supposed to be respectful for wasting my time. And this is just the tip of the iceberg, lets not start about arson in dorms full of foreigners. And ignoring skin head organization. These issues really don't seem too important to you. Try talking to some non-white expats (although white expats get their own share of Russian xenophobia).
I have to say that your perception on Estonia's actions is result of Russian FUD.
What's wrong with requiring knowledge of Estonian to get a job? It's their country, they want their language back. If you live in a foreign country, you need to know the language to get a job, that sounds fair. Certainly fairer than Russia's policy of issuing job permits. It is not viable for me to get an official part time job in Russia, even though I speak perfect Russian. The actual documents costs something like $500, that would be waste considering I need part time job for the summer before University starts.
Your comment about the SS is full of shit, unlike Moscow, Nazi organizations aren't really an issue in Talin. You won't get beat of for being black and walking in the wrong neighborhood. And police will never bother you, especially if you are tourist (this includes Russian tourists). In general, this kind of attitude undermines what little validity there is your argument. You are obviously bullshitting about the SS revival.
Russians need to realize the Estonia is not part of Russia, the USSR is over. They want their language and country back, don't like it, go back to Russia. Russia certainly has no problems with this kind of attitude with regards to kicking out Georgian nationals and job permits. Although I come from the Russian-speaking part of Ukraine and my Ukrainian is almost non-existant, I think it's stupid that children in Lugansk are taught Russian. Why? We are Ukrainian not Russian! And I am not even very nationalistic, I simply have Ukrainian passport by the virtue of my mother being Ukrainian, my father is from A different continent and it looks like my permanent home is going to be in the US.
P.S. US is great in some ways, like the way their institutions interact and their adherence to basic civil liberties, but on the social front the US has a lot of catching up to do. Homosexuals can't even get civil-unions let alone marriages. Marijuana consumption is prosecuted in an an reasonable manner. Theres seem to be very little checks and balances with regards to corporate activity, but I guess that's required to remain competitive in a globalized world.
If it's a community building game, why does it include the name Simcity? There is certain core aspect of the gamplay that makes any given simcity game a simcity game. EA are just leaching of Simcity's branding in order to make a mediocre game that is more accessible to the average gamer. If it's not a simcity game, don't call it simcity societies, call it "Urban Socities" or SimSociety. I wish EA never bought Maxis, before the purchase they where much more willing to make interesting new games. I still play SimTower from time to time, too bad nowadays all you see is "Simcity Lite" and Sims X + Expansion Packs. Though hopefully Spore will prove me wrong.
Though I guess that's the way everything is supposed to be, EA's approach is much more financially successful judging from the state Maxis was in before the purchase. Too bad that EA's approach leads to shitty spinoffs, cough C&C Generals cough.
I can't believe Will Wright let EA do this, Simcity was his masterpiece, his claim to fame. I guess he got bored of the city building thing and he prefers to work on Sims expansion packs nowadays.
Bla Bla Bla, saying "You've got it all wrong!" doesn't add anything to your argument. What has culture got to do with this argument? Or are you justifying attacks on foreigners as method of preserving Russians culture?
f c5f-01e8-4cfb-b621-ffcafc9c9343.html
Ad hominem attacks also don't add to your argument, on the contrary they underline that you've lost this argument. Of course life is more complex than my quick post. You're a random person on slashdot talking some BS, I am not going to go into a lengthy analysis with links to relevant sources. As far as I am concerned, you're not worth it.
Losing 20 million people doesn't stop the government from institutionalizing racism and ignoring neo-Nazi organizations. What was it that the chief of the Moscow police said? There are no skinheads in Moscow? This is Russia for you:
http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2004/02/01af
The people who gave their lives fighting Nazi Germany would be really proud of modern Russia.
I am only technically quarter Russian, luckily I have a Ukrainian passport. :) I don't know if I would be able to tolerate being a citizen of Nazi Russia.
Merciless terrorists? Are you talking about the Russian army and Ramzan Kadyrov (who is a former rebel himself, no less)? So when you supporting Russia, you stop being a merciless terrorist? I like the way that works. Is institutionalized kidnappings by the Russian army normal? Do you even know whats going in Chechnya? Ramzan Kadyrov is like a warlord. Don't agree with him, vote for Yabloka, you get beat up or better yet, you disappear in Kadyrov private palace to never be seen again.
You think Nord Ost and Beslan where just random acts? You think people do this kind of shit just for fun? Bah, Russians are as much to blame for those events as the Chechen separatists. I'd like to see how you would react when your parents are abducted by the Russian military and you never see them again. Nord Ost and Beslan will happen again because the vast majority of Russians are racists assholes who are willing to let the Russian forces slaughter Chechens as long as they can masturbate to Putin saying "how great Russia is and how they will point their missiles against Europe." I always feel bad for the few Russians who try to bring true democracy to Russia, they were prosecuted under the Soviet regime and they continue to be prosecuted now.