Re: eris: crumedgeons, antisemites, racist, etc.
I am simply arguing against the assumptions about it which stem from mindless absorption of propaganda.
Studying to be a lawyer are you?
Nope. I am in my chosen career.
It is changing. The world is changing. Compare attitudes now with those of 1700.
Really? Do you honestly believe that men (except for the gay ones... and only a few of them) don't think of you as a sex object? You
may want to talk of high minded attitudes... and that's all well and good. I, however, am speaking of human nature.
You are assuming that I am not extremely obese and hideously ugly. And that didn't address what I said (I'm so shocked.)
but you went and accused me of exactly that, wanting to start revolutions and such
Re-read my post then. You will discover that I never accused you of wanting to start a revolution. I merely stated the fact that a civil
war (or something similar) would be required in order to get the people who are in power now out of power.
Reread at least one of mine. I've only said that I think our society will *one Day* evolve - as in 5 or 6 centuries from now - until these things we think are so horrible but unavoidable are only history lessons. And you keep calling me socialist and such, and talk about whether a civil war is 'worth it.' Everyone wants to insult me... okay, maybe I'm on the optimistic side, but nobody has actually contradicted my hypothesis that society will eventually evolve to a more mature state.
you might not fight so much with me if you would slow down and listen to what I'm saying instead of what you've already decided
to expect.
Actually, I don't speak your posts aloud nor do I have a text to speech translation device, so listening is not an option here.
Oh, damn, you didn't appreciate my choice of terminology... well, you must be right about everything and I must be wrong, even on the ideas that you haven't addressed but just want to be snide about... oh well...
Comprehension is and at this point I fully comprehend that you are more interested in admonishing me and preaching to the rest of
us than you are at discussing the relative merits of your various positions (which seem to change slightly whenever you find one of
them threatened).
All I am interested in are informed opinions. If you disagree with something I say, there's nothing wrong with saying 'I disagree.' If you have facts to back them up, that's great. If you see problems with my logic, great - that's how I keep learning, by talking to people who can offer me insight. Everyone here is offering very narrow, unreflective criticism. My positions have not changed slightly when one is threatened, because they have not been threatened. You make assumptions about my ideas and address your assumptions, not my words.
You're kidding, right? You think Dubya earned something?
Yup. The Presidency.
Then I also earned a nice chest and pretty eyes, and I should start expecting special consideration for it. Thanks for cluing me in. And I earned the $50 I found on the street. I'm an overachiever practically without moving! Especially since I earned such good weather this week. I *rock*!
Sweet Cheeks, propaganda works with everyone. We are drowning in it. The less intellectual the person, the easier they are to
control with it.
Seen my pic on PI-Alt have you? Propaganda works with the weak minded, but only to a point. Complex subjects cannot be easily
converted to the sound-bites required to change a mindset, particularly when that change also includes an alteration in lifestyle.
Never mind. Read Jacques Ellul's excellent (often called 'definitive') treatise on the subject. I can't argue with statements that lack factual backup.
Second of all, the fact that an idea is doomed becuase it has never succeeded before is a non-argument.
Well, if that was my argument I might have to agree with you. My argument, however, was that causing a civil war was just too high a
price to pay for a socio-political-economic plan that has failed so often in the past.
Sorry, I thought it was your point. In this new case, however, you claimed that I am pro-revolutionary, which I continually deny and you continually ignore.
Well, technically I'm an atheist leftist (and despise Republicans); but however you want to interpret that is fine, I guess.
Well, technically that remark was tied to the previous remark about me not being the product of the public school system, not your
religious or political affiliations.
Oh, I thought it was worded rather oddly... now I don't understand what it meant at all. Sorry.
Incidentally, I'm a non-religious conservative who despises liberalism. IMO, you are foolish to be an achiest and to hate people
simply for belonging to a particular political party.
1) You don't know my feelings on the origin and meaning of spirituality, so you are rash to call me foolish for them. I do not believe in an external anthropomorphic deity though. You know, the religious right shares a mantra with you as well. 2) I never said I hate people for belonging to a particular political party. Don't be so quick to be judgmental, you may end up pushing away people you would have liked. I don't even know the political affiliation of most of my casual acquaintances, and feel no need to in order to make decisions about them. I am pro-choice and pro-social security; and pro-separation-of-church-and-state. The Republicans who I know personally and respect, I usually find later that they are at least a little 'soft' on topics like this. 3) You just used the same word I used, right before you criticized me for it! I'd be willing to concede that I used stronger language than I should have, but what sense is there in your reply anyway?
Everything that ever happens for the first time has never succeeded before, and there is always a first time. Logically, this point
is meaningless.
What does this have to do with my witty little rhetorical comment about your friends wanting to spend time at the mall rather than
with you at a commune? I seem to be debating a child. Perhaps as you grow older your skin will thicken a bit.
I didn't state it as such. This statement was in reply to the assertion that 'it will fail because it's failed every time it's been tried' (or something to that effect.) I didn't reply to the comment about what my friends want to do, because it didn't even warrant it... what was that about childish? Eh? I remember 2nd grade too: 'nyah-nyah-nyah, nobody likes you 'cause you're weird...'
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
