WritersBeat.com
 

Go Back   WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table

The Intellectual Table Discussions on political topics, social issues, current affairs, etc.


The Answer Is More Teddy Bears

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #91  
Old 05-09-2017, 05:18 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default


Industry self-regulation and independent testing can work -- UL is an example.

Then again, along with other testing companies, they are government approved.

Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 05-09-2017, 05:38 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,525
Thanks: 195
Thanks 667
Default

Originally Posted by moonpunter View Post
Yeah, right. Lol
Not an argument.

What would be the alternative if there wasn't a government, just no food standards? It would be absurd and make no sense.

If I have a supermarket I'm going to want to quality assure my suppliers one way or another. Scandals like Mad Cow cost industries billions, there is a HUGE market incentive to stop it from happening.

And the agencies will have a huge profit motive to make their membership an industry standard. For suppliers who don't conform and don't subject themselves to basic quality assurance checks they will struggle to find buyers who trust them.

As for the subpar standards of the past before the supposed effectiveness of government oversight, we did a lot of silly things in the past, processes improve organically that's indubitable. Is it just because of government that we don't publicly burn bags of cats anymore?

Aside from that shit happens. We all take our chances. Our governments have been running around the globe creating mayhem for centuries. I literally can't think of worse people to do business with, which is why it has to be compulsory. There's an Anarcho-Capitalist maxim, 'good ideas don't require force', for every government function which is in people's interest it will find expression in society without the need for taxation. And whenever the people act against their best interests, they'll have to own their shit, at least we won't be saying 'the government made us do it'.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 05-09-2017, 06:04 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,522
Thanks: 307
Thanks 597
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
In some respects, much as I don't like the idea or some of its more nefarious implications, globalism is the most promising idea out there.
Globalism in the sense of global governance is a terrible, horrifying idea. Making the people in charge further and further away, and reducing what little effect you can have is just bad thinking.

If you want to ex pat, then it really ruins the why of it. Or you can in-patriate yourself, and go with a hardened version of the Anabaptist sects or a hardened Benedict Option.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 05-09-2017, 09:41 AM
moonpunter's Avatar
moonpunter (Offline)
Profusive Denizen
Official Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 267
Thanks: 15
Thanks 43
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Not an argument.

What would be the alternative if there wasn't a government, just no food standards? It would be absurd and make no sense.

If I have a supermarket I'm going to want to quality assure my suppliers one way or another. Scandals like Mad Cow cost industries billions, there is a HUGE market incentive to stop it from happening.

And the agencies will have a huge profit motive to make their membership an industry standard. For suppliers who don't conform and don't subject themselves to basic quality assurance checks they will struggle to find buyers who trust them.

As for the subpar standards of the past before the supposed effectiveness of government oversight, we did a lot of silly things in the past, processes improve organically that's indubitable. Is it just because of government that we don't publicly burn bags of cats anymore?

Aside from that shit happens. We all take our chances. Our governments have been running around the globe creating mayhem for centuries. I literally can't think of worse people to do business with, which is why it has to be compulsory. There's an Anarcho-Capitalist maxim, 'good ideas don't require force', for every government function which is in people's interest it will find expression in society without the need for taxation. And whenever the people act against their best interests, they'll have to own their shit, at least we won't be saying 'the government made us do it'.
It would be a lot easier to fix what we have now than tear it all down and hope "someone" picks up the slack. Your whole argument is a lot of silly hypotheticals flying in the face of millennia of history.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 05-09-2017, 11:57 PM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,525
Thanks: 195
Thanks 667
Default

Originally Posted by moonpunter View Post
It would be a lot easier to fix what we have now than tear it all down and hope "someone" picks up the slack. Your whole argument is a lot of silly hypotheticals flying in the face of millennia of history.
Not tear anything down really. Just change the way people think.

Once people stop believing that paying tax is a moral duty, that the government is here to protect us, and start believing that we are a bunch of intelligent ingenuous motherfuckers who can work it out without them, and that the non-initiation of force must be held as a primary, then things will change through iteration. People will then focus on diminishing government control rather than crying out for it which is the current paradigm.

Definitely not in our lifetime, some then think it a pointless conversation. I don't really think like that. Monarchy and slavery persisted since the beginning of recorded history and both are more or less finished -- ultimately because something which used to be considered morally acceptable is now not so.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 05-10-2017, 02:46 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

Monarchies were replaced by other forms of government. Slavery was abolished by governments. At one point, people were essentially forced to change how they thought about things that we now readily accept.

