Rich Businessman, TV Host Says It's 'Fantastic' that 85 People Possess More Combined Wealth than Half of the World by Niki2

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

You see, this is where a really committed left-wing sociopath would know what to do with those 85 people.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 24, 2014 6:12 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
You see, this is where a really committed left-wing sociopath would know what to do with those 85 people.

Shoot them all and then shove Chick-fil-A sammichs in their faces ?

( Oh wait. That was a different kind of sociopath who tried that one already. )

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 24, 2014 6:20 PM

WHOZIT

I have nothing to add here.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 12:28 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
You see, this is where a really committed left-wing sociopath would know what to do with those 85 people.

Aye, and it involves rope..

That said, my violent impulses in this regard don't come from sociopathy, but rather compassion gone beserk, not like it'd make any difference to them on the receiving end, but it's the principle of the thing.

Again, while I don't believe in dehumanizing people, I do believe it's possible to deliberately surrender ones own humanity, at which point I feel no particular need to consider them such - especially as the subsequent behavior following that surrender makes it pretty goddamn obvious what they are.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 12:46 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
That said, my violent impulses in this regard don't come from sociopathy, but rather compassion gone beserk, not like it'd make any difference to them on the receiving end, but it's the principle of the thing.

Sounds a lot like the mind set of post French Revolution beheadings. Slay " the rich" , then their family, friends, and should anyone dare speak out at the mindless violence, slay them as well.

This phony sense of self absorbed moral authority to kill those who you perceive have wronged 'society' is twisted sociopathy every bit as on par w/ Hitler's "final solution ".

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 1:09 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"Aye, and it involves rope.."

Is that because rope is simpler, cheaper, and more - ah - bullet-proof than bullets?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 1:16 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"You see, this is where a really committed left-wing sociopath would know what to do with those 85 people."

Well, many years ago I came up with the ironic formulation that goes 'Where are the people with the high-powered rifles when you need them?' The irony being that OF COURSE they're on the other side.

I had a friend - a very nice, conventional, smart and hard-working person - who nervelessness had a slightly different take. She would say 'Sometimes I'd like to get a machine gun and clean house.'

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:38 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
I had a friend - a very nice, conventional, smart and hard-working person - who nervelessness had a slightly different take. She would say 'Sometimes I'd like to get a machine gun and clean house.'

Nice "Final Solution " your friend had.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 6:57 AM

SECOND

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at https://www.mediafire.com/two

Wealth Inequality in America

Infographics on the distribution of wealth in America, highlighting both the inequality and the difference between our perception of inequality and the actual numbers. The reality is often not what we think it is.

References:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/08/americans-want-to-
live-in-a-much-more-equal-country-they-just-dont-realize-it/260639/
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-ameri
ca-chart-graph
http://danariely.com/2010/09/30/wealth-inequality/
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/10/03/334156/top-five-wealthiest
-one-percent/
http://money.cnn.com/2012/04/19/news/economy/ceo-pay/index.htm

Technical Note: Socialism isn't technically equal distribution of wealth. However, in the case of this video, the video creator is referring to the majority of Americans' perception of what socialism is, not what it actually is. So yes, there's yet another thing we are generally misinformed about. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 8:31 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Sounds a lot like the mind set of post French Revolution beheadings.

Umm, you *DO* realize I rather idolize Robespierre despite his many faults ?
That I firmly believed his actions* were ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to breaking the Caste/Class system, and extraordinarily influential upon the idea formented in the creation of our Nation as one intended to be without Caste/Class systems ?

Were it not for his slaughter of people who for the most part damned well deserved it, the words "All men are created equal" might never have been penned here - but of course, everyone wants to ignore the ugly bits which ALLOWED a better society by slaying the motherfuckers cockblocking it, of course - cause no one ever wants to ADMIT it kinda has to "go there" FIRST, elsewise the entrenched and powerful bastards present an impossible obstacle.

Which is how it has always been.

Quote:
“There are two great powers, and they’ve been fighting since time began. Every advance in human life, every scrap of knowledge and wisdom and decency we have has been torn by one side from the teeth of the other. Every little increase in human freedom has been fought over ferociously between those who want us to know more and be wiser and stronger, and those who want us to obey and be humble and submit.”

