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
  #1  
Old 03-31-2017, 07:01 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,482
Thanks: 304
Thanks 590
Default The Answer Is More Teddy Bears


London once again experienced a terrorists attack. As with Brussels, the thing to do is hang teddy bears on the utility poles and change your Facebook banner to a rainbow "Stand with London".

Because that stops the rabid Saracens in their tracks.

__________________
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
  #2  
Old 03-31-2017, 07:50 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default The Answer Is More Teddy Bears

That wasn't a terrorist attack
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to brianpatrick For This Useful Post:
flyingtart (04-01-2017)
  #3  
Old 03-31-2017, 07:58 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default

The ISIS show is in its 8th season and the ratings are dropping.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-01-2017, 11:23 AM
Nick Pierce (Online)
Samuel Johnson, obviously!
Official Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,435
Thanks: 1,919
Thanks 1,219
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
That wasn't a terrorist attack

Can't speak for others but vehicle plowin' through people, driver exiting and plunging knife into a guy ... kinda thinkin' I would be afeared.
__________________
Through the smoke and fog there comes a form ... shape shifting ... could this be the Future?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-01-2017, 11:32 AM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default

Originally Posted by Nick Pierce View Post
Can't speak for others but vehicle plowin' through people, driver exiting and plunging knife into a guy ... kinda thinkin' I would be afeared.


Sure, but calling it a terrorist attack, noting all the rhetoric and implication that goes with that word these days, is disingenuous. The guy was an unstable drug dealer who committed a crime. And he got his ass shot for it.

That's different than a planned attack by a foreign entity.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-01-2017, 01:48 PM
flyingtart's Avatar
flyingtart (Offline)
Word Wizard
Official Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 716
Thanks: 109
Thanks 141
Default

The real terrorists are the meeja, whipping up hysteria to justify more restrictions on civil liberties.
__________________
I am not young enough to know everything.
Oscar Wilde
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-01-2017, 02:58 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default

Originally Posted by flyingtart View Post
The real terrorists are the meeja, whipping up hysteria to justify more restrictions on civil liberties.


To be fair, I think they are whipping up hysteria to get more viewers.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-01-2017, 04:00 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 869
Thanks: 151
Thanks 169
Default

Of course. The "media" doesn't care one way or the other about the restriction of civil liberties -- beyond making it into another story.

Here, it's all about conservative politicians whipping up hysteria to pander to their supporters. The day after this London attack, you could practically hear the glee in the voices of conservative talk show hosts and TV commentators trying to use the attack as justification for Trump's idiotic travel ban from the 7 Muslim countries -- never mind that this guy was native born...

Last edited by Myers; 04-01-2017 at 05:28 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Myers For This Useful Post:
PickleBottom (04-02-2017)
  #9  
Old 04-01-2017, 05:55 PM
moonpunter's Avatar
moonpunter (Offline)
Dedicated Writer
Official Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Midway, Iowa
Posts: 236
Thanks: 13
Thanks 43
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
To be fair, I think they are whipping up hysteria to get more viewers.
Can't it be both? They aren't mutually exclusive.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-01-2017, 06:56 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default

Originally Posted by moonpunter View Post
Can't it be both? They aren't mutually exclusive.


Yeah, maybe the Illuminati really DO control the media😀
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-01-2017, 07:38 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default

There is just a much simpler explanation for why the 'business' of the media does what it does. The business puts consumers in front of advertisements.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-01-2017, 08:28 PM
moonpunter's Avatar
moonpunter (Offline)
Dedicated Writer
Official Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Midway, Iowa
Posts: 236
Thanks: 13
Thanks 43
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
Yeah, maybe the Illuminati really DO control the media��
If by Illuminati you mean Rupert Murdoch, this century's William Randolph Hearst.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-02-2017, 04:30 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 869
Thanks: 151
Thanks 169
Default

The "media" is not some homogeneous thing.

In the U.S. anyway, the various outlets pander to different viewers across the political spectrum -- mostly for the reason brianpatrick said -- to increase ratings and bring in advertising dollars.

When it comes to terrorists attacks, FOX tends to do it an way that exaggerates the dangers of Islam, the more liberally biased outlets like CNBC and CNN tend to downplay that angle. The core elements of the story are essentially the same, but they editorialize it differently. It's the same with talk radio and the print and online media outlets.

