semantics

[SpyMoose]

do people really have natural "god given" rights, or do we just take what we want and call it a right?

does anyone think that in the US today too many people call too many things a right?

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by SpyMoose
do people really have natural "god given" rights, or do we just take what we want and call it a right?

I don't think there are god given rights, but i think there are rights that everyone are entitled to as a human being. Wait, actually i don't. People are animals, and everyone should treat everyone as such, and assert their power over them at every given oppurtunity, or else have someone else power asserted on them. The idea of human rights is an idea supported by the majority who didnt like getting picked on by the kings of england. Look where equal rights has got us... the most powerful country on earth, but at what cost? There are no values among us, we're a peasant class, every american, who didnt like getting picked on, so we used our intelligence to make it so it would never happen again, and in the process skrewed up the balance of power. WE borught the most dangerous weapons in the world into existence, to protect our freedom. We brought about processes which have corrupted generation after generation. We are the most wasteful country in the world. Why? Because our little pow wow back in the 1700's said it was our right to be. We're animals, we have no rights.

[SpyMoose]

you know all that bad stuff you mentioned i think comes more from certain people dissregarding the "rights" of other people.

you mentioned nukes, but was it our right to use them? We anialated 2 citys full of civilians with little to no military value, did we violate those peoples rights? Did they have the right to expect to be spared when our country is at war with thiers. Does a government have the right to imply that it speaks for its citizans and its will is the will of its people?

[otheadp]

i find ppl use the word "right" very loosely, without really knowing what it means. irritates the hell out of me.

[glaucon]

As it stands, I am in complete agreement with Fafnir665. To properly continue this discussion SpyMoose, we need, at the very least, a working definition of what you mean (lol, hehe.. semantics) by 'right'.

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by SpyMoose
you mentioned nukes, but was it our right to use them? We anialated 2 citys full of civilians with little to no military value, did we violate those peoples rights?

That was my point. Despite the fact that there were kings and such in the middle ages, it seemed as if there was more respect for life. There had to be, only 3 out of 15 children lived, or some rediculous amount like that. With the rise of the peasants,a nd equal "rights", all there has been is global turmoil. The US is the prime evil here. We go on "charity missions" and ignore the horrible living conditions within our own country. We blantently disregard the "rights" of countries whose method of life we don't agree with. We don't mind our own business. We're a nation of peasants who became powerful, and we're taking it out on every oppressor and threat to our "freedom". We need to get our mind out of the feed bucket and into the real world. This isn't how a sophisticated country should act. Despite the lack of technology in earliar dates, the people were sophisticated and respectful of each other. There were the few bad apples and such, but nothing like our world today, where the standard is to use as much profanity in everyday activity as possible, to insult others just to show off and be cool. I don't consider myself to be lucky to be born in this time of "miraculous achievement", i would rather have fought a lion in ancient greece.

Did they have the right to expect to be spared when our country is at war with thiers. Does a government have the right to imply that it speaks for its citizans and its will is the will of its people?

The government has the right to do as it wishes, because we the people gave it that right. It can stomp on any private citizens dreams and aspirations. Seize whatever property it wishes. Destroy any at will. All because we the people gave it the power. Now it can listen in on any conversation. Read your email. Invade your privacy to any extent. All because we're afraid of some radical group that killed a small number of civilians. We kill more civilians in one of those nuke drops. We've killed more civilians on the raid on afghanistan. We've killed more civilians in any act of war that we have perpetrated then, even one, then any other country has killed of ours. The united states has had suprisingly little civilian casualties in any conflict, save the civil war itself. All we do is kill other countries civilians. We the people, have turned into, We the massacurers.

[Redoubtable]

Originally posted by Fafnir665
I don't consider myself to be lucky to be born in this time of "miraculous achievement", i would rather have fought a lion in ancient greece.

That was ancient Rome, not Greece, comrade.

The government has the right to do as it wishes, because we the people gave it that right. It can stomp on any private citizens dreams and aspirations. Seize whatever property it wishes. Destroy any at will. All because we the people gave it the power.

I might be a fool for asking this, but are you a reincarnation of Thomas Hobbes?

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by Redoubtable
That was ancient Rome, not Greece, comrade.

I was under the impression they both had fought animals such as lions, but i was educated in an american school, please forgive my ignorance.


I might be a fool for asking this, but are you a reincarnation of Thomas Hobbes?

All mankind [is in] a perpetual and restless desire for power... that [stops] only in death. - Thomas Hobbes

I had not known about this man until you mentioned him, but i believe that had he been alive in this era, I would very much like to meet him. I agree with his ideas, people were meant to be ruled, they can not be trusted to govern themselves. Man is not infallible. The one thing the united states is, is a group of petty, squabling, greedy individuals, out to seek power over all for their own betterment. The united states is a long standing peasant revolt, which will not stop until the whole world is a mish mash of peasant empires, with no rulers. We are the most succesdul country in the world for the sole reason that we broke every major rule in the diplomacy between countries at the time of our revolt, and ever since. We are not polite. We do not follow the rules. We have put the world into it's current state of disarray. We are the root of all evil.

[gendanken]

Says Fafnir:
Despite the fact that there were kings and such in the middle ages, it seemed as if there was more respect for life.

What?

Despite the lack of technology in earliar dates, the people were sophisticated and respectful of each other.

Do my eyes deceive or are you a mite batty? Knowing full well the atrocities of crusading Euro-Christians in the middle ages, viscious Muhammads of the Turkish empire, one, mind you, that purportedly gutted 12 men just to find who it was that ate his melon, the torture, abuse, slaughter, and bloddy massacres of early England, Russian tzars, Aztec sacrifice, New England witch trials............yet you've somehow weighed in beliving that our yesterfolk were somehow "more sophisticated and respectful of each other"?

Insanity.

as to the question we contend with here:

Spymoose:
does anyone think that in the US today too many people call too many things a right?

Yes. I'm well acquainted with armchair patriots that wrap U.S. flags round those potbellies like nobody's business. Its called hiding.

Though of course there *is* one basic right, all be it a god given one. And that's the right to assert that I'm always, has, is, and ever will be absolultely right. About everything.

Kidding. ;)

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
Do my eyes deceive or are you a mite batty?

Probably, but not in the sense you later go to discribe.

Knowing full well the atrocities of crusading Euro-Christians in the middle ages, viscious Muhammads of the Turkish empire, one, mind you, that purportedly gutted 12 men just to find who it was that ate his melon, the torture, abuse, slaughter, and bloddy massacres of early England, Russian tzars, Aztec
sacrifice, New England witch trials

Are you aware of the atrocities that modern man commits? The bombings of civilian populations, the terrorist organizations needlessly killing hundreds of people, most whom are not even involved in the conflict. Goverments locking down, questioning, arresting, their own citizens under false pretences, the constant threat of annihilation, be it nuclear, chemical, or biological, over our heads? I think the atocities you speak of were small isolated events that were recorded, and this doesnt represent the overall mood of the times. That I would much rather live in that world then this, were bloodshed wasn't so rampant as it is now. Where human life had value, when you were one of three, out of 20, who survived. All you've stated is widespread views that what we had was bad, and what we have now is good, look deeper into history, past your highschool lessons, and see what is really there.

yet you've somehow weighed in beliving that our yesterfolk were somehow "more sophisticated and respectful of each other"?

Yes, Did you see teenagers insulting the elderly? No, they were already adults. Children had no childhood, they were raised fromt he start to respect authority, and each other. The element of society which theived, and lied, and plundered, and raped, and murdered, were a much smaller minority then they are now. Isolated cases were isolated cases, not growing trends. Whens the last time someone flipped you off, or swore at you?

Insanity.

Hardly.

as to the question we contend with here:

as all can see you just try to answer to stay on topic.. and all you give is nonsensical garbage. Not even good for a laugh, well, maybe one at your lack of intelligence.

Yes. I'm well acquainted with armchair patriots that wrap U.S. flags round those potbellies like nobody's business. Its called hiding.

see?

Though of course there *is* one basic right, all be it a god given one. And that's the right to assert that I'm always, has, is, and ever will be absolultely right. About everything.

see?

Kidding. ;)

see?

[gendanken]

Are you aware of the atrocities that modern man commits? The bombings of civilian populations, the terrorist organizations needlessly killing hundreds of people, most whom are not even involved in the conflict

And so our little friend here's figured he woke up to the carnage becuase suddenly Tom Brokaw decides to comment on the plights in Afghanistan. Maybe it was all that bosh about the Taliban. Maybe it was Lester Holt or Ashleigh Banfield parading around in humvees. Maybe because CNN is finally doling its slant on the international arena since its figured there's revenue to be gained in an American public suddenly interested in what's going on in places with weird names like Khajikistan and Riyahd.

Or maybe our friend thinks he's fancy becuase he's suddenly divined on BBC or World Link TV. Give 'em some sound-bytes and voila.......we've got ourselves a political pundit.

What the devil has you thinking that this carnage has not been going on for ages in man's bloody history is beyond me. I don't contend that this age is any better than its been, not for a goddamn minute.

You've either been sleeping or are doing little more than sleight-of-hand pedancy. Either way, I'm amused.

Children had no childhood, they were raised fromt he start to respect authority, and each other.......
The element of society which theived, and lied, and plundered, and raped, and murdered, were a much smaller minority then they are now

Read some Dickens, hell even Hardy for a demographic taste of what our industrial age was really like and then waltz on over back here, friend. Mighty way to change that *oh* so fallous tune of yours.


Not even good for a laugh, well, maybe one at your lack of intelligence.

At this point I'm thinking I'm a wee too bemused to even be amused but this tripe from you, on account of your pulling hat tricks and not really knowing what the fuck you're talking about has got me wanting to end this peacefully.

Then again, I never quite end anything peacefully so shoo-go away, do some research and then come back. We'll be happy to see you again :)

[Mephura]

Ok, before I wade into this frey, I will answer the original question.

The idea of "god given rights" should probably be replaced with
universal right. The phrase was coined by a religious majority that, at the time, spoke from 95% of western civilization's beliefs.

As far as universal rights, that all of mankind are entitled to merely by birth: I would say yes. That being the most simplistic right to live your life and do as you wish as long as it does not interfere with anyone else's life. Mind you, by life I do not mean merely the state of being alive, but rather the process of living.