Did it never occur to anyone WHY the French were so eager to help us found a country without a class system, does no one remember it was THEY who built the Statue of Liberty ?
Because they knew what their Liberty HAD COST, thanks to an entrenched aristocracy which had wrapped itself around their country till it had begun to strangle.

And don't deny it, while we'd like to pretend ourselves more civilized than this, some small part of every decent human being in this country is thinking the same goddamn thing, although often in less elegant words.

Quote:
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.
- H. L. Mencken

Thing with Robespierre, or any revolution really, is a simple goddamn concept.
You DO shit to people, often enough, long enough, they're gonna get sick of it, and they're gonna DO stuff to *YOU*.
And being one of those doin the kickin now, the thought of that boot being on the foot of the masses you ground its heel into just scares the piss outta you, don't it, Rappy ?

Which is as it should be.

-Frem

*Up to and including the destruction of himself and his own political cabal, which was a necessary part of the process and plan, although he did not expect it to come upon him so suddenly.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 9:34 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yeah, Second, that was a shocker first time I saw it. Posted the same sort of thing a couple of years ago, and look how much worse it's gotten?

I'm obviously not in favor of violence in any form, but the situation has gotten worse than I ever dreamed it could in my lifetime, and it's definitely not healthy for the country or the world.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 10:15 AM

ANONYMOUSE

I wasn't going to comment here - then I remembered that people have fought and died for my freedom to do so, and so I'm gorram well gonna say something here.

It is indeed a fantastic statistic. It is also deeply wrong.

It is my considered opinion that we will never get any further as a species as long as institutions like the Old Boy Network and the like are in control, i.e. the rich and privileged who are powerful only because they are rich. They're getting in the way of meaningful social change, because people are too worried about keeping a roof over their heads and feeding their kids to be concerned about the overall state of society. On the other hand, family comes first, so that's only right and proper, but if they had no need to worry so much, perhaps...

Consider: suppose people were paid more wages by rich employers, i.e. they surrendered some of their riches - wouldn't need to be much, really. What happens?

For a start, people then have more disposable income, i.e. they're more able to buy things. Those things must be made. People have to make them. If more things are required to be bought, then more people are required to make 'em - elementary Supply & Demand theory - and therefore more people need to be employed. Meanwhile, they're buying stuff other people are making, while those other people are doing the same. The wealth they create is thus fed back into the economy - also the rich folk who own the manufacturing companies make even more money. The end result is that if the wealth is more evenly distributed, everyone is better off.

Is this too simple for the rich to grasp?

Businessmen in the UK were predicting total economic collapse with the long-overdue introduction of the National Minimum Wage...and here we are 15 years later, and no such collapse has occurred. There ya go.

Y'know, I had high hopes for Y2K, especially in the UK. I was actually hoping for a social collapse, because as far as I can see it's the only way to get the Old Boy Network to relinquish the stranglehold it has on our country. I was hoping that with the destruction of the old social order, we might get something better - at worst, we might have got something different. Alas, the programmers did their work too well.

(And no, it's not correct to say 'oh, they spent all that money and nothing happened' - that's totally ass-backwards. Nothing happened because all that money was spent so it wouldn't.)

It can't go on. Something, somehow, has to change, or we're all doomed.

(Hi, Echelon! It's me again!)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 10:44 AM

America loves a winner!

One sick MFer.

Quote:
"It is time that equality bore its scythe above all heads. It is time to horrify all the conspirators. So legislators, place Terror on the order of the day! Let us be in revolution, because everywhere counter-revolution is being woven by our enemies. The blade of the law should hover over all the guilty."

There is no justification for such wanton and haphazard slaughtering of humans.

Robespierre's attempt at justifying his virtuous terror was, as I said, every bit as inspiring as Hitler's " Final Solution ", or Pol Pot's killing fields.

In short, among the darkest side of all humanity.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 11:37 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:

I'm obviously not in favor of violence in any form ...