It's not an entirely pointless conversation. There will always be things that could be better performed by private entities. But when you keep pushing it to the extremes, it just becomes absurd.

P.S. And I don't think that "we" are "intelligent ingenuous motherfuckers." I think that there are "intelligent ingenuous motherfuckers" among us -- or maybe just cunning, ingenious motherfuckers, and some small percentage of them, probably with sociopathic tendencies, want to be in charge -- and they will find a way to do it, by force if necessary...

Last edited by Myers; 05-10-2017 at 04:18 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 05-10-2017, 10:07 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,522
Thanks: 307
Thanks 597
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Monarchies were replaced by other forms of government. Slavery was abolished by governments. At one point, people were essentially forced to change how they thought about things that we now readily accept.

It's not an entirely pointless conversation. There will always be things that could be better performed by private entities. But when you keep pushing it to the extremes, it just becomes absurd.

P.S. And I don't think that "we" are "intelligent ingenuous motherfuckers." I think that there are "intelligent ingenuous motherfuckers" among us -- or maybe just cunning, ingenious motherfuckers, and some small percentage of them, probably with sociopathic tendencies, want to be in charge -- and they will find a way to do it, by force if necessary...
The more I examine elected officials, Especially those elected to spots in FedGov the more I am convinced that they are average intellects that are really good at "The Calculus Of Me".

the worst of these are often essentially gigolos. (gigolos, not juggalos) Among these are John Kerry, John McCain, and Paul Ryan.

If I work off "the good man" judgment (and I'll throw in elected chicks, too) I can only think of maybe 5-10 out of 435 elected members of the House, 100 Senators and the President/Vice President.

So does this leave me at BTMFD as a political theory? I have a South African Ex Pat friend warns me that 99% of anyone anywhere are not ready and really suffer in a BTMFD scenario. But I wonder if a reset of some sort is on the horizon. I'm 50-50 on that.

As for the question of anarchy - that is very dependent on the people, their ethics and culture. Some can live in harmony, at least temporarily without people telling them what to do. Others follow the Three Meals rule. I can point out the how different locals, (that were geographically close) reacted different to an anarchy situation in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Some communities along the Gulf in Mississippi, parts of Louisiana and Gulf Coast Texas were hit hard and still worked things out for themselves peacefully. Some of these areas were hit as hard as New Orleans, but the meltdown in New Orleans is what people remember about Hurricane Katrina.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 05-10-2017, 11:20 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

But I wasn't talking about your average politician -- rather people who come to power in times of crisis or transition.

That could be anyone from George Washington to Roosevelt -- Hitler to Mao.

And the same would likely hold true on a smaller scale, depending on circumstances.

It's not about people who manage to carve out a place for themselves or excel within an existing power structure. I agree -- that doesn't necessarily take much intelligence or savvy. Sometimes it's just about having the right people behind you.

Last edited by Myers; 05-10-2017 at 01:37 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 05-10-2017, 01:48 PM
moonpunter's Avatar
moonpunter (Offline)
Profusive Denizen
Official Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 267
Thanks: 15
Thanks 43
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Not tear anything down really. Just change the way people think.

Once people stop believing that paying tax is a moral duty, that the government is here to protect us, and start believing that we are a bunch of intelligent ingenuous motherfuckers who can work it out without them, and that the non-initiation of force must be held as a primary, then things will change through iteration. People will then focus on diminishing government control rather than crying out for it which is the current paradigm.
Lol guess you never watched a Trump rally. 😂
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 05-10-2017, 04:58 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

Even internet communists can give you a remotely plausible chain of events that lead up to their version of pure communism, or whatever. Revolution, dictatorship of the proletariat, etc. etc.

With anarcho-capitalists, it's always something like, well, someday everyone will see how this can all work...

Last edited by Myers; 05-10-2017 at 05:01 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 05-10-2017, 08:26 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,311
Thanks: 306
Thanks 709
Default

Originally Posted by moonpunter View Post
Lol guess you never watched a Trump rally. 😂


Yeah. A few of us could work it out for ourselves with others. The rest are below 100 IQ, and would rather follow like sheep than make their own decisions.