The problem is that like all things one is entitled to, you rely on others to uphold your rights for for you. This leads to laws, law enforcement, and naturally, someone being in charge and that is where the whole things takes a downward plunge. By having someone in charge, you must place this/these people above the rights of others.

Into The Trenches.
Fafnir, Man has never been civilized. Before flight and nukes, you had the french teaching Native Americans to take scalps of the english. (Yes, that was an introduced practice) you had wich trials and inquisitions, holy crusades, and the 100 year war. You had english lords attempting to breed out the Scotts with a law that gave lords the right to screw your wife before you did. Before that you had gadiators whose very life hung on the whim of the emperor, and an empire that ruthlessly slaughtered anyone that stopped their expansion. Before that, you had slaves in Egypt who were so merely because they were a different race. Let's not get into the human sacrifices that took place to placate old gods.

Don't fool yourself into thinking that man was more civilized in the past just because you would have rather have been born then instead of now. The other problem you have is when speaking of today you talk of nukes, which are a weapon of war. But when you speak of the past you seem to forget about the wars, killing, and slaughter.
On a smaller scale, you claim that cursing, crime and respect where greater then as compared to now. Perhaps this is true, but only because man was less civilized. When stealing food could be punished by death or removal of a hand, you will have less thieves. When the weathy are the only ones being protected, the commoners will be more respectful to the rich. Don't think for an instant that crime and disrespect are new ideas. Read Shakespeare. That alone is full of crime and disrespect. Also, When people worked 12 to 14 hours a day just to survive, they have less time for anythign else, including crime.

If the measure of civility is a lack of the evils of living, then surely the measure of civilization is the abundance of the same.

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
At this point I'm thinking I'm a wee too bemused to even be amused but this tripe from you, on account of your pulling hat tricks and not really knowing what the fuck you're talking about has got me wanting to end this peacefully.

Then again, I never quite end anything peacefully so shoo-go away, do some research and then come back. We'll be happy to see you again :)

Boo hoo, your insulted. Maybe you just can't think of a real point? Want to try again? Get some better information, or maybe you can give up now? Get over it, it's hard to admit when your wrong isn't it? There has never been a time when human life has had so little value. There had been more bloodshed since the begining of our "modern age", then there has been in any other century. Stalin killed more people internally in his own country then, then any war has killed in history. Why do you quote from T.V. so much? Is that all you watch? I havn't turned on my T.V. in over 6 months. I'm not pulling my sources on the spot. I'm expressing opinions on real world events, not as they happen, but in how i intepret them into my argument. Who are these people, and places you speak of? Are you so obsessed with current events, you expect everyone else to know them? The bombing of civilian populations, and terrorist activities have been going on the better part of the last quarter century, so maybe you should open your eyes, they aren't just current events.


What the devil has you thinking that this carnage has not been going on for ages in man's bloody history is beyond me. I don't contend that this age is any better than its been, not for a goddamn minute.


Okay, I think your missing my point, or fabricating one you think you can argue. Read my posts again.

Read some Dickens, hell even Hardy for a demographic taste of what our industrial age was really like and then waltz on over back here, friend. Mighty way to change that *oh* so fallous tune of yours.

Yes, i'll read some fiction which focused on the bad aspects of a society to change my opinion of an event, time, or place. This is the same as negative publicity, lets take the worst account of everything, and assume it to be true for the entire world in that era. What if all the rest of the world only got the murder statistics for New York City, or the statistics for mental illness, or some other only negative feedback on our country, do you think so many people would be in a race to get here? I don't, and the same with boks written to show people how hard certain things were, while it may be a case, that doesn't mean it was the norm.

When you have some sources other then your flawed education, and your T.V, you can try again, until then, pffft.



Originally posted by Mephura
Fafnir, Man has never been civilized.
I know my history. I don't need an abbreviated teaching by anyone. I know there were less deaths caused by another party, for no descernible reason then, then there is now. If i lived in any other country, I would be afraid to go outside, because what if the US gets mad at us next? The point about me wanting to live in another ag was a minor side issue, I thought, but i guess less people want to argue that I called everyone alive today a peasant, then that i said i wanted to live in the middle ages. I thought that when i argued everyone is a peasant, and that as peasants we're out of control, and when i said we are animals, we have no rights, that i would have more responses agaisnt that, but no, people seem hung up on one comment. Anyway's, despite my poor grammer, and bad spelling, I ask you guys to actually read and interpret my posts, rather then pick out one small point and try to masacre it, I'd rather have an intelligent breakdown of the entire thing, otherwise i would assume those comments you don't show any negative feedback on, you agree with.

[Mephura]

Originally posted by Fafnir665
I ask you guys to actually read and interpret my posts, rather then pick out one small point and try to masacre it,

I actually hit every major point you made. Perhaps you just want the quotations? Does that make you feel special or is reading comprehension just not a strong point of yours?

That was my point. Despite the fact that there were kings and such in the middle ages, it seemed as if there was more respect for life.

As I said in an earlier post, there wasn't a greater respect, just a harsher law, and less protection for the common man. When you can be killed on a whim, you tend to mind your mannors.


With the rise of the peasants, and equal "rights", all there has been is global turmoil. The US is the prime evil here. We go on "charity missions" and ignore the horrible living conditions within our own country. We blantently disregard the "rights" of countries whose method of life we don't agree with. We don't mind our own business.

I originally didn't touch this one, but I will now. The problem is that countries interact with each other now more than any other time previous. That in turn has to widen our scope. In stivcking wiht the whole middle ages theme, You can think of the U.S as being king, and other countries as being minor lords. (Not the populations mind you, but the governments) Right now, the U.S. does things because it can, and no one can really do anythign about it. That is exactly how kings ruled. If someone had a larger army, they could take control and them they were king. It was in the kings best interest to make allies, i.e. weathly lords with smaller person armies, and crush rebelions. Most rulers didn't give much thought to the little people and the U.S. is acting much the same.

As far as not helping our own, We have alot of programs that are set up to help people. Wellfare, job placement services, and if you are really desperate, join the military. The fact is that americans, you and myself included are lazy whiners, who like to criticize things when we are part of the problem. Want to help the homeless? Go and get one and put him/her up in your place. Feed the hungry? Go and take them meals. Just don't whine about it here and do nothing about it.
Oh wiat, that isn't your responsibility is it? The Government is supposed to miraculously solve all of our problems for us, isn't it.


We're a nation of peasants who became powerful, and we're taking it out on every oppressor and threat to our "freedom". We need to get our mind out of the feed bucket and into the real world.

Or perhaps you just need to quit being so idealistic and realize that life isn't fair and the 'real word' isn't nice. Like I said before , that is how kings ruled, why should we act any differently. You seem to believe in divine mandate or something like it. The only difference between peasant and prince is money and power. There is no inherited sense nobility. It is something you learn, and not all rulers ever did. Do you have any idea how kings originally took power? They killed those whole got in their way and lied, cheated, and stole the entire time.

This isn't how a sophisticated country should act. Despite the lack of technology in earliar dates, the people were sophisticated and respectful of each other. There were the few bad apples and such, but nothing like our world today, where the standard is to use as much profanity in everyday activity as possible, to insult others just to show off and be cool. I don't consider myself to be lucky to be born in this time of "miraculous achievement", i would rather have fought a lion in ancient greece.


Just how should a sophisticated country act then? Please tell us.
People were not more sophisticated or respectful. (see above) Evil thought and deeds are not something that just spontaniously came into existance. Yes, America is at the forefront of the degredation of morals. Whats the reason? So that people like you and I can be free to sit here and bitch about how bad our country is. The free comunicatin of ideas is what is coruptive.

If you think that we should go back to a time when people weren't given basic education and the freedom to make their own descisions about life; when they were told what to believe on where and how to work, and most couldn't write more than their name, feel free. Yeah, it will get rid of alot of moral coruption, because who ever is in charge will just kill anyone who steps out of line.

As for your using "as much profanity in everyday activity as possible" and insulting " others just to show off and be cool", Perhaps you should grow up or get some different friends. I step out of my house and treat people with respect. I curse around close friends yeah, but not when ordering in a restaurant or working. Most of the people that I know don't do such things and all of us find it rather annoying and infantile when we see others doing it. Try leading by example, not bitching from the sidelines.

The government has the right to do as it wishes, because we the people gave it that right. It can stomp on any private citizens dreams and aspirations. Seize whatever property it wishes. Destroy any at will. All because we the people gave it the power. Now it can listen in on any conversation. Read your email. Invade your privacy to any extent.

True. Of course, any dictator would have the same power. If we gave ours the power, we can take it away. Interesting concept huh? Besides, that is the nature of law. Again, had you bothered to read my original post, you would see that.


All because we're afraid of some radical group that killed a small number of civilians. We kill more civilians in one of those nuke drops. We've killed more civilians on the raid on afghanistan. We've killed more civilians in any act of war that we have perpetrated then, even one, then any other country has killed of ours. The united states has had suprisingly little civilian casualties in any conflict, save the civil war itself. All we do is kill other countries civilians.

Sounds like we are doing a pretty good job of protecting ourselves then. Its a pretty simple idea really: Kill and be killed.
Am I calloused for sayin I really don't care about civilian lives being lost in war? Personally, I disagree with the geneva convention. War is uncivilized by its very nature. Any attempt to make it nice and fair is just plain stupid. You want to save lives? Kill faster than the other guy. Make examples. The more people fear you, the less you are fucked with. War never was and never will be nice and pretty.

We the people, have turned into, We the massacurers.

I personally haven't killed anyone. I also never gave any order to do so. The government has control over that. Not me, not you.


People are animals, and everyone should treat everyone as such, and assert their power over them at every given oppurtunity, or else have someone else power asserted on them.
I'll agree we are animals. Then again you were probably meaning that in more than a biological sense. You sound like you need some counseling. Seems like you've got some control issues. I don't try to exert control over 99% of the animals I come across.
Besides, who would be the one exerting the power? We kinda already have that. Its called government.