The only thing that happens across the board is the repetition and how these events dominate the news. Some of it's justified, but a lot if has to do with milking it for everything they can to increase ratings.

A possible side effect of any resulting hysteria is that politicians will use it to infringe on civil liberties in the interest of "keeping us safe" -- but that's not the media's objective. How would they benefit? They're all about the money.

Other than that, the media doesn't have a singular agenda or bias, and it's kind of silly to talk about it that way.

Last edited by Myers; 04-02-2017 at 04:47 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-02-2017, 09:33 PM
PickleBottom's Avatar
PickleBottom (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,866
Thanks: 1,161
Thanks 356
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Of course. The "media" doesn't care one way or the other about the restriction of civil liberties -- beyond making it into another story.

Here, it's all about conservative politicians whipping up hysteria to pander to their supporters. The day after this London attack, you could practically hear the glee in the voices of conservative talk show hosts and TV commentators trying to use the attack as justification for Trump's idiotic travel ban from the 7 Muslim countries -- never mind that this guy was native born...
Yep, it is kinda queer that the people in power are only being elected due to terrorist activities, that is, terrorism sustains their grasp on power... we are starting to go back to the health-a-majig question...
__________________
If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas
-George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-14-2017, 11:38 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,514
Thanks: 195
Thanks 660
Default

Hysteria, and those who get really emotional about buzz words aside... it doesn't matter if someone is homegrown, foreign, a low life drifter acting alone, or a professional officially representing a group. All that matters is that an act of violence is committed, specifically against civilians, in order to advance a political agenda.

Question is, what is the political agenda? Personally I barely know.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-14-2017, 03:20 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
Hysteria, and those who get really emotional about buzz words aside... it doesn't matter if someone is homegrown, foreign, a low life drifter acting alone, or a professional officially representing a group. All that matters is that an act of violence is committed, specifically against civilians, in order to advance a political agenda.



Question is, what is the political agenda? Personally I barely know.


Hmm... I think it does matter who the person that commits the act is. Yeah, yeah, in a general way, we all know that violence is bad, but if we want to further progress in solving or reducing such incidents, the problem needs to be broken down and analyzed—something I think the legal and professional intelligence communities do pretty well, even while the media is busy recruiting viewers to advance their bottom line.

It's never going to be a utopia. There are just some people who are mentally unstable, and they can be manipulated by others with a political agenda, or can self-radicalize and act on there own. I don't think we can ever really stop these people. We can improve mental health services and try to reduce the numbers that slip through the cracks, but I don't think it can ever be completely solved. There will always be crazy people.

But financially motivated professionals, paid to do a job in the name of a political agenda are not crazy. Psychopaths without remorse or empathy for others, will take money to do terrible things, and afterwards feel little or nothing. These people can't always be stopped either. They have always been, and always will be. The most we can do is recognize the fact and deal with the aftermath. Law enforcement does a pretty good job of that. What else can it do? Catch the bad guys after the act, and punish them.

Now, the political backdrops and motivations we can control to some extent, but there will always be people unhappy with their position in life and circumstance. The US and the west in general are actively trying to create democracies across the world. They think it will be better for business, and it will. Factions in the East (including Russia and China) push for a more totalitarian model. Both are the same in the end. They both accomplish a goal that if reached will work to their exclusive advantage, but neither will work for everybody.

There is enough wealth in the world to feed, house, clothe, and keep secure every person on the planet. And until we do this as a whole, the slaughter, the fighting, the inequity, the chaos and mayhem will continue.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to brianpatrick For This Useful Post:
Grace Gabriel (04-21-2017)
  #17  
Old 04-20-2017, 08:52 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,482
Thanks: 304
Thanks 590
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Of course. The "media" doesn't care one way or the other about the restriction of civil liberties -- beyond making it into another story.

Here, it's all about conservative politicians whipping up hysteria to pander to their supporters. The day after this London attack, you could practically hear the glee in the voices of conservative talk show hosts and TV commentators trying to use the attack as justification for Trump's idiotic travel ban from the 7 Muslim countries -- never mind that this guy was native born...
Banning refugees in general at this time and 7 Muslim countries in specific is a good idea.

