I was nobody. Nothing.
i do see what you mean @allegro , though...about the tea party not being a "real movement."
but like i said, anything that comes back around to rational self interest, for me, is inherently evil.
as far as Reagan...i bet the same thing will happen with W in time.
Trollhunter
In my opinion, the origin of this country's economic troubles (among other shitty politics), began with Reagan. Yes, fuck trickle down. It was the first step toward us becoming the oligarchy we are today.
I was nobody. Nothing.
i agree with all of that. but it's that baser part of human nature that i struggle against.Originally Posted by allegro
Altruism is my goal, more so than putting god first.
Capitalism is inherently fucking evil, and i agree that socialism doesn't work because of human nature.
I don't know what the answer is. But at the end of the day, the right is far more ostensibly self interested than the left. AND Anton Lavey was influenced by Ayn Rand.
That's what i meant.
I'm not trying to sound like a bible beater or anything for fuck's sake.
Bite me
I don't believe in evil. Evil is just the absence of good. Rational self-interest lives in us all. Just ask Adam and Eve [rhetorically]. See Milton's "Paradise Lost" for further reference.
I was nobody. Nothing.
i know it does, but for me it's something to be FOUGHT against, not embraced!I don't believe in evil. Evil is just the absence of good. Rational self-interest lives in us all. Just ask Adam and Eve [rhetorically]. See Milton's "Paradise Lost" for further reference.
I can't do this yet, @allegro ...i just woke up and haven't eaten my xanax...this is making my brain hurt.
Bite me
Ohhhhhh, don't be too sure about that. Not if you're thinking "the Left" are Democrats.
There are plenty of Dems serving prison sentences right now. ALL Democrats are taking lobbyist's and Corporations' dollars right now, millions and millions of dollars, just like the right. There really isn't a whole hell of of a lot of difference between Democrats and Republicans right now, because Democrats ain't "the Left." Not by a fucking longshot.
Bite me
You don't really need a Xanax to have an intellectual conversation. If you do, you ain't ready for college, my friend.
Trollhunter
Illinois, for example, is well known for its corrupt politicians, the majority of which are democrats.
I was nobody. Nothing.
unfortunately, i know that you are absolutely right.
that's why when you said "damned two party system," i kind of hinted that we don't even have that anymore.
But i mean ostensibly...on paper...left wing IDEALS, not in practice.
I'm a leftist for the sake of doing the most good for the most people. Borderline fucking marxist.
(i wasn't exactly serious about the xanax thing. honestly, i just woke up and my wife is probably wondering why i'm still out here online and not kicking it with her)
Last edited by elevenism; 01-15-2015 at 08:40 PM.
Bite me
Amen to that, brother. Now if the rest of the country would just wake the fuck up and stop worshiping Reagan's dead bullshit. When he exited, he was mostly hated. He had a TERRIBLE approval rating. Give him a bunch of years after he was shot, then he got Alzheimer's, then he died, they canonize him. What the fuck.
Trollhunter
This is well tread ground and all but his funeral lasted F O R E V E R.
Bite me
I hear ya, the whole system is fucked, and I don't think there's a whole lot we can do about it, really.
And people are blaming the SCOTUS decision (Citizens United) but I don't think that's the problem. You see, contributing to a campaign STILL CAN'T BUY VOTES. Joe Millionaire can pump $300 Billion into a campaign AND STILL LOSE (which we've seen happen). The campaign dollars ain't the whole problem (although, I'd LOVE to see a BAN on TV campaign advertisements ... BAN 'EM. WE NEVER USED TO HAVE THEM, JUST GET RID OF THEM, THAT'S WHAT REALLY COSTS MONEY, ANYWAY, and then the little guy with no money can win, like David Brat winning fucking ERIC CANTOR'S seat. Brat raised $200,000 but spent $120,000, vs. the $5.4 Million that Cantor raised. LOL LOL LOL).
The LOBBYISTS are the REAL problem.
Last edited by allegro; 01-15-2015 at 08:50 PM.
I was nobody. Nothing.
amen. and no, there is nothing we can do about it. that's why i get into "america ISN'T so fucking great" arguments now and then.
There is no way out of this, ever.
I was nobody. Nothing.
BUT...i STILL love politics.
It's a lot like pro wrestling to me.
tempus est umbra in mente
whenever I see the Tea Party discussed, I feel the need to bring up this very good write up rant by Matt Taibbi
I was nobody. Nothing.