As has been pointed out to me in the past, the rich will never voluntarily give up their power.

My personal preference is for people in democracies to ride the vote and see how far it goes. But when the people in power are seriously threatened they'll - oh, have the military dissolve the government, ban the majority political party, re-write the constitution and promise an end to the junta 'soon' - as in Egypt.

Then what?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 11:56 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:
Originally posted by ANONYMOUSE:

It is indeed a fantastic statistic. It is also deeply wrong.

What I find mind-boggling is that a few billion people could let it happen. How can so many people be so thoroughly dispossessed of any control over their own lives against so few? Could 85 people stand against a few billion? Could even 100,000 people do the same?

I think we need to look at the factors that lead to that reality. They include the multiplying effect of wealth to directly control existing governments as well as their ability to control our mores. What we are taught is our reality to a large extent. And they control the lessons, so we will live according to their rules.

Parenthetically, did you ever wonder who REALLY runs the government? For example when the State Department decides once again to throw US support behind Israel, what interests are being catered to?

So, here's a real life example:

"But the fact that Obama even tried to shove Summers down the planet's throat tells us more about Obama than Summers—and whom Obama works for. Hint: You aren't one of them."
"Stiglitz, who would go on to win the Nobel Prize in Economics, tried to tell them exactly what would go wrong. But when he tried, he was replaced and exiled."

http://www.gregpalast.com/larry-summers-goldman-sacked/

Larry Summers: Goldman Sacked

Monday, September 16, 2013

By Greg Palast

Joseph Stiglitz couldn't believe his ears. Here they were in the White House, with President Bill Clinton asking the chiefs of the US Treasury for guidance on the life and death of America's economy, when the Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Larry Summers turns to his boss, Secretary Robert Rubin, and says, "What would Goldman think of that?"

Huh?

Then, at another meeting, Summers said it again: What would Goldman think?

A shocked Stiglitz, then Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisors, told me he'd turned to Summers, and asked if Summers thought it appropriate to decide US economic policy based on "what Goldman thought." As opposed to say, the facts, or say, the needs of the American public, you know, all that stuff that we heard in Cabinet meetings on The West Wing.

Summers looked at Stiglitz like Stiglitz was some kind of naive fool who'd read too many civics books.

On Sunday afternoon, facing a revolt by his own party's senators, Obama dumped Larry as likely replacement for Ben Bernanke as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. ... But the fact that Obama even tried to shove Summers down the planet's throat tells us more about Obama than Summers—and whom Obama works for. Hint: You aren't one of them.

All these Cabinet discussions back in the 1990s requiring the blessing of Goldman Sachs revolved around the Rubin-Summers idea of ending regulation of the US banking system. To free the US economy, Summers argued, all you'd have to do is allow commercial banks to bet government-guaranteed savings on new "derivatives products," let banks sell high-risk sub-prime mortgage securities and cut their reserves against losses.

What could possibly go wrong?

Stiglitz, who would go on to win the Nobel Prize in Economics, tried to tell them exactly what would go wrong. But when he tried, he was replaced and exiled.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 12:16 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Shoot them all and then shove Chick-fil-A sammichs in their faces ?

I have no idea what you're referring to. Could you save me the trouble of giburuing shoot+chick-fil-a and tell me what you're talking about?

In any case, it sounds like a waste of sandwiches.

Quote:
Robespierre's attempt at justifying his virtuous terror was, as I said, every bit as inspiring as Hitler's " Final Solution ", or Pol Pot's killing fields.

Or Shock and Awe. Don't feel so high and virtuous, dweeb. We- the United States- have displaced over 50 government since WWII, most of them democracies. And we didn't do it by jawboning people. In the process, we managed to kill millions- certainly more than Hitler ever did.

Quote:
There is no justification for such wanton and haphazard slaughtering of humans.

And yet, you'll manage to justify.

Quote:
This phony sense of self absorbed moral authority to kill those who you perceive have wronged 'society' is twisted sociopathy every bit as on par w/ Hitler's "final solution ".