Civil liberties are broadened and loosely defined. I'm agreeing more and more with Christopher Ferrara's understanding of Liberty....
__________________
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
  #18  
Old 04-21-2017, 05:39 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 869
Thanks: 151
Thanks 169
Default

I'm not buying it. Trump mentioned a Muslim ban during the campaign -- all his supporters cheered -- and now this 6 country ban is as close as he could get to it.

As you know, it doesn't include the countries where most of the terrorists come from -- including Saudi Arabia -- the biggest exporter of radical Islamic ideology and propaganda materials.

Plus, we already have a rigorous 18-24 months screening process for refugees. Trump claimed he was going to make it better -- well OK -- he's had plenty of time to do it now, but we haven't heard a thing about it. Surely, he's put the very best and brightest on it -- so what's taking so long?

So it's all over conservative talk radio this morning -- pointing at this latest attack in Paris -- and saying "Trump told you so!"

The thing is, our immigration and refugee policies and processes are NOTHING like you see in Europe -- where some countries practically had open border policies. No one here has proposed anything like that. What we have done is increase limits somewhat as dictated by world events. So it's apples and oranges.

All this tells me the ban is politically motivated -- and obviously, a lot of people are falling for it.

Last edited by Myers; 04-21-2017 at 05:58 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-21-2017, 06:17 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,514
Thanks: 195
Thanks 660
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
There is enough wealth in the world to feed, house, clothe, and keep secure every person on the planet. And until we do this as a whole, the slaughter, the fighting, the inequity, the chaos and mayhem will continue.
I don't honestly think that humans are capable of acting with this level of cohesion. But if we go to unicorn land again it would be an incredible feat of homogeneity and uniformity within politics. And this perfect centre which was able to allocate resources in accordance with everyone's basic needs would be far and above the most powerful centre in the world. And therefore inhabited by... yes you guessed it... nutters.

Personally I'd rather power was diffuse, and accept all the chaos which comes with it... I mean at least it's interesting. It's why the main protagonists in Brave New World and 1984 are so romanced by the Proles and the Savages.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-22-2017, 05:58 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
I don't honestly think that humans are capable of acting with this level of cohesion.

Have you ever noticed that the vast majority of people you meet and interact with on a daily basis are fairly reasonable and can be got on with despite their differing views on religion, or politics, or lifestyle? I'm talking like a high 90%. Probably closer to 99%.

And yet, the world is a divided and messy, fucked-up shit hole of war, greed, chaos and disruption.

Is that because people as a whole are not capable of peaceful coexistence?

Or is it because we live in a series of fucked-up systems designed (or maybe a better word is driven) by a few psychopaths who tend to gravitate towards the top? Yeah, nutters I guess.

I'm not saying we will fix this anytime soon, but I do believe it's possible to fix eventually. Top-down power and control is more a sign of psychopathic behavior. Diffuse or loosely divided government is more natural to most of us.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-22-2017, 05:58 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default

http://www.pathocracy.net/
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-24-2017, 01:44 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,514
Thanks: 195
Thanks 660
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
Have you ever noticed that the vast majority of people you meet and interact with on a daily basis are fairly reasonable and can be got on with despite their differing views on religion, or politics, or lifestyle? I'm talking like a high 90%. Probably closer to 99%.

And yet, the world is a divided and messy, fucked-up shit hole of war, greed, chaos and disruption.

Is that because people as a whole are not capable of peaceful coexistence?
Oh yeah the first statement really invalidates the second. Most people peacefully cohabit, which is an incredible feat of cohesion in itself. Given this perspective the world isn't really a fucked up war torn shit hole.

But on the food clothing and shelter thing. It is basically a Marxist argument which goes like this 'Criminals aren't criminals because they're genetically wired that way, or because they think that robbing and scamming is cool. Crime is concentrated within the lower strata of society as a consequence of deprivation. Therefore should these people be provided for, then crime and anti-social behaviour would diminish'.