Yup.
okay i have to go kick it with my woman.
this thread is going to be fun for the next 22 months i think.
Bite me
Wow, that is a good rant, thanks. Ugh, depressing.
Last edited by allegro; 01-15-2015 at 10:46 PM.
Active Member
Humans are always the problem with systems where you centralize power. Until we decide to implement one of those systems and let machines operate it, it will stay this way. What makes capitalism inherently evil? All you are doing is letting private entities control trade instead of letting a much smaller subset of humans do it. The more you centralize power, the more you open up the opportunity for corruption and abuse. The bigger that target is, the more people will fight to have that power.
The decentralization of power is key. Then, if you can setup a system where the consequences of one's actions are not shielded, you can dramatically reduce the "evils" that you want to avoid.
You also have to realize how dated the ideas of socialism and communism are starting to become. Marx wanted the means of production to be owned by everyone, not just a few. The means of production were insanely expensive back then. It's now 2015 and technology is opening the doors for everyone to have access to the means of production. The most developed is the means to produce media (written, music, photo, video, etc) and mass-distribute it. We are also starting to see this bleed into physical object production (3D printer, desktop lathes, etc) and even monetary systems (crypto currency). Everything is moving in this direction. Marx would have LOVED this. It's all early stage, but my point is this: all of those who are currently in a position of centralize power are trying VERY hard to control and restrict this technology.
Last edited by DigitalChaos; 01-15-2015 at 11:54 PM.
Active Member
There have been fascinating experiments on decentralized/isolated economy. A city having its own inner currency, in parallel with the national one for instance, allows a bigger and faster economic growth apparently. That's how old european cities of a few thousands inhabitants could afford the enormous costs of a cathedral for example. That budget was completely independent from the kingdom economy.
Active Member
You have any specific ones you can list? I love these kinds of things. It sounds about right though, and much like a foundational component that lead to Classical Liberalism (aka: what liberalism was in the 1700's).
Some of the downsides of the historical experiments are going to be in a lack of common currency for trading with "outsiders." Only now have we managed to find a solution that allows for a global common currency and monetary system what is completely devoid of a centralized controller. It's a solution derived through some clever math. It has so much potential that all kinds of new systems are being adopted to use it. Things like replacements to central record keeping (house deeds, car titles, all forms of contracts, etc). Those that currently hold the centralized power are not going to let it go easily...
Last edited by DigitalChaos; 01-15-2015 at 11:53 PM.
Active Member
He is pretty far from libertarian, but significantly more libertarian leaning than any main party candidate.
There is a bunch of overlap, but Rand has a lot more main stream GOP things about him. It actually pisses off many of the libertarians who were libertarian before "tea party" existed. He basically compromises and plays party politics a lot more. As a result, it makes him much more popular than his father was.... so I guess that's what it takes.
You know what is crazy though? Rand Paul is heavily to the left of most Democrats when it comes to things like War, Drugs, NSA spying, Wall Street, etc. Imagine him running in a general election. Imagine how awkward that would be for the Democratic candidate during debates. It would have a good chance of pushing everyone much more to the left on these topics.
Active Member
Rand Paul also was in favor of cutting off people's long term unemployment because it "discouraged them from looking for work." Having been unemployed and spent months anxious and depressed, looking for work every day, I can tell you first hand just how important my unemployment insurance was. Now that I am back in the workforce, I am more than happy having my tax dollars go to help people who are laid off and in a slump. That's one key philosophical difference between the two parties--one believes that government has a role in helping people and one does not. If it were up to the GOP, every bit of the New Deal would be abolished. I'll never vote Republican.
I was nobody. Nothing.
Holy shit, you just dropped some knowledge on me.
That's all i'm going to say without getting too far into it.
Also, i wanted to make something clear, especially to @allegro . I don't want you to think i'm crazier than you already do
I don't think that the right is controlled by lucifer and the left is filled with the holy spirit (imagine all of that said in an ignorant redneck voice.)
And when i call myself a christian, it's...okay, you know how there's theistic satanism and philosophical satanism? Well i guess come pretty close to being a philosophical christian, if there is such a thing. It's not that i have a personal relationship with jesus because he died for my sins and so therefore i follow his teachings. It's not John 3:16 for me, it's Matthew 5 6 and 7. It's that i agree with the teachings of jesus (those teaching especially, the sermon on the mount teachings,) and strive to believe the rest.