Maybe we should kill the dumb people this time, at the start of the revolution, instead of the intellectuals?
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 05-11-2017, 12:53 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,525
Thanks: 195
Thanks 667
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Monarchies were replaced by other forms of government. Slavery was abolished by governments. At one point, people were essentially forced to change how they thought about things that we now readily accept.

It's not an entirely pointless conversation. There will always be things that could be better performed by private entities. But when you keep pushing it to the extremes, it just becomes absurd.

P.S. And I don't think that "we" are "intelligent ingenuous motherfuckers." I think that there are "intelligent ingenuous motherfuckers" among us -- or maybe just cunning, ingenious motherfuckers, and some small percentage of them, probably with sociopathic tendencies, want to be in charge -- and they will find a way to do it, by force if necessary...
I don't think we can say that people were forced to end slavery. I know that sound a little strange when yes slave ships were literally hunted across the seas and those aboard arrested by government decree. But William Wilberforce 'n' co didn't have to start arguing against it. If it wasn't anything to do with consciousness and just some kind of perfect random series of political and economic events I can't see how the institution would have persisted for tens of thousands of years.

Things can only really work if the people involved support, or believe in it, either expressly or tacitly. We got rid of slavery and now it is not in any way a conscionable social norm, so no matter how much the sociopaths might want to be in charge, they couldn't enslave people because who's going to go for it? Statism would have to be in the same category, ie: something which people were so hostile towards that it simply wouldn't be possible to garner any support for it.

Brings me back to ISIS, they're running around trying to create a new state using force as we speak, but they couldn't possibly do it without a great deal of support. If there was no support for Islamic extremism, it's a no go, so yeah it is a case of changing people's minds. Funnily enough when people were arguing for the end of slavery, a whole heap of mad max style dystopian objections would ensue.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 05-11-2017, 05:04 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

I think it's probable that slavery would have died out -- eventually. But I think that in the southern U.S. at least, it would have gone on for as long as it was economically viable. The mindset that allowed for it persisted for another century. It took laws and the force of government to end it swiftly and altogether. I'm guessing if you were a slave, waiting for public opinion to shift wouldn't have seemed like a very good option.

And while governments certainly do reprehensible things, I think the vast majority of people will continue to believe that they aren't inherently immoral, so when it comes to changing minds, I don't think the comparison to slavery is a very good one.

Otherwise, I think people want to be governed and led. They will always hold out hope that in the just the right measure and with the right people, government can work and function in the their best interest.

We all know that corporations already have a huge influence over government, and that some number of politicians will continue to push for private solutions -- so you could argue that we're already headed in the direction of private entities running everything -- but when it comes to logistics and making it all work at the ground level, the devil is in the details.

If it's all about changing minds, then you need to at least put forth some kind of plausible scenario for a transition -- if it's forced or if it evolves -- and address some of the logistics of things like entirely private police forces and courts etc. -- how they function and compete and who does what or how there can even be anything beyond the veneer of impartiality when profit is the motivation. This is where things tend to remain vague in this discussion. I have a good imagination, but it's not that good.

And we're already bombarded with marketing messages and advertising. Do we really want to live in a world where we have to be sold on practically everything? Because I can't see avoiding that.

This section of road is brought to you by...

Last edited by Myers; 05-11-2017 at 05:29 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 06-04-2017, 05:58 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,522
Thanks: 307
Thanks 597
Default

Random Orthodox Muslim violence, or an attempt to sway an election?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/371733...s-dead-latest/

If the three responsible have any family in GB, they should be rounded up and shipped out.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 06-04-2017, 06:02 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,522
Thanks: 307
Thanks 597
Default

Originally Posted by moonpunter View Post
Sure "someone " will do it. And those who can afford it get police and fire service and the rest of us are up shit creek. Awesome.

The reason America has a constitution is because small government under the Articles of Confederation failed. Every state and territory was doing their own thing, which made trade problematic.

If you know anything about the time period (1787) and how The Constitution For These United States came about then you will realize that your statement is full of derp.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 06-04-2017, 06:03 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,522
Thanks: 307
Thanks 597
Default

Hey, the terrorists just might realize an election is close...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...me-within-two/
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 06-04-2017, 07:02 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post

If the three responsible have any family in GB, they should be rounded up and shipped out.
No investigation and no due process -- just expel them, no questions asked?