Pretty much stands to reason. Although what I would say is inequality doesn't necessarily relate to food, clothing and shelter. Everyone could be technically housed and have all the basics required for survival, but when that meagre existence bumps up against the conspicuous extravagance of the rich the agitation between the haves and the have nots still yields negative effects. The poor of the West might be the global middle class, but they will still rob you at gun point.

For me, without some system which successfully redistributes resources inequality will always be a fact of life. Redistribution could technically work, like you say there is way more than enough to provide for everyone. So again Marx will say 'we're producing more than enough resources -- to sell on the market -- and these just need to be allocated according to everyone's needs'. And therein lies the problem, the 'management' of resources, we're really bad at that.

The main reason for this is that it's simply too much power not to be abused and mishandled. Governments should be treated as irresponsible crackheads and kept away from sharp implements. An extreme example is Mao's great idea to stop producing crops in favour of steal... everyone starves. This is what I mean about cohesion, technically we could globally redistribute so that everyone is provided for, but in practice no group is really that smart, incorruptible or altruistic.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-24-2017, 02:59 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Online)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,185
Thanks: 287
Thanks 687
Default

Maybe the coming technological singularity will provide some answers beyond the capabilities of Marx. Anyway, I remain an optimist.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-26-2017, 12:49 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,514
Thanks: 195
Thanks 660
Default

I don't think there's really a way of getting 'round the basics of the economy. Either it's centralised and controlled, or it's free, or it's mixed. Right now it's mixed, some people want to nationalise everything, and some people think the government should either have no business in the economy or shouldn't exist at all.

I'm in the latter camp, but I've been in all the aforementioned ones too. If the government doesn't exist, then all these invasions become very difficult. Who's going to invest in a business plan which projects costs of 1.5 trillion and has no real plan as to how that money might be made back? Business simply doesn't work like that, for it to be in any way viable you've got to forcibly extract the cash.

So no crazy unpopular wars... but there would be inequality, and all those government safety nets and various other state programmes would have to be replaced with charity and patronism etc. Someone once said that in a perfect world tax would be voluntary and people laughed. But all that means is you pay towards something which is in your best interest. Some organisation will come along and offer to collect you bins, maybe build your roads, maybe supply your gas and electricity for a monthly fee, you'll voluntarily pay it.

If that same organisation starts selling arms to radical mercenaries in far off lands... you cancel your subscription, giving the bin collectors a monetary incentive to behave. I'm not sure what incentive governments have to behave, the supposed threat of the office changing hands doesn't seem to be working
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-26-2017, 12:50 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,514
Thanks: 195
Thanks 660
Default

Also WB looks less fucked, is this right?
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-26-2017, 06:46 AM
moonpunter's Avatar
moonpunter (Offline)
Dedicated Writer
Official Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Midway, Iowa
Posts: 236
Thanks: 13
Thanks 43
Default

If there's no government who's going to pave the roads or patrol the streets for burglars etc? Farming all that to private business would cost you more.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-26-2017, 07:30 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,514
Thanks: 195
Thanks 660
Default

Maybe, maybe not. We don't really know because we're so used to everyone being taxed to fuck we can't really fathom a world without it. Remember we don't just get taxed, every business does as well. Everyone ends up paying 30 - 50% of their income. If that is reclaimed then operating as a business is a lot easier, you can bring down your margins, charge less. If you don't, someone will undercut you and you'll have to compete.

Really to answer your question... someone. Someone will build the roads, and if they need investment to do so, they'll have to make it attractive and affordable.

There's probably just as much private security on the streets as police. It'll work like insurance. You sign up... if you don't call them or get burgled etc you can have a nice no claims bonus
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-26-2017, 08:47 AM
moonpunter's Avatar
moonpunter (Offline)
Dedicated Writer
Official Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Midway, Iowa
Posts: 236
Thanks: 13
Thanks 43
Default

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.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-26-2017, 10:14 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 869
Thanks: 151
Thanks 169
Default

I think you would just need to expand the "Adopt a Highway" program.

Plus, if everyone had a gun -- then who needs police? Yeeee haw!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-26-2017, 11:42 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Scribbling Master
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 869
Thanks: 151
Thanks 169
Default

Anyway -- I'm beginning to think the answer really might more teddy bears.
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 02:57 PM.

vBulletin, Copyright © 2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.