I don't think god is a "person." I don't know if satan exists. I DO believe in God, but i damn sure don't think that the world is 6000 years old, etc. And the only way i know for sure that Christ was crucified, or even existed for that matter, is through the idea that it may have happened, had to have happened, in some dimension. Also, i have this strange notion that all stories are true to a degree once they become part of the collective consciousness.
A lot of christians would probably say that i'm NOT a christian, but i claim it. I claim it because i strive to live my life according to the sermon on the mount, NOT because i'm sure about the resurrection or think that there's gonna be a rapture.
So it's not so much good and evil. It's that, for me, left wing ideals are morally right. Right wing ideals are morally wrong. That's what i feel in my heart.
I REALLY didn't want you to think that i meant that GAWD is on the side of the dems and SAYTON is controlling the right.
Am i making sense here?
Active Member
No one appears to be challenging his potential candidacy. Maybe the situation will evolve when he actually makes a formal announcement.
Do you believe it will be challenged?
Bite me
I believe so, yes. It's the law, people don't just make this shit up. He has to be properly cleared before he gets anywhere near winning a primary. We haven't even gotten to Iowa yet, it's way too early.
Bite me
Rand Paul USED to be more libertarian, until he pretty much sold his soul. Like they all do. Although I'm not fond of Libertarians, anyway.
Bite me
That's typical Tea Party shit, not Republican (although I don't think Libertarians love unemployment much, either). Typical Republicans aren't against unemployment during tough economic times, but the Tea Party had control. Who knows what will happen, now. I'd hoped they'd all be gone by now, but Americans are selfish morons.
All this anti-"entitlement" shit is coming from Tea Party assholes. Fine, get rid of Medicare and disability and watch their voters all scream and holler.
Ugh, truthfully, I'm probably going to completely unplug during this election.
Last edited by allegro; 01-16-2015 at 10:30 AM.
Active Member
When the snopes of politics says otherwise, you might want to reevaluate: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...ployment-insu/
Even ignoring that, if unemployment benefits means more to you than making progress on foreign policy, drug war, NSA spying, Wall Street, etc.... You sound like a ridiculous single-issue voter or, more likely, just someone who finds any reason to justify voting based on party.
Active Member
I am shocked, not one mention of Rick Perry or Chris Christie!
I would have never thought that there would be so many looking to throw their hat in on the Repub side. It'll certainly be interesting - each trying to look more moderate than the next guy. Jeb Bush apparently has moderated a lot of his stances on issues since he first tried to run for office in Florida. Dam if I can sort through all the noise of the last week on him to find the article I read that put it rather succinctly.
The National Democratic Party should pay attention to history and not anoint Hilary with no other Dem to compete with her in the primaries. That was a serious failure of theirs when they anointed a woman to run for Senate in Massachusetts to replace dead Ted Kennedy. She unfortunately, just didn't have the charisma or political wherewithal to win big. That's how Scott Brown became senator for a day or two. Same woman couldn't win the Governorship a couple of years later. Voters do like choices, good choices, choices that make you have to think. Or am I giving 'Mericans too much credit?
@RhettButler Just curious, where are you located?
Last edited by Dra508; 01-16-2015 at 02:05 PM. Reason: conjunction function...
Active Member
It's true. I used to be pretty against the thought of voting for Rand Paul. I'm not exactly FOR him, but I am no longer writing it off. I realized that being interested in saint making or witch hunting doesn't really do anything productive (even though this is the popular way to approach candidates). I'd rather look at who is going to produce the best progressive step toward what I want to see. I don't remember any recent candidates who wanted to actually reel back on war-based foreign policy, war on drugs, NSA spying, AND Wall Street. If a Dem is willing to do it, show me! Those USED to be Dem positions. WTF happened?
Also, Justin Amash is my favorite active congressman.
edit: To quote Jeffrey Tucker: "To all people who are sending me evidence of Rand Paul’s various heresies, you can save your bandwidth. I’m not interested in saint making or witch burning. ... I really don’t care who or what makes a contribution to this end or how it comes about, so long as it is ethical and it actually achieves the aim of human liberation, the mother of all progress, order, and higher civilization.
Last edited by DigitalChaos; 01-16-2015 at 02:19 PM.
Posting Permissions
Likes: 
Faceplams: 