Wow.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 06-04-2017, 07:24 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

"Rounded up."

Some of those code words that BP talks about...

Otherwise, yeah -- we really should try to emulate the dictatorships most of these people are from.

An awesome example of the cliche -- "letting the terrorist win..."
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 06-04-2017, 07:47 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,522
Thanks: 307
Thanks 597
Default

Rounded up is not code, it was used very specifically.



Continuing on with the false premise that if we are "more understanding" that the Saracen will also reciprocate is proving to be a deadly notion.

More understanding only works if you share enough values with another that there can be a live and let live relationship. I add this to the premise that before The Enlightenment we had a better understanding in the West of Good and Evil, Right and Wrong.

Though it's not a popular concept these days, there is a better guide than "Reason".
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.

Last edited by Mohican; 06-04-2017 at 07:51 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 06-04-2017, 07:49 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

You didn't answer my question.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with being "more understanding."
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 06-04-2017, 08:00 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,522
Thanks: 307
Thanks 597
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
No investigation and no due process -- just expel them, no questions asked?

Wow.
Is the question? Does this need to be a question?

Just expel them, no questions asked.

I'm good with an older, correct notion that in 'Murrica - the BIll of Rights is for citizens, and in England that the Magna Carta was for their citizens.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 06-04-2017, 08:18 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

So you're saying a legal resident doesn't have the right to due process?

Because last time I checked, non-citizen legal residents are afforded equal protection under the law, including due process.

But you're saying a legal resident, despite any lack of evidence of illegal activity, can be deported based solely on on guilt by association.

And what's your definition of family? Immediate family, aunts, uncles, cousins, second cousins -- where does it end exactly?
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 06-04-2017, 08:22 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

I'll make it simple -- I just think if you're here legally and you haven't actually broken any laws, you shouldn't automatically be deported, just cuz.

Crazy, I know.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 06-04-2017, 08:49 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post
I add this to the premise that before The Enlightenment we had a better understanding in the West of Good and Evil, Right and Wrong.
The ideas that came out of the enlightenment are an integral part of constitution, maybe the foundation of it. John Locke anyone?

So maybe we should just toss that out and go back to dictatorial monarchies ruled by God and King, when there was no such thing as due process.

I've actually never met anyone who pines for the dark ages. Fascinating.

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post
Though it's not a popular concept these days, there is a better guide than "Reason".
I don't know -- reason works as a way to figure things out and see unintended consequences -- like what might happen if we start deporting people for nothing. Maybe you should try it sometime.

Last edited by Myers; 06-04-2017 at 09:51 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 06-04-2017, 02:24 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

Now, let me give a few fer instances --

A legal resident straps on a bomb and blows himself up in a shopping mall and kills a bunch of people.

Brother #1 lived with him in a small apartment where bomb making materials where found throughout. I'd call that evidence of prior knowledge -- at least -- and with that evidence you arrest him and charge him with a crime.

Brother #2 lives a few blocks away. Radical Islamic propaganda is found on his computer and phone records show he was in contact with his brother in the moments leading up to the bombing. There's no hard evidence to show he was directly involved, but the circumstantial evidence is shown to an immigration judge at a hearing and brother #2 is deported.

Brother #3 lives in another part of the state. A search of his home and phone records show no recent contact with his brother. Witnesses say the brothers were estranged -- partly because brother #3 had become too westernized for his own good.

Okay -- see where I'm going with this? It would be absurd to deport brother #3 simply because he was related to the bomber -- but that would be a great idea in your world, despite that it doesn't make a lick of sense.

So no, as much as you would like to make this about a pre-enlightenment sense of right and wrong or God's law or globalism or pussy liberals trying to appease Muslims -- it doesn't have anything to do with that.

Now, if your brain is operating in a fog of fear and paranoia and you've banished reason as a basis for applying a sense of justice and right and wrong -- then hell yeah -- let's "round up" and deport everyone in his family including his 95 year old grandma.

That'll learn them towel heads!

Last edited by Myers; 06-04-2017 at 10:26 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 06-04-2017, 02:57 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 968
Thanks: 172
Thanks 182
Default

By the way, I know you think that using vocabulary like "Saracen," that isn't recognizable by people who aren't familiar with medieval religious jargon is clever -- but it isn't.

So what gives you satisfaction -- the idea that someone has to google "Saracen" in order to respond?