Indeed. So bring it, dude. Let the justification begin!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 12:19 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I'm obviously not in favor of violence in any form ...- NIKI

As has been pointed out to me in the past, the rich will never voluntarily give up their power. My personal preference is for people in democracies to ride the vote and see how far it goes. But when the people in power are seriously threatened they'll - oh, have the military dissolve the government, ban the majority political party, re-write the constitution and promise an end to the junta 'soon' - as in Egypt.
Then what?-KIKI

I've asked NIKI that question five or six times, never got an answer. So, then ... nothing, I guess. But yanno- those 85 people.... and the 85,000 people after them... they're building up some bad mo'fo juju. So karma will sort it all out.

(You can't argue people out of their religions, and that is NIKI's.)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 12:58 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

KIKI- question has been discussed many times whether the system is maintained by convention or by violence or by fear of the unknown. I've thought about that myself... the extreme power of our modern weapons, which allows a few people to threaten and potentially kill (literally) millions... well, that's a far cry from the ancient Egyptian overseers with their whips and spears. We've seen authoritarian governments which managed to move forward economically- Russia under Stalin, East Germany under the Stasi, Chile under Pinochet- so it's possible for a nation to continue to function under duress.

On the other hand, there is an author (forget who) who very forcefully came down on the side of "convention". In his view, there is no way a brute force can compel an entire society if it is truly against the authority's view.

Anyway, I've thought long and hard about how to "dictator-proof" societies in a way that is automatic, because people are so bad at vigilance, and depending on the intermittent revolution to keep things fresh (The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.) is unreliable.

One way to end this tyranny is to either get rid of money, or to create a multiplicity of currencies such that nobody has control of that big pile of fruit that you've referred to. Money seems to be the linchpin in this system; those who control the money control everyone. So... move out of that system and develop a parallel one.

Another way is to eliminate any single-person position of authority- Chair, President, CEO, etc. because a single person (such as a unitary executive) is always able to come to decisions faster than any representative group such as a committee. Also, I think people should be appointed to committee by lottery... the person who wants that power the most is the person who you least want in position. Change the laws which define corporations.

Free speech should only be defined as speech which you don't have to pay for. If you have to pay for it, it's advert.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 12:59 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
Shoot them all and then shove Chick-fil-A sammichs in their faces ?
I have no idea what you're referring to. Could you save me the trouble of giburuing shoot+chick-fil-a and tell me what you're talking about?

In any case, it sounds like a waste of sandwiches.

Floyd Lee Corkins II, who pleaded guilty in federal court on Wednesday to the Aug. 15 shooting at the Family Research Council (FRC), identified the FRC as a target by using the website of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which includes what it calls a “Hate Map” that features the FRC's Washington, D.C., headquarters.

As the court filing’s “Statement of Offense” for United States of America v. Floyd Lee Corkins II reads, “He was a political activist and considered the FRC a lobbying group. He committed the shooting for political reasons. He had identified the FRC as an anti-gay organization on the Southern Poverty Law Center Website.”

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/chick-fil-sandwich-shooter-identified-
frc-target-using-southern-poverty-law-center#sthash.OikvOSCD.dpuf

Quote:

Quote:
Robespierre's attempt at justifying his virtuous terror was, as I said, every bit as inspiring as Hitler's " Final Solution ", or Pol Pot's killing fields.
Or Shock and Awe. Don't feel so high and virtuous, dweeb. We- the United States- have displaced over 50 government since WWII, most of them democracies. And we didn't do it by jawboning people. In the process, we managed to kill millions- certainly more than Hitler ever did.
Quote:
There is no justification for such wanton and haphazard slaughtering of humans.
And yet, you'll manage to justify.
Quote:
This phony sense of self absorbed moral authority to kill those who you perceive have wronged 'society' is twisted sociopathy every bit as on par w/ Hitler's "final solution ".
Indeed. So bring it, dude. Let the justification begin!

Sorry, apples to oranges. Next

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 1:19 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
I've asked NIKI that question five or six times, never got an answer. So, then ... nothing, I guess. But yanno- those 85 people.... and the 85,000 people after them... they're building up some bad mo'fo juju. So karma will sort it all out.