The idea of human rights is an idea supported by the majority who didnt like getting picked on by the kings of england. Look where equal rights has got us... the most powerful country on earth, but at what cost? There are no values among us, we're a peasant class, every american, who didnt like getting picked on, so we used our intelligence to make it so it would never happen again, and in the process skrewed up the balance of power. WE borught the most dangerous weapons in the world into existence, to protect our freedom. We brought about processes which have corrupted generation after generation. We are the most wasteful country in the world. Why? Because our little pow wow back in the 1700's said it was our right to be. We're animals, we have no rights.

Hey, the degredation of moral values is society's fault, not freedom's. We had the choice to live as we saw fit. We pushed the boundries. We still have the choice. Go be Amish if you don't like popular culture. Quit being a mindless drone and buying everything they sell you and living your life they they tell you you should. That is the problem. That is why that "little pow wow back in the 1700's" Also wasn't going to give us the right to vote. The general populace is too stupid, and can be lead anywhere.
There is your culprit. Not the gevernment, those who created it, or the people. Its the corporations that sell the shit. Want to change the world? Control the consumer market.

Are you aware of the atrocities that modern man commits? The bombings of civilian populations, the terrorist organizations needlessly killing hundreds of people, most whom are not even involved in the conflict. Goverments locking down, questioning, arresting, their own citizens under false pretences, the constant threat of annihilation, be it nuclear, chemical, or biological, over our heads? I think the atocities you speak of were small isolated events that were recorded, and this doesnt represent the overall mood of the times.

Its called technological progress. If your oh so noble kings had planes and bomb, they would have used them. It wasn't any imagined sense of the santity of life that you think they had. Kings and churches did the same "needlessly killing hundreds of people" and "arresting, their own citizens under false pretences" that we do today. It is simply how you maintain power.


That I would much rather live in that world then this, were bloodshed wasn't so rampant as it is now. Where human life had value, when you were one of three, out of 20, who survived. All you've stated is widespread views that what we had was bad, and what we have now is good, look deeper into history, past your highschool lessons, and see what is really there.
Sure you would. The minuste you complained there, you would have been jailed on killed. Why don't you look "past your highschool lessons." The inquisitions were started to weed out heretics, i.e. people that disagreed with the church, and get them to confess their sins (through torture) and kill them. Yeah, that is real nice and civilized. Or perhaps you perfer being killed because the deer you killed to feed your starving family just happened to be on the wrong piece of land.

Yes, Did you see teenagers insulting the elderly? No, they were already adults. Children had no childhood, they were raised fromt he start to respect authority, and each other. The element of society which theived, and lied, and plundered, and raped, and murdered, were a much smaller minority then they are now. Isolated cases were isolated cases, not growing trends. Whens the last time someone flipped you off, or swore at you?

That could also be because the average life span was about 30 years. There really wasn't any elderly. Teenagers were adults because they had to be. people were also commonly maried at the ages of 13 or so. That tends to make one grow up quick. Maybe we should just become pedophiles and that would solve the problem. And as for the bit about isolated cases,
1.)See above about law enforcement
2.)Much smaller populations over wider areas.
Most people were farmers. As such, they worked 14-16 hours a day and had very little time to go out and be criminals.

I know my history. I don't need an abbreviated teaching by anyone. I know there were less deaths caused by another party, for no descernible reason then, then there is now.

Other than the obvious ones.

If i lived in any other country, I would be afraid to go outside, because what if the US gets mad at us next?

I guess the military is doing its job then. Don't piss us off. If some one does piss us off, better find him and his friends and hand them over.

The point about me wanting to live in another ag was a minor side issue, I thought, but i guess less people want to argue that I called everyone alive today a peasant, then that i said i wanted to live in the middle ages. I thought that when i argued everyone is a peasant, and that as peasants we're out of control, and when i said we are animals, we have no rights, that i would have more responses agaisnt that, but no, people seem hung up on one comment.

People tend to attack the most stupid points first. What you said was pretty stupid.

Anyway's, despite my poor grammer, and bad spelling, I ask you guys to actually read and interpret my posts, rather then pick out one small point and try to masacre it, I'd rather have an intelligent breakdown of the entire thing, otherwise i would assume those comments you don't show any negative feedback on, you agree with.

Since this is what you wanted, I gave it to you. I just figured you would be smart enough to extrapolate this from what I said the first time.

[Fafnir665]

I actually hit every major point you made. Perhaps you just want the quotations? Does that make you feel special or is reading comprehension just not
a strong point of yours?

Actually, you didn’t. The points you hit upon in your original post, were those that were hit upon by others, not all the points that I had brought, only those contested. In this you follow the crowd, humans are drawn to conflict, yes? That is what I have been taught, and that is what I have continued to discover. Though I really do enjoy this breakdown of my arguments, I appreciate it much more then a little comment on how one of my points is invalid.

As I said in an earlier post, there wasn't a greater respect, just a harsher law, and less protection for the common man. When you can be killed on a whim, you tend to mind your manners.

And what is wrong with this? The common man respected each other more as well, who else were they going to respect? Who else is going to respect them? How many accounts do we have of life of the peasant in that era? We have lords who write accounts. We have monks who write accounts. How many accounts were written by the common man? Their history is that of oppression and such, but man likes to be oppressed and guided, and since we can extrapolate their lives many different ways, I choose to extrapolate it in the better light then you must be doing.


I originally didn't touch this one, but I will now. .... Most rulers didn't give much thought to the little people and the U.S. is acting much the same.

Exactly. This is what I take issue with. Why are we the most powerful? Why are we driven to such lengths to be number one? Because of our mentality. We are peasants, not in the literal sense, in the mindset. We have been bred by thousands of years to have traits which make us peasants. Our minds are such that we like to be led. We like to be oppressed. We like to be treated rotten. But the US is a new thing. No longer are the rich all powerful. No longer are their kings and lords, able to do almost as they wish. The common man can challenge his government at any level, and does so. But the government is still powerful. It's more vulnerable from within then from without. Our mentality is such that we use every opportunity to corrupt ourselves, and while seeking power uncontrollably. We shouldn't do things because we can, we should do them because we should.

As far as not helping our own, We have a lot of programs that are set up to help people. Welfare, job placement services, and if you are really desperate, join the military.

Hardly, these are minority services, how many people do you personally know that take advantage of them, who can take advantage of them?

The fact is that Americans, you and myself included are lazy whiners, who like to criticize things when we are part of the problem.

Agreed.

Want to help the homeless? Go and get one and put him/her up in your place. Feed the hungry? Go and take them meals.

Actually, I help with "Habitat for humanity" an organization that builds houses for homeless families.
I donate to the salivation army.
I have fed the homeless.

My single solitary acts aren't going to help all of them though.

Oh wait, that isn't your responsibility is it? The Government is supposed to miraculously solve all of our problems for us, isn't it.

Our government in it's current state is hopeless to help.

Or perhaps you just need to quit ... and stole the entire time.

This is exactly the mentality I was speaking of. "The kings did it, why shouldn’t we"


Just how should a sophisticated country act then? Please tell us.

Not my place to say. But not with complete lack of responsibility. "This country did this, so we had to do that", no, it should be "We want their resources, so we're going to take them".

People were not more sophisticated or respectful ... The free communication of ideas is what is corruptive.

The free communication of ideas has never been so corruptive as it is now. Why is this so? Because we make it so. It doesn't have to be corruptive, or negative, we just make it so.

If you think that we should go back to a time when people weren't given basic education and the freedom to make their own decisions about life; when they were told what to believe on where and how to work, and most couldn't write more than their name, feel free. Yeah, it will get rid of a lot of moral corruption, because who ever is in charge will just kill anyone who steps out of line.

This I had actually forgotten, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

As for your using "as much profanity in everyday activity as possible" and insulting " others just to show off and be cool", Perhaps you should grow up or get some different friends. I step out of my house and treat people with respect. I curse around close friends yeah, but not when ordering in a restaurant or working. Most of the people that I know don't do such things and all of us find it rather annoying and infantile when we see others doing it. Try leading by example, not bitching from the sidelines.

You are the minority. Read my posts, how many swears have I used? I haven’t insulted you, I tried to point out a couple flaws in your argument, and you get insulted, and have to insult me to try and make your point. This doesn't help you much. I admit that I did intentionally insult gendankan, but that was a minor side point, most people do better thinking when their angry, better debating, but that’s an issue to argue in the psychology forum.



True. Of course, any dictator would have the same power. If we gave ours the power, we can take it away. Interesting concept huh? Besides, that is the nature of law. Again, had you bothered to read my original post, you would see that.

On a smaller scale, you claim that cursing, crime and respect where greater then as compared to now

That original post?
I never said that.
I think you need to re-read my post, I didn’t miss a point you made. You said nothing that relates to that one line. At this point, we have given our government power, do you really think we can take it away? Do you think Americans, shown what monstrosities our government is capable of, would be able to instill another? The constitution, and related documents, give the government power to quell rebellion, we're stuck with it.



Sounds like we are doing a pretty good job of protecting ourselves then. Its a pretty simple idea really: Kill and be killed. Am I calloused for saying I really don't care about civilian lives being lost in war? Personally, I disagree with the Geneva convention. War is uncivilized by its very nature. Any attempt to make it nice and fair is just plain stupid. You want to save lives? Kill faster than the other guy. Make examples. The more people fear you, the less you are fucked with. War never was and never will be nice and pretty.

Why? Why must people be slaughtered? The conflict is artificial. Why can't their be a basic understanding between human beings? Why? Because of our breeding. It's not only psychology, it's based on our genes. Humans were bred in conflict, and therefore need it to be healthy.



I personally haven't killed anyone. I also never gave any order to do so. The government has control over that. Not me, not you.

By advocating the governments actions, you are responsible for them. At least I say no.

I'll agree we are animals. Then again you were probably meaning that in more than a biological sense. You sound like you need some counseling. Seems like you've got some control issues. I don't try to exert control over 99% of the animals I come across. Besides, who would be the one exerting the power? We kind of already have that. Its called government.

I think we have no more rights then the other animals present on this earth.



Hey, the degradation of moral values is society's fault, not freedom's. We had the choice to live as we saw fit. We pushed the boundaries. We still have the choice. Go be Amish if you don't like popular culture. Quit being a mindless drone and buying everything they sell you and living your life they tell you should. That is the problem. That is why that "little pow wow back in the 1700's" Also wasn't going to give us the right to vote. The general populace is too stupid, and can be lead anywhere. There is your culprit. Not the government, those who created it, or the people. Its the corporations that sell the shit. Want to change the world? Control the consumer market.