It has the opposite effect of what you intended -- it makes you look kind of silly.

And if you believe that your particular God and your religious belief is the basis of law, you are fundamentally and intellectually no different than the proponent of radical Islam, even if you aren't chopping off anyone's head.

It all comes down to one thing -- because MY God told me so, and fuck everyone else.

Or you could look at it this way -- if you want to see what a religious belief and idealogy looks like when you skip over the enlightenment and the application of reason -- which you're saying is great thing -- then look no further than fundamentalist, radical Islam.

Last edited by Myers; 06-04-2017 at 10:20 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 06-04-2017, 03:49 PM
moonpunter's Avatar
moonpunter (Offline)
Profusive Denizen
Official Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 267
Thanks: 15
Thanks 43
Default

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post
If you know anything about the time period (1787) and how The Constitution For These United States came about then you will realize that your statement is full of derp.
Maybe you should pick up a history textbook not written by the NRA.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 06-05-2017, 01:06 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,525
Thanks: 195
Thanks 667
Default

It's hard to get a hold of the thinking behind these attacks beyond 'my life sucks and I'll do anything to give it some kind of meaning'.

Because if you're an Isis sympathiser then OK your biggest threats are Russia, and the governments of Iraq, Syria and Iran. The 'West' has historically found itself on the other side of this conflict. In any event, what does it do to support the cause for Isis, killing random people in the UK? -- what are your demands exactly?

And say you disrupt the election... so what? Are you hoping Labour get in or something? -- because then the UK will probably be less involved in the Middle East? -- OK, well that would probably be the end of Isis. Surely your only chance in hell is a Western backed deposition of Assad...

I'd love to be a fly on the wall when they're discussing these things. It is black comedy.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 06-06-2017, 02:47 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,522
Thanks: 307
Thanks 597
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
By the way, I know you think that using vocabulary like "Saracen," that isn't recognizable by people who aren't familiar with medieval religious jargon is clever -- but it isn't.

So what gives you satisfaction -- the idea that someone has to google "Saracen" in order to respond?

It has the opposite effect of what you intended -- it makes you look kind of silly.

And if you believe that your particular God and your religious belief is the basis of law, you are fundamentally and intellectually no different than the proponent of radical Islam, even if you aren't chopping off anyone's head.

It all comes down to one thing -- because MY God told me so, and fuck everyone else.

Or you could look at it this way -- if you want to see what a religious belief and idealogy looks like when you skip over the enlightenment and the application of reason -- which you're saying is great thing -- then look no further than fundamentalist, radical Islam.
Ah, Myers, let the butt hurt flow. And bless your little heart.

I didn't use Saracen to be clever. But am glad to expand your vocab, even if you don't appreciate it now.

The ideas of Locke and Hobbes might have led to the thinking behind the thirteen colonies secession, but if you look at the Constitution For These United States, especially prior to the 1st ten amendments you would see only a charter for government.

Hobbes advancement of Leviathan has created the situation that faces us now - the large unresponsive edifice of government tethered only to man.

Your modernistic pusillanimous conflation of Christianity with Islam is specious argument.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 06-06-2017, 03:02 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,522
Thanks: 307
Thanks 597
Default

Originally Posted by moonpunter View Post
Maybe you should pick up a history textbook not written by the NRA.
Quick question - without googling or otherwise looking it up, tell me how may states originally ratified the Constitution?

But onward

Your assertion is on it's face is a ridiculous statement, showing your ignorance of what I am talking about and your ignorance of how the NRA views the Constitution.

I've read widely on the subject, from the Federalist Papers to the AntiFederalists Papers, books on the How/Why/Who benefited from its creation.

There was a post secession downturn, but several sources say that the slump was close to over.

The States that sent delegates to the First Convention were sent with the idea of strengthening or amending the original Articles Of Confederation After a go around or two, the triumvirate that wrote as Publius (Madison, Hamilton, and John Jay) - and specifically Madison showed up with a "Constitution".
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Teddy Attack. (Short story) Asferthecat Fiction 11 07-14-2012 08:37 AM
The Bears lost! Get over it! Unknown_Hero Free Writing 39 01-29-2011 06:27 PM
Members' Choice Nominations - February/March Mridula Members' Choice 8 04-20-2008 03:52 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:02 AM.

vBulletin, Copyright 2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.