(You can't argue people out of their religions, and that is NIKI's.)

I don't know what this is all about. I don't recall you asking the question before, much less five or six times. Perhaps you asked after I had left a thread...I don't always stick around, once I feel a thread has exhausted its viability.

And you didn't state clearly what question you ARE asking...I'm guessing, given what you quoted, whether I think violence would be justified if things got bad enough? I can't answer that except for myself: If it got to the point you suggested, "have the military dissolve the government, ban the majority political party, re-write the constitution and promise an end to the junta 'soon'", I would certainly understand people turning to violence. The problem with your scenario is that I don't believe it ever would come to that in this country, so we'll just have to agree to disagree on that point. Given the world as it is today and America what it is, I don't think it would ever get that far. Only time will tell.

I'm not sure what kind of snark "You can't argue people out of their religions, and that is NIKI's" is, first, because Buddhism isn't a religion, although many consider it one, and second, because you appear to have decided what my position would be, tho' you said you never got an answer, and have decided what the "argument" is. I don't know what all that is about, all I can figure is that it bothers you that I don't call for violent revolution to "fix" economic inequality in America? If that's the case, my answer is that I don't think violent revolution would "fix" anything, certainly not in the short term and, from what history seems to show, not necessarily in the long term either.

Does that answer your question?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 1:21 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"In his view, there is no way a brute force can compel an entire society if it is truly against the authority's view."

The Taino under Columbus (yes that Columbus) were so oppressed by their conditions women killed their babies as soon as they were born. As result of smallpox, Spanish brutality and infanticide, the population fell from an estimated 600,000 to 500 with two decades. There's always a way out if you really can't stand it.

Anyway, one of the ways to hierarchy-proof a society might be to allow aggregations of no more than a certain number of people. Even if your economy has a flat structure, some people can acquire control of others by simple numbers.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 1:51 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Sorry, apples to oranges.

Because....? Killing some people is different from killing other people? Well, I'll mentally put YOU in that "other" category then. The "doesn't count" category, where you've put millions of others.

You are a troll, and not worthy of further response.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 1:56 PM

America loves a winner!

Because one is a military endeavor, and the other is nothing but whole sale slaughtering of men, women at the whims of a tyrannical blood lust movement.

Seems you're simply not capable of comprehending the difference between political butchery and winning an actual war.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:02 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Niki

fwiw I do remember SignyM asking you that question repeatedly, though, given my memory, I can't remember which thread. But perhaps you had already left. In any case, I appreciate your answer.

Out of curiosity - if you were active in a group that was tending to favor violence, would you try to dissuade them, participate with the majority, or leave?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:05 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Because one is a military .... whole sale slaughtering of men, women at the whims of a tyrannical blood lust movement.

Shock and awe fits that description, as do the many other genocides that we've fomented and supported.

You can't seem to get the idea that if you massacre people, even with "the best of intentions"... yanno, you've still killed lots of innocent people. It's not apples to oranges- dead people are dead people, all their lives and all their deaths are worth all the same.

And NO government is going to say- Hey, we're going to invade your nation and break it apart for resources. Every single massacre, every single occupation, is going to have some great-sounding rationale: white man's burden, self-defense, the enemy among us, bringing democracy to benighted tyrannies, responsibility to protect, anticommunism, revolution of the people... you've really got to look very carefully at mass slaughter to see whether it is truly necessary, and not just given acceptable propaganda. Being a "military endeavor" doesn't automatically make it right; our military is used for all kinds of despicable actions.

In my view, the only reason to kill real people is to save actual lives.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:06 PM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up

Quote:
Originally posted by FREMDFIRMA:
Did it never occur to anyone WHY the French were so eager to help us found a country without a class system, does no one remember it was THEY who built the Statue of Liberty ?
Because they knew what their Liberty HAD COST, thanks to an entrenched aristocracy which had wrapped itself around their country till it had begun to strangle.

American Revolution ended officially in 1783, with most combat over in 1781.

French Revolution began in 1789.