The corporations were given such power by our government. Whose being the mindless drone? Your buying into the popular idea of "we must protect ourselves from invisible enemies". What evidence do you have that I am buying into the popular image? Can you tell what I look like, what I buy, what I do? Do you have my house bugged? I don't think you know me, the type of person I am, or the type of people I associate with, based on any of my statements made.



Its called technological progress. If your oh so noble kings had planes and bomb, they would have used them. It wasn't any imagined sense of the sanity of life that you think they had. Kings and churches did the same "needlessly killing hundreds of people" and "arresting, their own citizens under false pretences" that we do today. It is simply how you maintain power.

Okay. We have argued this point in many other parts of this little thread.



Sure you would. The minute you complained there, you would have been jailed on killed. Why don't you look "past your high school lessons." The inquisitions were started to weed out heretics, i.e. people that disagreed with the church, and get them to confess their sins (through torture) and kill them. Yeah, that is real nice and civilized. Or perhaps you prefer being killed because the deer you killed to feed your starving family just happened to be on the wrong piece of land.

Isolated events, again.



That could also be because the average life span was about 30 years. There really wasn't any elderly. Teenagers were adults because they had to be. people were also commonly married at the ages of 13 or so. That tends to make one grow up quick. Maybe we should just become pedophiles and that would solve the problem. And as for the bit about isolated cases,
1.)See above about law enforcement
2.)Much smaller populations over wider areas.
Most people were farmers. As such, they worked 14-16 hours a day and had very little time to go out and be criminals.

Maybe people need to work 16 hours a day. It would be good for Americans, myself included. I also stand by my "bit about isolated cases", the only recounts we have been inflated by history.



Other than the obvious ones.

duh



I guess the military is doing its job then. Don't piss us off. If some one does piss us off, better find him and his friends and hand them over.

Why not? Other countries have the right to live as they wish. Stepping into a conflict doesn't make us right.


People tend to attack the most stupid points first. What you said was pretty stupid.

You still haven’t given any proof of this.


Since this is what you wanted, I gave it to you. I just figured you would be smart enough to extrapolate this from what I said the first time.

Thank you, but had their been anything to extrapolate, I would have, and you still focused on the one point, overall, of my statement which said I’d rather live in the middle ages. Can you people look past that, and focus on the philosophy issue. I philosophized that we as a nation, are a nation of peasants, who are living their lives to get on top, and this is why we have no rights. We have no rights because we don't have the authority to give ourselves rights. We don't have rights because we don't respect the rights of others. To have rights, we, as a person, have to respect the rights of others. The golden rule stands true.

[Mephura]

You are a surprising one. Yes, I posted out of anger. Why isn't exactly important. Merely accept my apologies.


Originally posted by Fafnir665
Actually, you didn’t. The points you hit upon in your original post, were those that were hit upon by others, not all the points that I had brought, only those contested. In this you follow the crowd, humans are drawn to conflict, yes? That is what I have been taught, and that is what I have continued to discover. Though I really do enjoy this breakdown of my arguments, I appreciate it much more then a little comment on how one of my points is invalid.

My original post and the points I was intending to make. Also the one sentence has been corrected.

"Fafnir, Man has never been civilized. Before flight and nukes, you had the french teaching Native Americans to take scalps of the english..... Let's not get into the human sacrifices that took place to placate old gods. "

I was attemping to show that mankind has never had respect for life, especially in times of war or when religion was involved.

"Don't fool yourself into thinking that man was more civilized in the past just because you would have rather have been born then instead of now."

About the one small comment

"The other problem you have is when speaking of today you talk of nukes, which are a weapon of war. But when you speak of the past you seem to forget about the wars, killing, and slaughter."

How you cling to the idea that mankind ws nicer then and also, that in war, the most advanced and destructive technologies are generally used. As technology advances, so does destruction and killing.

On a smaller scale, you claim that cursing, crime and a lack of respect where lesser then as compared to now. Perhaps this is true, but only because man was less civilized. When stealing food could be punished by death or removal of a hand, you will have less thieves. When the weathy are the only ones being protected, the commoners will be more respectful to the rich."

An attempt at showing, albeit in the aforementioned time frame, that the ruling class/government have always ignored the rights of the little man. The actions that the U.S. are hardly a new trend.
(ok so its also a point about the time period) It was ment to show that a lack of freedom and fear fear of physical harm is what made people nice. Not a respect for one another.

"Don't think for an instant that crime and disrespect are new ideas. Read Shakespeare. That alone is full of crime and disrespect."

As an author, Shakespeare wrote to the common man. From his works, we learn that there was a definite cursing, and that the evils of society were widely known back then. They are not new ideas, just more in our face.

"If the measure of civility is a lack of the evils of living, then surely the measure of civilization is the abundance of the same."

Just a closing thought.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And now, on to your statements.


And what is wrong with this? The common man respected each other more as well, who else were they going to respect? Who else is going to respect them? How many accounts do we have of life of the peasant in that era? We have lords who write accounts. We have monks who write accounts. How many accounts were written by the common man? Their history is that of oppression and such, but man likes to be oppressed and guided, and since we can extrapolate their lives many different ways, I choose to extrapolate it in the better light then you must be doing.

And what evidence do you have of the common man respecting each other more then? Reality is neither one of us probably knows much about the subject. Besides the more we drop, the sooner we get to your main point.

Exactly. This is what I take issue with. Why are we the most powerful? Why are we driven to such lengths to be number one? Because of our mentality. We are peasants, not in the literal sense, in the mindset. We have been bred by thousands of years to have traits which make us peasants. Our minds are such that we like to be led. We like to be oppressed. We like to be treated rotten. But the US is a new thing. No longer are the rich all powerful. No longer are their kings and lords, able to do almost as they wish. The common man can challenge his government at any level, and does so. But the government is still powerful. It's more vulnerable from within then from without. Our mentality is such that we use every opportunity to corrupt ourselves, and while seeking power uncontrollably. We shouldn't do things because we can, we should do them because we should.

What exactly is the mindset of peasants? Nothing has changed really. Personally, I think if people liked oppression and being treated rotten there would be no rebellions. Political power stays in political families. Bushes, Kenedys, etc...The rich are still powerful, and still have alot of political sway. They are constantly trying to pass campaign finance reform proposals to try to limit this, but there will always be loop holes.

Hardly, these are minority services, how many people do you personally know that take advantage of them, who can take advantage of them?

Well, my mother used wellfare and food stamps shortly after my father left. I've known lots of people who were on unemployment when they had been laid off. I've used job placement services. All of which are free government services. Actually, you talk about a 'peasant class', I know it pretty well. And none of the people I've mentioned were minorities. I've lived on the street for a while myself. It isn't that hard to get help, if you actually want it.


Actually, I help with "Habitat for humanity" an organization that builds houses for homeless families.
I donate to the salivation army.
I have fed the homeless.

My single solitary acts aren't going to help all of them though.

True, but its a start.

Our government in it's current state is hopeless to help.

For the most part, I will agree

This is exactly the mentality I was speaking of. "The kings did it, why shouldn’t we"

The point I was trying to make is that its more of the one that anymore we living in more of a global community, and in this community the U.S. happens to be king right now, reguardless of who likes it.

The free communication of ideas has never been so corruptive as it is now. Why is this so? Because we make it so. It doesn't have to be corruptive, or negative, we just make it so.

True. In fact I generally dislike most of the internet and television.
To me its just more proof that those ideas are not learned, but rather natural. If they weren't why would there be references to them throughout major religions.

Not my place to say. But not with complete lack of responsibility. "This country did this, so we had to do that", no, it should be "We want their resources, so we're going to take them".

I agree 100%. Then again that is just might makes right.

This I had actually forgotten, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

No problem


You are the minority. Read my posts, how many swears have I used? I haven’t insulted you, I tried to point out a couple flaws in your argument, and you get insulted, and have to insult me to try and make your point. This doesn't help you much. I admit that I did intentionally insult gendankan, but that was a minor side point, most people do better thinking when their angry, better debating, but that’s an issue to argue in the psychology forum.

Alright, again you have my apologies. However, I find people tend to think less when they get angry and speak more from gut reaction, and less from good thought.

At this point, we have given our government power, do you really think we can take it away? Do you think Americans, shown what monstrosities our government is capable of, would be able to instill another? The constitution, and related documents, give the government power to quell rebellion, we're stuck with it.

I'll agree, and it is rather sad. Personally, you really wouldn't want to see me running things. Then again, people would be better behaved.

Why? Why must people be slaughtered? The conflict is artificial. Why can't their be a basic understanding between human beings? Why? Because of our breeding. It's not only psychology, it's based on our genes. Humans were bred in conflict, and therefore need it to be healthy.

Yes, violence is a big part of human nature.

By advocating the governments actions, you are responsible for them. At least I say no.

I don't advocate anything. I really don't care one way or the other.I just live here.

I think we have no more rights then the other animals present on this earth.

I agree totally. In fact look at what I said in the should we kill animals thread.
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17999&perpage=20&pagenumber=11

Then again, each animal makes their own rules to a certain extent. We've made ours.

The corporations were given such power by our government. Whose being the mindless drone? Your buying into the popular idea of "we must protect ourselves from invisible enemies". What evidence do you have that I am buying into the popular image? Can you tell what I look like, what I buy, what I do? Do you have my house bugged? I don't think you know me, the type of person I am, or the type of people I associate with, based on any of my statements made.

I tend to judge society but what I see and the people I know. You made the statement that its other insult people just to be cool. I don't see alot of that. Most of the people I do see it from are rather stupid. I figured if you see it that often, it must be rather prevalent where you are at, and so more than likely you friends do so. No that huge of a jump really. Yes anger influenced the thought.


Isolated events, again.

That is really oppinion. I could say dropping of the a bombs were just isolated events. They were. We have only dropped two for war purposes. The things you claim aren't isolated events are just as isolated as the ones I point out.


Maybe people need to work 16 hours a day. It would be good for Americans, myself included.

You can if you want. Most people wold rather spend time with family or friends though.


Why not? Other countries have the right to live as they wish. Stepping into a conflict doesn't make us right.

That is the way of violent politics. Might makes right. The winner rights the history.

You still haven’t given any proof of this.

Well, its generally the weakest point. it only makes sense. Destroy the weakest point and anything related to it becomes weaker.

Thank you, but had their been anything to extrapolate, I would have, and you still focused on the one point, overall, of my statement which said I’d rather live in the middle ages. Can you people look past that, and focus on the philosophy issue. I philosophized that we as a nation, are a nation of peasants, who are living their lives to get on top, and this is why we have no rights. We have no rights because we don't have the authority to give ourselves rights. We don't have rights because we don't respect the rights of others. To have rights, we, as a person, have to respect the rights of others. The golden rule stands true.

Well, I hope I showed you that I actually did hit on different points. I must admit that I'm still a lost a towhat the 'mentality of peasants' is exactly. As for the authority,

(From my original post)The problem is that like all things one is entitled to, you rely on others to uphold your rights for for you. This leads to laws, law enforcement, and naturally, someone being in charge and that is where the whole things takes a downward plunge. By having someone in charge, you must place this/these people above the rights of others.

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by Mephura
You are a surprising one. Yes, I posted out of anger. Why isn't exactly important. Merely accept my apologies.

Thank you. Posting out of anger is not a problem. Staying civil while doing so is.

and now, on to your statements.

To quote spuriousmonkey, Woo Yay


And what evidence do you have of the common man respecting each other more then? Reality is neither one of us probably knows much about the subject. Besides the more we drop, the sooner we get to your main point.

None, I was extrapolating. I was using my own personal belief that people only write the worst of events, to villianify the worst, to make changes in that. If thats the worst, then the best, and the norm, can't be that bad.



What exactly is the mindset of peasants? Nothing has changed really. Personally, I think if people liked oppression and being treated rotten there would be no rebellions. Political power stays in political families. Bushes, Kenedys, etc...The rich are still powerful, and still have alot of political sway. They are constantly trying to pass campaign finance reform proposals to try to limit this, but there will always be loop holes.

Exactly what our mentality leads us to believe. The Bushe's, Kennedy's, and other politicol families, are politicol families because they know how to control people. They know how to convince them to do as they wish. How else do they stay politicol families? The mindset of a peasant hates oppresion. The mindset of a peasant hates being ruled. The mindset of a peasant drives the peasant, once he's free, to stay free. This has lead to the creation of the most powerful nation on earth, IMHO.



Well, my mother used wellfare and food stamps shortly after my father left. I've known lots of people who were on unemployment when they had been laid off. I've used job placement services. All of which are free government services. Actually, you talk about a 'peasant class', I know it pretty well. And none of the people I've mentioned were minorities. I've lived on the street for a while myself. It isn't that hard to get help, if you actually want it.

So your experienced. So am I. I lived in a habitat house, I was lucky enough to be in one of the families chosen to receive one. I lived out of hotels. No, it isn't that hard, but theres always people who want to have a free ride. To have help given, but not to have to seek this help. Maybe I was to harsh on the governtment programs intended to help the needy.



True, but its a start.

I think every US citizen should have a mandatory community service quota.


The point I was trying to make is that its more of the one that anymore we living in more of a global community, and in this community the U.S. happens to be king right now, reguardless of who likes it.

Agreed. It should change. We're getting soft anyways.


True. In fact I generally dislike most of the internet and television. To me its just more proof that those ideas are not learned, but rather natural. If they weren't why would there be references to them throughout major religions.

Sorry, but what ideas? I think i'm missing some point that should be obvious to me. Can you please explain?


Alright, again you have my apologies. However, I find people tend to think less when they get angry and speak more from gut reaction, and less from good thought.

Thank you. It depends on the person. I tend to think better when I have a reason to. You gave be some reasons to. That does not make me less civil though.



I'll agree, and it is rather sad. Personally, you really wouldn't want to see me running things. Then again, people would be better behaved.

We are of the same mind on this issue.


Yes, violence is a big part of human nature.

If you read Arthur C. Clarkes short stories, theres an interesting one on a species, shorter lived then our own, but amazingly bright. They are introduced to religion, and since they spawn from their parents stomach (they are aesexual), they view this as their original sin. They are voracious. They kill each other over the slightest wrong doing. To them, being civil is almost impossible, but religion makes it so. I'm not a fan of religion, but maybe it's what we need. A faith implanted in people so strongly that they don't act against it.

I don't advocate anything. I really don't care one way or the other.I just live here.

Okay. To quote a phrase that always gets me riled up, "Actions speak louder then words", but this site is only words. Only Ideas. So we are judged solely on our words, we can't act. I think we should stop flaming (directed at the site as a whole, not you), and start intelligently discussing ideas, the only way that we can prove ourselves are through clear thinking, and decisive arguments.


I agree totally. In fact look at what I said in the should we kill animals thread.
http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17999&perpage=20&pagenumber=11

Don't you love it when you go through all that time to make a good argument, type it out, post it, then get no responses?
I agree with your post.

Then again, each animal makes their own rules to a certain extent. We've made ours.

Our rules are less then satisfactory to the equality of our species.



I tend to judge society but what I see and the people I know. You made the statement that its other insult people just to be cool. I don't see alot of that. Most of the people I do see it from are rather stupid. I figured if you see it that often, it must be rather prevalent where you are at, and so more than likely you friends do so. No that huge of a jump really. Yes anger influenced the thought.

I live in a small town. I "hang out" with a group of maybe 5 people. We're all civilized in our conversations. The most prevalent word is "w00t". The foul language I see so prevalently is at my place of work, a supermarket, and at the local stores.


That is really oppinion. I could say dropping of the a bombs were just isolated events. They were. We have only dropped two for war purposes. The things you claim aren't isolated events are just as isolated as the ones I point out.

True.


You can if you want. Most people wold rather spend time with family or friends though.

I would if i could. I had a hard enough time finding one job, let alone two.


That is the way of violent politics. Might makes right. The winner rights the history.

Which is why we shouldn't trust the versions of history we do see as fully as we do.


Well, its generally the weakest point. it only makes sense. Destroy the weakest point and anything related to it becomes weaker.

Oh, and just to set you guys straight, I said I "would rather fight a lion in ancient greece", I don't know where all this middle ages mumbo jumbo came from, I just went with it as gendanken said it. I probably should have corrected myself earlier.

[Mucker]

What does this thread have to do with semantics??

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by Mucker
What does this thread have to do with semantics??

se·man·tics n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)

1. Linguistics. The study or science of meaning in language.

2. Linguistics. The study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent. Also called semasiology.

3. The meaning or the interpretation of a word, sentence, or other language form: We're basically agreed; let's not quibble over semantics.

Does this help? I think you need to read the entire thread and see where the conversation has lead, rather then one post (which I doubt you have read even as much), and make a determination about the thread from that.

Good day.

[gendanken]

Says Fanfir:

Yes, i'll read some fiction which focused on the bad aspects of a society to change my opinion of an event, time, or place. This is the same as negative publicity, lets take the worst account of everything, and assume it to be true for the entire world in that era. What if all the rest of the world only got the murder statistics for New York City, .................
? We have lords who write accounts. We have monks who write accounts. How many accounts were written by the common man

Look, man. I get what you're saying but you're making it seem as if history is little more than illusions and what you're doing is grinding some 6 thousand years worth of history down to 'only' raggedy scrolls and mythology. Fine. We can of course think of it only as statistics, petty gallup polls, fancy fiction.
But the evidence stands. Was it statistics that wiped out whole empires? Our Mesoamericans, what wiped them out? a monk's tale? Aztecs- were they done in by storytelling? Did all that storytelling build those vast pyramids too and 'storytell' those people into oblivion? oh?

The Inca's demise- a crusading lord's account?
Nanking- pretty fiction?
The holocaust, Cambodia, Rwanda- what happened there?
the Persian, Muslim, and Chinese empires wiped out by.............statistics? Oh?

I was *not* using television to prop up my platform, but rather to point out the reasons behind your grievious delusions. You really did come off sounding like the typical suburbanite that's suddenly woke up to the timeless, bloody carnage becuase suddenly its breaking news and making headlines.

And its true- don't deny for a minute that "terrorism" didn't suddenly make patriotism fashionable. Don't deny either that what happened with all that jazz was this: patriots, having finally tuned in, suddenly surmised that the world's never been bloodier because lo and behold, the gore of suicide bombings and political tortures is now topping off stories on Nightline. And I staunchly believe you fall into this category.

And you're wrong. There's always been oppression and slaughter. Bloodletting is timeless; we're viscious, cruel, power hungry animals and people like you only think its a 'now' thing becuase, like Mephura's said, the scope has widened. The sad thing is that it wasn't a starving, leperous Ethiop or a bloodied Serb or a gassed Kurd that it took for our Billy Bobs and Betty Sues to realize this but the deaths of his own middle-class few for him to wake up to the bloodletting.

I'm not going to split hairs here, and I won't go through the process of quoting piecemeal, becuase its tedious to both do and read through.

But my two cents are these- while you, FanFir, do make some valid points concering the largess of the government and how off the rail its policies are becoming, its true that we of small voice can hardly do much to change her......

BUT she just so happened to make us the happiest little proles in the world. I doubt there's any other place in this world where insecurity can be taken as mildly as it is here. Laid off? lady liberty's got unemployment benefits, countless federal branches for relief and even *if* temporary at least its something. There's job placement organizations, welfare, food stamps, countless non profit organizations- all the perks that come with a place where the natives have time to spend in forums to bitch about their countries and dish out fallous maiden ideologies.

Sure we may be expedable cogs in the big wheel, but we're the happiest, laziest, giddiest plebs in the world.

Fanfir:
Boo hoo, your insulted. Maybe you just can't think of a real point?

Small winds only fan wildfires. If you want to insult me, you'll have to puff harder.;)

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
I was *not* using television to prop up my platform, but rather to point out the reasons behind your grievious delusions. You really did come off sounding like the typical suburbanite that's suddenly woke up to the timeless, bloody carnage becuase suddenly its breaking news and making headlines.