When the French helped us kick the British out, they were still a Monarchy, and our Revolution was one part of their off-and-on series of wars with Great Britain.

By 1797 we were in an undeclared naval war with France.

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:18 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Signy ... tsk tsk. The posts you're replying to have been put up there SIMPLY to provoke you so much you'll reply. No amounts of facts on your part will change that. You can't turn it into a real discussion no matter how hard you try.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
Because one is a military .... whole sale slaughtering of men, women at the whims of a tyrannical blood lust movement.
Shock and awe fits that description, as do the many other genocides that we've fomented and supported.

You can't seem to get the idea that if you massacre people, even with "the best of intentions"... yanno, you've still killed lots of innocent people.

And NO government is going to say- hey, we're going to invade your nation and break it apart for resources. Every single massacre, every single occupation, is going to have some great-sounding rationale: white man's burden, self-defense, the enemy among us, bringing democracy to benighted tyrannies, responsibility to protect, anticommunism, revolution of the people... you've really got to look very carefully at mass slaughter to see whether it is truly necessary, and not just given acceptable propaganda.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:21 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

You're right. There is no glimmer of logic or rationality in rappy's head. No more responses.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:37 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

I just didn't want to see you waste your time and effort on its posts. Life's too short, yanno?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:42 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Niki

I'm need to go get some things done but I'm hoping for a reply. I think we've got some interesting topics going on, and one of them is personal conscience. It took a lot of that (and probably not being married and/ or having children) for Snowden to do what he did. I just wonder what prompts the conscience of the people here. (The people who have one, of course. Not everybody does.)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 25, 2014 2:42 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Did it never occur to anyone WHY the French were so eager to help us found a country without a class system, does no one remember it was THEY who built the Statue of Liberty ?

So, the King of France helped us out because he was against a class system ? Gee, I didn't know that.

[/sarcasm]

The French had become interested in the American Revolution from the outset. They saw the revolution as an opportunity to strip Britain of their North American possessions in retaliation for France's loss of Canada a decade before. At first, French support was covert; French agents sent the Patriots military aid (predominantly gunpowder) through the legitimate French company Hortalez & Cie, beginning in the spring of 1776. By 1777, over five million livres of aid had been sent to the American rebels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War#
French_involvement

Sig - if you're going to compare the targeting of MILITARY sites and installations to the rounding up of CIVILIANS so as to slaughter them simply because of their political/ social affiliation,with no due process or pretense of legal justification or grounds, then sorry, there's no agreeing with you here.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 11:20 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Because according to rappy, even tho we killed 100,000+ civilians and rounded them up and tortured them in military prisons with no due process, gosh, we meant well!

[/snicker]

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 11:26 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Because according to rappy, even tho we killed 100,000+ civilians and rounded them up and tortured them in military prisons with no due process, gosh, we meant well!

That's not according to anything I've remotely said, think, or believe. Nor is that remotely what has happened.

You keep on believing lies and bearing false witness onto others. You have nothing else to cling to otherwise.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 11:56 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
There is no justification for such wanton and haphazard slaughtering of humans.

except....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 12:06 PM

America loves a winner!

I see you're stuck in a ridiculous loop. We've already gone over this before.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 12:22 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 12:35 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

NIKI, perhaps you didn't see these, but I asked the same question quite a few times over several pages in the What Will It Take for Us to Get Back to Being a Decent Society? thread.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=57096&p=2

Because I asked so often, I assumed that you didn't want to answer:

Quote:
... NIKI, we have to get beyond the plaintive Why can't we all just get along? approach. The reason why society is as fucked up as it is, is because the wealthy and powerful have made it that way for their benefit. And as KIKI has pointed out, wealth begets assholeness... which begets wealth... which begets... And even the wealthy who are honest enough to recognize that they're parasites on society don't stop. Like Soros, they say- Hey, I just play by the rules, I didn't make them "Asking" the rich and powerful to be nice is like expecting a lion to stop eating zebras. It's pointless. There are only two ways to make this a decent society: either get rid of the rich and powerful (a guillotine would be a nice touch), or build an alternate society and refuse to let the rich and powerful in. In order to build an alternate society, you need an alternate medium of exchange, because money and the current financial system pretty much has us all by the short-hairs. Yanno what I mean?