I don't follow the news. I don't care for the news. I know whats happening, and I don't find it important. I don't advocate violence, but it happens. The point I was trying to make, was the power of the United States, not that anytime was more or less bloody, at least to begin with. I believe this is the bloodiest time of all. Before you take that small statement, and blow it out of proportion, think about the relative population sizes. The percentages of populations brutalized may be the same, but since the worlds population is so fantastically huge now, then we are going to be killing more people to keep up with the statistics. The point on terrorism was just an easy way out to make an argument, had their been an easier example, one that came to mind quicker, then I may have used it. One didn't, So I didn't. I havn't suddenly woken up to the timeless, bloody carnage, but I have woken up to the fact that things need to change. Why can't we be the ones to make it so? Are we so entrenched in our habits, in our upbringings, that we don't think that we can make a difference for the rest of history?

And its true- don't deny for a minute that "terrorism" didn't suddenly make patriotism fashionable. Don't deny either that what happened with all that jazz was this: patriots, having finally tuned in, suddenly surmised that the world's never been bloodier because lo and behold, the gore of suicide bombings and political tortures is now topping off stories on Nightline. And I staunchly believe you fall into this category.

I'm not patriotic. If you think so, re-read my posts. I don't believe in our government. If I was going to advocate violence on either side of this conflict, I'd support the suicide bombers. when I was making that post, I was thinking of the niponese group who had release a chemical agent into a subway, in Nipon. This had no effect on Americans, as I recall. The last time I turned on my T.V. was to watch a simpsons episode, I don't trust the news. Maybe you need to actually read and comprehend what I am trying to say, rather then force your opinion of what I'm trying to say on me. Like I said, stop fabricating points to argue. It donsn't help any, and just makes us both look foolish.

And you're wrong. There's always been oppression and slaughter. Bloodletting is timeless; we're viscious, cruel, power hungry animals and people like you only think its a 'now' thing becuase, like Mephura's said, the scope has widened. The sad thing is that it wasn't a starving, leperous Ethiop or a bloodied Serb or a gassed Kurd that it took for our Billy Bobs and Betty Sues to realize this but the deaths of his own middle-class few for him to wake up to the bloodletting.

Do you mean bloodshed? As I understood it, bloodletting was a medical practice that invloved "releasing the evil demons" that caused sickness, or something along these lines. do you believe that these conflicts are bloodletting? That we are killing to release the ills of society? I didn't deny that there has always been oppression and slaughter. I didnt deny that we as humans are, and always have been viscious, cruel, power hungry animals, I only stated that it was less so. It may be due to population sizes that this was true, in fact I beleive it is true. What I was trying to propose originaly, is that we as humans havn't changed since our days of being forcibly oppressed. Please re-read my original post, I have the feeling your only skimming it. In that sentence, I said "forcibly", because now, in these united states, we are allowing ourselves to be opressed. We are allowing ourselves to be led. We, the people, supposedly have control over our government, why don't we use it? Or does the common man support our actions in the middle east? Does the common man want to see Gee Dubyas pockets lined further? Do you?

But my two cents are these- while you, FanFir, do make some valid points concering the largess of the government and how off the rail its policies are becoming, its true that we of small voice can hardly do much to change her......

Thats "Fafnir", but even the smallest voice has the power for cahnge. The rebellion that created these United states started as an isolated idea. Christianity started as an isolated idea. Both are either becoming the strongest in their fields, or are already on top. Small voices, little ideas, are both the basis of human change. Don't discount your, or my, small ideas as worthless in the whole scheme of our existence.


Sure we may be expedable cogs in the big wheel, but we're the happiest, laziest, giddiest plebs in the world.

This is unfortunate, we have become complacent, and will lose, over generations, the urge to fight for what is right within ourselves, and within the world, and let a small group of social and politicol elites do as the wish.

Small winds only fan wildfires. If you want to insult me, you'll have to puff harder.;)

Your tone of anger in your second post implies that you were insulted.

[gendanken]

Wanna recap? Lets:
One:
Despite the lack of technology in earliar dates, the people were sophisticated and respectful of each other. There were the few bad apples and such, but nothing like our world today
Two:
Despite the fact that there were kings and such in the middle ages, it seemed as if there was more respect for life

This joint's never had a king. Only our European counterpart have dabbled in royalty and if in fact it was the 'power of the United States' you were huffing and puffing about in the first place, which you weren't, you would have never commented on the Middle Ages and its royalty or for that matter general lack of respect to be the culprit. Perhaps you'd better trip on back and read your posts.

What's more:

We are the most succesdul country in the world for the sole reason that we broke every major rule in the diplomacy between countries at the time of our revolt, and ever since. We are not polite. We do not follow the rules

Now, isn't the golden mean in diplomacy Machivelean? Want to make the trains run and keep the walls from falling in on your blooming civilization? Nice won't cut it and you damn well know it. Pat some backs and smile like a fruit instead of puting your foot down and you'll have half the globe walking all over you.

By the way- which nation hasn't broken rules? Its a given their rebellious stories don't end quite as happily as ours has, but rules got broken either way. They get broken. The ink's hardly dry and its broken. Think otherwise and you're a factional zealot shrieking in some utopian la la land.


I believe this is the bloodiest time of all

Why? because of Uncle Sam? couple of nukes? fancy technology?


what about Russian bolshevism? Fascist Italy? German nazism or Japan's brutal millitary.

Do me a favor. Hop on over to Google and type C-A-L-I-G-U-L-A.
If our president, in fact any other president, chancellor, or prime minister in this age of ours even dared to do half the things that man did, he'd be shot. Not by beauracracy. Not by corportate moguls. Not by the Pentagon or the FBI. But by the people. Me. You. Us.


Do you mean bloodshed? As I understood it, bloodletting was a medical practice that invloved "releasing the evil demons" that caused sickness

No. I mean bloodletting. Granted this thread has been dubbed "semantics" but woe is me to find, like always, the person I'm dealing with suddenly playing his trump card. Nitpicking.


Your tone of anger in your second post implies that you were insulted.

Oh?

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
This joint's never had a king. Only our European counterpart have dabbled in royalty and if in fact it was the 'power of the United States' you were huffing and puffing about in the first place, which you weren't, you would have never commented on the Middle Ages and its royalty or for that matter general lack of respect to be the culprit. Perhaps you'd better trip on back and read your posts.

Have you read my original post? I really don't think so. Your interpretation implies that you are still skimming them, see below. But still, you aren't making any valid points. Are you trying to argue against my view of our nation as a nation of peasants out of control? As I stated, this is mentality, not literally. This whole "back in time" business started with a line about ancient greece, not the middle ages, you decided I wanted to live then. Why not actually read an entire line before comenting on it, quoting partial lines isn't adding to this, it's just you trying to make my points look invalid without the proper use of evidence.


Why? because of Uncle Sam? couple of nukes? fancy technology?

You still seem to be skimming my posts, this makes it obvious, the entire line read I believe this is the bloodiest time of all. Before you take that small statement, and blow it out of proportion, think about the relative population sizes. Do you get it now? Does that make it any clearer? I hope so, I wasn't disagreeing with your point, I was adding an interpretation of both our points. Let me know if you require any further assitance with this.


what about Russian bolshevism? Fascist Italy? German nazism or Japan's brutal millitary.

Actually read my post. Stop skimming them. I'm getting tired of repeating my statements for you.


No. I mean bloodletting. Granted this thread has been dubbed "semantics" but woe is me to find, like always, the person I'm dealing with suddenly playing his trump card. Nitpicking.

Did you read that entire paragraph, or stop with the end of that sentence? It seems as though your reading part of my reply, and responding to that, rather then reading the entire thing. Try doing that arnd you'll see that our opinion really aren't that different.

Oh?

Your petty insults have given you away again. I ask you to read my entire previous reply, actually, all my replies to you, before you reply again. I ahve shown you this courtesy, could you at least show it to me?

[sargentlard]

Ok i haven't read any other posts in this thread so my opinion is solely on this post.


do people really have natural "god given" rights, or do we just take what we want and call it a right


Ok that depends on you view us as a species. Since we are the only known species that believe in god the term "god given" does not then coincide with "natural". If you are one of those that view humans on the same plane as all the other animals then why not!!!, nature is giant circle of killing, power struggle and the fight to stay on top of the food chain, especially for us since we are higher level consumers. I call that POV on this subject the Discovery channel POV. So if you do believe in that POV then the question comes in do we really have the right to believe in that since we out perform every other species on this planet. If we are to assert our natural gifts on others shouldn't they be leveled out??? Yes other species have good abilties but face it....we can tame em all.


So the above argument leads into seeing ourselves as something better than other animals....something beyond and then we get into the dilemma of god. If you look at this through the Humanatarian point of view then we have some god given rights such as freedom of speech, Liberty etc etc but this is contrary to the Discovery channel POV.

No matter what both views fuck up our perception on what are our rights. I mean i am sure you have heard of Manifesdestiny.....how ridiculous was that idea...i am sure God didn't tell US to head west and kill whoever got in their way. It also comes down to the motives of the one who ponders this question.

So do we have god given natural rights? Well if you see your self as a animal then we have a right to everything we can get but if you see your self as human than our humanity allows us certain rights.

[Mephura]

Fafnir, this is getting ridiculous. I'm not going to argue this anymore until you learn to post what you want to say clearly enough that we have some chance of understnding what you are trying to say. You keep saying that people aren't reading your posts. I know I am, and you still say we aren't getting it. Perhaps you just need to make your point a bit clearer unless your whole goal here is to argue semantics. First you've said that we are a contry of peasants in our mentality and as such we

"like to be oppressed" and "we like to be treated rotten."

Then. you change positions and say:

"The mindset of a peasant hates being ruled. The mindset of a peasant drives the peasant, once he's free, to stay free."

Now why would people that like to be oppressed have an urge to remain free, or unopppressed? Then you say that political families

"are politicol families because they know how to control people."

Then you say that we are

"a nation of peasants out of control."

How exactly can the politiacal families control people who are out of control?

Also, the whole middle ages started from the second sentence of your second post on this thread. It had nothing to do with the lions in greece. For blaming everyone else of not reading your posts, you don't seem to be too much on them yourself. How am I supposed to make an argument against someone that constantly contradicts himself and doesn't even know what he has said?

Clean it up and say what the hell you are trying to say. Untill then, have fun belittling people pointlessly.

[gendanken]

Let me know if you require any further assitance with this.


You, sir, are incorrigible. Not only that but you're wearing holes on my nerves.

I don't have it in me to go back and wade through your posts pro bono. I would if there coherence I could get my mind around but to insist that I go back and plow through your many constradictions is bogus.

Fine. Got a problem with the word patriot? Poof. Gone. History. You're not a patriot. But you, sir, certainly are symptomatic in your selfish idelogies claiming that this is the worst that its ever been.

When its so fucking not.

I don't have have to go back and sift. What it boils down to is this. You think our planet's in far worse shape than its ever been and I don't. The reasons behind you thinking so can be simply chalked up to the proverbial advantage of our modern age: internet, polls, and mass media.

The only difference is that Big Brother's been doing his homework. A Kurd drops dead from hey fever today and -zing- in a second you'll hear about it. It wasn't always like this. Doesn't mean it hasn't been happening. And overpopulation, dear boy, has nothing to do with it.

Its always been a fucking battlefield. Its only now that we get all the gory details in seconds.

I'm getting tired of repeating my statements for you.


And I'm a wee tired of the tortorous clutter in your posting. Not to mention that nasty habit you have of falling back on your last post by default completely forgetting all the blather you'd done in earlier ones.


Edit: Says Mephura: "like to be oppressed" and "we like to be treated rotten."

Then. you change positions and say:

"The mindset of a peasant hates being ruled. The mindset of a peasant drives the peasant, once he's free, to stay free."

Good point.

[gendanken]

Mephura:

Now, should I quotedrop or let the man go?

[Mephura]

That choice is completely and totally yours to make. I think he might be collecting his thoughts and restating his arguement.

[gendanken]

holy fucking christ.

More? :: rolling eyes ::

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
holy fucking christ.

More? :: rolling eyes ::

Theres an icon for that :rolleyes:

[gendanken]

--AHEM---


<========================S-H-E

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
--AHEM---


<========================S-H-E

And this means what? Is there a point to this?

[gendanken]

is there a point to this?
Only in that it wasn't directed towards you but rather towards a certain someone that figured he'd want to keep it secret.

I did it to spite him, Fannie. Keep your shorts on.;)

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
Only in that it wasn't directed towards you but rather towards a certain someone that figured he'd want to keep it secret.

I did it to spite him, Fannie. Keep your shorts on.;)

*confoosled*

But i'm almost done with my serious post.

[gendanken]

Sooooooooo..........you can't post on a whim?

Must you suffer the little children? have you no consideration, you incurably pompous manpig of a maggot?
Let it go.

kidding.

[Fafnir665]

:bugeye:

I am posting on a whim. I just choose to do other activities when I post. My inbox keeps making funny sounds at me, drawing my attention towards this banter. Must I keep my shorts on? It is quite warm in here

[gendanken]

your not posting on a whim. Had you been a serious about a serious post.......it would've been up already. My pm's going off too.

Must I keep my shorts on? It is quite warm in here

Nope. Chicks dig when guys freeball.

[Fafnir665]

Sorry if I'm to distracted to completly focus on this one post. I'm not being serious enough I guess. Maybe I should delete it and try again when I am rested, after community service. Heh, no, I'd only be pissed off at the legal system, more so then I am now.

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
You, sir, are incorrigible. Not only that but you're wearing holes on my nerves.

I try. I will try to explain, in this post, what I beleive to be my main points, and why you are mis-interpreting them. I don't beleive I made any assumtions on your stand point, I ask that you make no judgment on my views other then those stated, for the ones you have made so far have for the most point been false.

Fine. Got a problem with the word patriot? Poof. Gone. History. You're not a patriot. But you, sir, certainly are symptomatic in your selfish idelogies claiming that this is the worst that its ever been.

Fine. Okay. You win on that point. I misspoke when I said that the most bloodshed has occured in this century. This day in age. All of stalins victims, they didn't exist. All the massacured chinese, nope, their gone too. Any civilian bombed for a cause they very may have been unaware of, yea, their gone as well. The Jews? they never existed. The only victims are those of the personal nature. The murders, rape, and theft. Does that make you feel better? Do those not count? Weren't those the largest shedding of blood in our history to date? If i'm wrong, please correct me. Stalin killed what, close to 20 million of his own citizens? What other leader, in all of history even comes close to this number? Or would you rather deal in percentages? Make it relative? Well then, maybe some did come close, or surpass him. Your viewpoint seems relative, with not desire to look at the raw numbers. Why this is so, is a loss to me.

When its so fucking not.

Read above.

I don't have have to go back and sift. What it boils down to is this. You think our planet's in far worse shape than its ever been and I don't. The reasons behind you thinking so can be simply chalked up to the proverbial advantage of our modern age: internet, polls, and mass media.

Or not. Why do you keep assuming that those are my information sources? You still don't know me. This much is obvious. You can't assume every person you argue with on a forum has been raised by their television, or their computer. Thats just idiocy. It has been since you brought that point up, and will continue to be so until you stop using it. Can you accept that there are still some people who learn the traditional way? Through reading classics, the newspaper, and avoiding junk such as T.V. and oppinionated stories on internet news sites? Instant access to bullshit has never been helpful, and as far as I'm concerned, never will be. Maybe if you stop with the personal attacks, I'll stop having to defend myself with these large paragraph's, and we'll both be saving porfiry some money on bandwidth.

Its always been a fucking battlefield. Its only now that we get all the gory details in seconds.

So What. Why is this "instant propagation of all knowledge" so important to you? Does it really make a difference? How many people really take advantage of it? I believe it's still a minority portion of the population of these united states.

And I'm a wee tired of the tortorous clutter in your posting. Not to mention that nasty habit you have of falling back on your last post by default completely forgetting all the blather you'd done in earlier ones.

I remember what I have said. So What. Every post afterwards has been to try and correct some falicious point you tried to make on something that i havn't said. Okay. Whatever.


All The Points I Have Been Trying To Make To Date

Point One. Oppresion.

Maybe oppresion is to strong a word. Maybe it isn't, when I was using the word oppresion, I was trying to say that man likes to be controlled. He doesn't like to make choices. People like to be told what they can't do. They live with this until it's so ingrained in them, that when someone does something like break a law, it's not only seen as a criminal act, it's seen as morally wrong. Control. This is control over a persons mind, as well as their actions.

Point two. Peasant Mentality.

Okay, I have stated that men like to be controled. That they feel it's required that someone, or something control them. Okay. But why can't there also be a part of them that doesn't want to be controlled. You allow yourself to be governed by laws because you were brought up to be governed by them. But doesn't it piss you off when you have no options? Like when you get out of your seat at a movie theater, and return to find it occupied, and the person refuses to move? That was your seat right? But, you don't have the power to take it back. What if you were a peasant back in England when there was a chance to come to the americas. You had the option of farming some land for the rest of your life, or getting passage, which survival wasn't garenteed, to a "new world" where there was the possibility that you could break out of your lifestyle. You were over there. Rebellion happened. You were free. New laws were set up that garenteed your rights. You were controled again, but it was your choice. So now your set up with your rights. But theres all these countries around you that want to take them away again. So theres this massive buildup between you and your compatriats, making the united states powerful, which garantees that you, and all of your decendents will never be controlled in a manner thats not to your liking, ever again. Hence, the all powerful USA, built on a peasants mentality.

Point three. United States Not a polite country.

Argue this. Please. I think we were the first country, on a world stage, to bully with such force. The only comparisons I can personally think of, are all the wars in the mediterrarean way back in the day. But then nothing was as stable as it supposedly is now. Actually, I agree with that. Country lines are stable, but what else? Maybe I should retract my statement that the world is more screwed up now, then it has been in the past. To admit the truth, I didn't really put that much thought into that statement. Maybe there is more violence now, then then, but only because there are so much more of us to be violent. Crude. It just makes it more obvious, media that is. Our world has always been uncivilized to a degree, oh well.

Point four. Patriotism.

Refers to Love of and devotion to one's country. I do not love my country. I do not devote myself to it. I devote, and love, the people of this country. Which unfortunatly, on the whole, love and support this country. I would like a uptopian society. I would like it to happen without my input, without my working towards it. Is this going to happen? Probably not. So therefore I need to work towards it. We need to work towards it. Every human being would have to work towards it. But once we have it, do you really think that our minds could accept it?

[Fafnir665]

That's an incomplete list at the bottom by the way.

[Mephura]

Originally posted by Fafnir665

Point One. Oppresion.

Maybe oppresion is to strong a word. Maybe it isn't, when I was using the word oppresion, I was trying to say that man likes to be controlled. He doesn't like to make choices. ... This is control over a persons mind, as well as their actions.

I will agree to a certain point. I believe most people need a framework to opperate in, and would feel rather lost with out it. Its just the little things that people have the most trouble with being taking from them. Most people just have a heard mentality. See popular culture.


Point two. Peasant Mentality.

Okay, I have stated that men like to be controled. That they feel it's required that someone, or something control them. Okay. But why can't there also be a part of them that doesn't want to be controlled. making the united states powerful, which garantees that you, and all of your decendents will never be controlled in a manner thats not to your liking, ever again. Hence, the all powerful USA, built on a peasants mentality.

Ok, not much really to say there. Yeah, people piss me off, and there is always a way to et back at somebody if you try hard enough. just got to work in the system. I see what you are saying here. Works for me.

Point three. United States Not a polite country.

Argue this. Please. I think we were the first country, on a world stage, to bully with such force. The only comparisons I can personally think of ...be violent. Crude. It just makes it more obvious, media that is. Our world has always been uncivilized to a degree, oh well.

Actually, if you think about it, we learned it from england. Who had colonies all over the world? Who did we used to belong to? If things weren't to their liking, they sent in the military. Now things are just on a larger scale, and we are the ones calling the shots. Yeah, we do shit for financial gain, but at least we aren't just claiming territories. I would say the assumption on violence is pretty right on.

Point four. Patriotism.

Refers to Love of and devotion to one's country. I do not love my country. I do not devote myself to it. I devote, and love, the people of this ........ But once we have it, do you really think that our minds could accept it?

Yeah, most people probably would like a utopia. That is the whole nature of the idea after all. It wouldn't last, and I don't ever see it happeing, or at least not for a very long time. Man is greedy, violent, and covetous by nature. We work towards removing those qualities in future generations by the morals and values we teach our children (for the most part). Then, we later reward those same values later in life. The world doesn't make sense. Its not nice. I doubt it ever will be that way.