... Hoping for input from NIKI.

... OH BTW- NIKI, I am specifically waiting for an answer from you. What I posted goes directly against your Buddhist grain (I think) and yet it is a real-world observation. I'd appreciate seeing how you resolve the problem.

... Still hoping for some kind of response from you NIKI. WHAT IF "getting back to a decent society" involves breaking some legs... or some necks? How do you resolve this conundrum?

... Interesting. NIKI is a Buddhist; quite evidently she believes in being nice and would like other people to be nice as well. So I asked NIKI five times (or so) what she would do if getting "back to being a decent society" mean breaking some necks. It's a question she studiously avoided.

.... Well, I still want an answer from NIKI and an answer from RAPPY. I've asked each of them... oh, about 7 times by now. Maybe more. I would LOVE to get to the bottom of their beliefs, understand the nub from which everything else springs. Like a lot of things, it prolly has to do with a personal experience. Our most enduring lessons are the ones most deeply felt.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 12:39 PM

America loves a winner!

Sig - You're neurotic, obsessive or something, I can't say. Don't care, either. But I've answered your question more than a few times, and given damn near 10 years of examples of my views. You keep asking ,if you like, I've already addressed your question.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 12:43 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

RUSH LIMBAUGH is a BLUE PILL ADDICT!

As evidence of "rape mentality"
Tuesday, July 30, 2013 8:11 PM
MAL4PREZ
And just remember, according to Rappy, the term befitting a women who wants the insurance she pays for to cover medications affecting her reproductive organs is whore

Wednesday, July 31, 2013 4:23 PM
little rappy
The term applies

And this is Geezer being non-partisan ... HAHAHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ...

Dem Super Pac slams Obamacare because it really sucks and will cause herpes
Geezer
So some Democrats are running on pointing out that the Healthcare.gov rollout was an unmitigated disaster.

I feel so vindicated.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 12:56 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

NIKI, I left a post for you, it's above the post where rappy so rudely interrupted. In it, you'll see that I did ask you quite a few times about whether violence is ever justified. You came back to the thread later, but may have missed the pages where I repeated the question.

Quote:
I'm not sure what kind of snark "You can't argue people out of their religions, and that is NIKI's" is, first, because Buddhism isn't a religion, although many consider it one, and second, because you appear to have decided what my position would be, tho' you said you never got an answer

As I understand it, karma is a fundamental tenet of Buddhism, correct?

http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/karma.htm

Karma, like god, or souls, or creation, or many other supernatural tenets of religion, cannot be demonstrated by real-world observation. In fact, in many cases real-world observation tends to disprove many of these tenets. In any case, whether by lack of evidence or evidence against, certain ideas must be believed. That belief constitutes a religion. Therefore, in my view, Buddhism is a religion. And you can't argue people out of a religion (belief). Not a snark, just an observation.

As far as thinking I had an answer, I thought your lack of response (in the presence of responses to other posts) was indeed an answer. However, in this post I do see that you have provided an answer.

Quote:
And you didn't state clearly what question you ARE asking...I'm guessing, given what you quoted, whether I think violence would be justified if things got bad enough? I can't answer that except for myself: If it got to the point you suggested, "have the military dissolve the government, ban the majority political party, re-write the constitution and promise an end to the junta 'soon'", I would certainly understand people turning to violence.

You yourself probably would not but you would understand if others did.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 1:28 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Actually Niki, I too am wondering if you have an answer to my question about conscience.

You seem to be a person of strong conscience. You rescue animals locally and after the Macando spill, you were active in the 99% movement, and probably other things I'm unaware of. So your conscience takes you very far. I'm just wondering where you draw the line, and under what circumstances.

My conscience centers around family - parents, siblings, youngsters. Plus when it comes to the planet I work very hard to improve things or at least do less harm. But I draw the line at anything that would jeopardize people being able to depend on me. (Though since both parents have passed on and youngsters are mostly grown, that constraint is beginning to loosen up.) And of course I have yet to retire. But should something threaten anyone in my family, my long-term constraints would give way to immediate goals.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 1:32 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Ahhh, that explains it. If you had bothered to look, you'd have noticed that I never went back to that thread after the first page. I searched for my name, and it only comes back in posts from you, asking that question, then apparently deciding I was "studiously avoiding" the question. I also found "I find BYTE to be entirely self-absorbed. NIKI, bless her heart, engages in magical thinking about karma", which I also find curious. You make a lot of assumptions.

For future reference, if you ask a question and I don't respond, you can always PM me with the link to the thread and I'd be more than happy to check it out. I get out of a lot of threads once it becomes obvious they're going nowhere and not worth my time or effort to continue.

I've stated previously that I don't agree with all the tenants of Buddhism; I'm unconvinced about reincarnation, and "karma" is something I HOPE is true, more than anything else. It's not a religion, remember, and it's practiced differently in every country. Generalizations can be dangerous.

As to your question, I answered that I don't envision things ever getting to that point in America. But I'll approach it from the hypothetical which is difficult because I have to create a society--America just isn't a good example, in my opinion. Let's just say I was living in a society where what you suggested was true, a small minority "had the military dissolve the government, ban the majority political party, re-write the constitution and promise an end to the junta 'soon'". In such a situation, yeah, I believe I would join the resistance; I would encourage/work toward as few innocent people as possible being harmed, try to help plan things which didn't cause slaughter but be as big a "wrench in the machine" as possible. NOW. I don't know what I would have done when younger, but I don't value my life much anymore, it's been a great one for me, but I already have an end game planned, so it would be worth the potential sacrifice. But I can't know, nobody can except those who have actually taken action.

Nonetheless, I find your position unrealistic, because in the real world, I don't see any of those things happening in America, or even coming close. I continue to believe that protest and legal action have a bearing in our country…certainly not a perfect one, but I see nations as swinging more in pendulum form from closer to one extreme to the other these days, certainly "Western" nations, and I see America in particular as too independent, too populous and too rooted in our beliefs to ever allow a dictatorship or anything like it to come to fruition. Obviously you do, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I definitely see revolution as an extremely fallible method of "fixing" things; more often than not, it ends up with a worse result than what it was supposed to "fix", and people who engage in revolution are generally people who think they have all the answers and want the power to enforce their agenda, which never makes for good government.

On a personal note, I found quite a few of the things you wrote to and about me rather offensive. I've never advocated any "Why can't we all just get along? approach." I attempt to inform people here, bring things to their attention, and I express my viewpoint. In the real world, I have been active about my beliefs all my life.

"NIKI is a Buddhist; quite evidently she believes in being nice and would like other people to be nice as well. So I asked NIKI five times (or so) what she would do if getting "back to being a decent society" mean breaking some necks. It's a question she studiously avoided." While I think almost everyone would "like" everyone to be nice, what you wrote doesn't reflect me even slightly. I've been almost as nasty as anyone here, been quite overt in my anger about even things the "liberals" do (like drones and Gitmo), and only wished that people HERE could be CIVIL when debating, which is, I think, not a particularly ridiculous stance. And obviously, I never "studiously avoided" anything…I WASN'T THERE!

There's tons I could say about what's wrong with our "representative democracy", from the military-industrial complex to economic inequality to politics, but it's not worth the time or effort, and my opinions are pretty clear on every issue upon which I comment. I find it ironic that you go after me as some kind of woos, given I'm one of the few people here who have owned up to HAVING taken action on the causes in which I believe. Certainly not violent action, which seems to be what you want to get out of me, but the question kind of remains: Why me?

Not that it's important, I just found this rant of yours and your conviction that I was "dodging" the question rather curious.

ETA: We just cross-posted; you posted while I was writing this in Word and I just pasted it in. As to those around me being harmed, if I were to engage in anything dangerous, I would re-home my dogs; my husband, from what I know of him, would let me follow my conscience and is of an age where I already know he doesn't value his life either, and I have no relatives. So for me the answer would be easier.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, January 26, 2014 1:44 PM