[SpyMoose]

well theres certainly been a lot of sillyness going on in this thread while i wasnt paying attention hasnt there been? Fafnir, why not formulate a whole and real oppinion before posting and lashing out at others? The reason you repeatedly accuse them of not reading your posts or inventing points to contest with you is because those points are there in your posts, you have just changed your mind to go on with a contradictory idea.

I strongly disagree with your concept that america is a country of peasents (if indeed you still agree thats a point you tried to make) because i deny there was ever a nobility. Just because somone has a crown on thier head and gets to call the shots dosnt make them a better persion and frankly if you study history nobles were the perpetrators of some of the most awful atrocitys immagineable. Although being a fan of Frank Herbert maybe you think otherwise. A lot of people take that guy too seriously.

Its been said repeatedly in this thread that people are animals but i dissagree. I believe "god given" rights do exist. Although i like the sound of "universal rights" better.

start with the concept of man as an animal like a bear or something. Give the animal the means to communicate with others of its kind, and understand the communications from the others. what will instantly result if you have a creature like a bear or something territorial is that there is a new way to try to assert dominanc. Communication will be turned into just a way to hurl insults. But man is also greedy. Greedy, and intellegent enough to see that two men working together get more done than one. Through self interest men begin clumping together and working together and trying thier darndest to coordinate activity and resolve the territorial conflicts inherent in animals, via thier communication skill. Sometimes the communication breaks down, and man is only an animal again and the conflict is resulted in the animal way, through violence. But greed keeps us coming back together to form groups to get more done so we can satisfy our greed.

I prepose that rights are nothing less than the most humane mechanisms that a group of people has to ensure that its constituent members do not begin solving problems in the animalistic way, and keeps contributing to the team effort to enrich all.

more on the way but i probably havnt spoken coherently enough as it is up to this point. My basic point is that economics determines rights, and people DO deserve rights.

[Mephura]

If I'm reading you right, you're basically talking about a social contract ethical system. If so, I would have to agree that that is probably how everything started. However, I think that over the years, mankind has lost. We now look for absolutes of 'good' and 'evil', we look for goods and saviors. For some reason, people find it hard to believe that others could've ever come together if the purpose wasn't inherently good.

I don't understand why people feel this need to day we are entitled to anything, be it from god or merely birth. As you've stated, the only things that seperates us is language and, I would add, technology. What we do have is a social contract that allows us to function in a somewhat 'civilized' (and I use that term loosely) manner.

The rights that we have as a species are the ones that we have given ourselves via that contract. Now that the contract has been in place for so long, we further refine behavior through legalities and cultural mores. In the end, we are left with a set of behaviors that most of us practice, but few of us understand why.

I think I am rambling a bit too, so I will stop also until I can get a better grip on what exactly I'm trying to say.

[gendanken]

I prepose that rights are nothing less than the most humane mechanisms that a group of people has to ensure that its constituent members do not begin solving problems in the animalistic way, and keeps contributing to the team effort to enrich all.



Right on, moose. Nature, or God, or Marduk or whomoever you attribute creation to probably had no idea the sadististic tyrants about to be unleashed on the world. Now, I know you don't take too nicely comparing us humans to animals, but what better way to harness the bloody violence than through notions of 'rights"?

So by what other name can we put to our social mores? Crowd control


Says Mephura:
The rights that we have as a species are the ones that we have given ourselves via that contract. Now that the contract has been in place for so long, we further refine behavior through legalities and cultural mores.

Agreed. Without our contracts we'd be a swirling, whrling chaotic swamp.

[gendanken]

(I'm just dying to quote. A terrible.....terrible......*cough* .......horrible itch........must scratch it...........but bad habits make terrible pets so....what to do what to do........)


This is agony.

[SpyMoose]

even evil tyrants who slaughtered millions of people like stalin did, thought they were improving the lot of socioty. Polpot didnt mean to kill all those people, he just wanted to scare them. I dont belive a person can be basicly bad, but i do believe they can be ill informed, fanatical, and generaly screwed up. Its bad ideas about who should control the contract and distribute peoples rights that gets us this bloody conflict.

hmm... im not sure that really adds anything to the arguement right now, but ive got a lot of time between classes and people you just arnt posting fast enough to keep me entertained!

(I do think its my right to be entertained by the sciforums :p )

[Fafnir665]

I would post my opinion, but the general thought that has been expressed, is that my opinions are malformed, and a waste of time to read, so until I am informed otherwise, I won't post my opinion to your thread.

[SpyMoose]

Originally posted by Fafnir665
I would post my opinion, but the general thought that has been expressed, is that my opinions are malformed, and a waste of time to read, so until I am informed otherwise, I won't post my opinion to your thread.

good sport. take one for the team!

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by SpyMoose
good sport. take one for the team!

I truly hate you.

[SpyMoose]

ooh hey, brainfart, maybe we could use this oppertunity to change the direction of the thread a little.

Fafnir came in and was posting all kinds of what we concidered nonsence, but he sure seemed enthusiastic about it.

Now because several of us have expressed our antipathy towards his posts he has decided he is going to stop making them.

Is this the very essence of civilization? A driven individual giving up aggressive goals so as not to hurt the rest of the group?

(since this is a slightly new topic I think maybe we could tentativly let Fafnir weigh in on it)

[gendanken]

is that my opinions are malformed, and a waste of time to read, so until I am informed otherwise

We could, of course, inform otherwise but, dear boy, it'd be lying.

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
We could, of course, inform otherwise but, dear boy, it'd be lying.

Since the english language is built for misinterpretation, I will correct you on what my statement meant. I was simply stating that I wasn't going to post, until invited to. Since I have been invited to, I will now post. Thank you.

Originally posted by SpyMoose
Is this the very essence of civilization? A driven individual giving up aggressive goals so as not to hurt the rest of the group?

It could be. Aggressive, intelligent individuals, sacrificing what they think is right, for the good of the community. A driven individual may then change his drive, such that it gives the community as a whole a better status, maybe instead of driving some change in some obscrue law, he then instead works towards some municipality project to improve everyones standard of living, instead of some point that helps a few people at best, himself alone most likly. This may be so. The reason I stopped was because I felt insulted, so I then tried to draw attention to myself, and my opinions, by posting what I did. The easiest way to insult someone opinionated, is to ignore their opinions.

[Mephura]

Originally posted by Fafnir665
The easiest way to insult someone opinionated, is to ignore their opinions.

I'm sorry. Did you say something?

[Fafnir665]

http://www.guru3d.com/forum/images/smilies/fouet.gif

You'll be black and blue (purple) as him when i'm done with you.

[SpyMoose]

for my next trick i will invite a vampire into somones house...

[Mephura]

Originally posted by Fafnir665
[BYou'll be black and blue (purple) as him when i'm done with you. [/B]

doubtful..
But then again, I am more used to arguing points that have at least some sort of evidence to back them and not just oppinion, so you just might be right there.
:D

[Fafnir665]

Yes, I decided that if there isn't going to be any constructive conversation, I'd might as well threaten

http://www.pishen.com/icon128.gif

[Mephura]

It would seem that once again this high minded thread has degenerated into mud slinging. Perhaps someone has an idea on how to get it back on track? If not, I'm gone.

Its been fun folks..

[gendanken]

:: feverishly tugging on fleshy nub ::

Allright now. Okaaay. Now can I quote? Please?

[Mephura]

since you put it that way..
go ahead..

[gendanken]

YES!


"You're a dreamer (Fafnir); that's what's the matter and that's all the matter. Oh, not one o' those big dreamers that put through the big deals! No, sir! You're the kind o' dreamer that just sets out on the back fence and thinks about how much trouble there must be in the world! That ain't the kind that builds the bridges, (Fannie); it's the kind that borrows fifteen cents from his wife's uncle's brother-in-law to get ten cent's worth o' tobacco and a nickel's worth o' quinine."


- from Tarkington's "The Turmoil"

[Fafnir665]

You have no evidence of this.

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by Mephura
It would seem that once again this high minded thread has degenerated into mud slinging. Perhaps someone has an idea on how to get it back on track? If not, I'm gone.

Its been fun folks..

The easiest way would be to stop trivializing my posts. You started it this time.

[gendanken]

Says Fannie:
You have no evidence of this.



There's a slimy trail of convoluted posts with your name on it that says I do.

I took measurements and tailored a word out perfectly suited for you, Fannie. You, sir, are an alarmist.

'There are two men looking out through the same bars;
one sees the mud and one sees the stars.'

I look up. You look down. Four heated pages later and it grinds down to simply that.
Seems our yesterpoets knew alot more about us than we do. ;)

[Fafnir665]

Your sitll avoiding replying, instead insisting on personal attacks, I will take this as a sign of victory, thank you.

[SpyMoose]

jesus jacked up christ where are you taking my topic?!

If my status as the creater of the thread gives me any power at all, then i hereby do decree and declair that fafnir is a pesimist and his world view is heavily colored by it, this is not good or bad its one theory on rights and thats what weve been looking for, case closed, lets get some other theories on rights.

[gendanken]

Says Moose:

lets get some other theories on rights.

Did I not say it all ties back to crowd control? How else is a man going to respect his neighbors?

[SpyMoose]

isnt there anyone around who believes in human dignity enough to try to post a theory that paints rights as something more than just a way to control the filthy unwashed mob?

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by SpyMoose
isnt there anyone around who believes in human dignity enough to try to post a theory that paints rights as something more than just a way to control the filthy unwashed mob?

apparently not/

[Fafnir665]

Originally posted by gendanken
I look up. You look down. Four heated pages later and it grinds down to simply that.


Wait, How does this comment apply here? In all your posts, you say that man has always had blood on his hands, and always will, no matter the age, so how are you looking up? Your looking down as far as I am, if I am even doing so, you can't honestly argue that, looking at your posts throughout this thread.

[SpyMoose]

ugh, time to shoot this thread like a diseased horse. If there is a moderator out ther listening, close the thread! Clip this dead brach so that more may grow in its place!

this baby aint going anywhere, my only hope is to get it to end and maybe start another one a few months from now when noone remembers it. maybe then we can have an intellegent conversation that goes about 2 or 3 pages before we all move on to the rest of our happy lives