The [Current Year] General Political/Salma Hayek discussion thread, part 4!!!

[jbombelli]

We got tired of bands copying other bands. We let STP slip through the cracks in copying Pearl Jam, but there was no way that Creed clone, Nickelback, was gonna get past us. And FYI, not the biggest fan of Creed either.

THIS will change your mind.

[video=youtube_share;oCiS0jxzlFk]http://youtu.be/oCiS0jxzlFk[/video]

 

[Brad69]

I have decided to become a Elizabeth Warren supporter!

 

[mmpsteve]

THIS will change your mind.

Not ever having been a fan, I clicked on it. Ouch, that was painful. All 30 seconds that I could stand of it.

editied to remove the picture.

.

 

[jamil]

Did you ever see a 12 year old kid who, when taken to a restaurant, has no idea how to use a knife and fork?.....not because he has a mental/physical impairment or because mommy always cut up his food for him. Nope. It's because since the time he was old enough to get off the bottle, he's been eating out of fast food containers. McDonalds, Taco Bell, KFC.

It seems as if you are doing that with language as well. Latest: LARPing. Last month: Woke.

You've decided that the English language is a Happy Meal. Well, it isn't. You either stand against grammar entropy or you don't. TLex is correct.

And all this parsing that Bug is doing is ridiculous. Just because Trump feels threatened, he doesn't have permission to label getting called on coloring outside the lines "a coup". He who sows chaos to weaken the ground upon which his opponent treads must step carefully. Trump is not a careful man.

First. I think someone should start a "words I hate" thread. It's not like I like some of these words that seem to set you off. I think that you and T.Lex have similar problems. You don't seem to accept some things you can't control. The world is changing, and that includes words. In informal settings it's not so bad to use them the way I've used them. They're just part of the contemporary conversation on the internet. "Woke", "LARPing", whatever. I didn't invent them. Don't ***** at me about it. It's kinda silly to complain about LARPing anyway. It's just short for LIVE ACTION ROLE PLAYing. It's often borrowed to refer to people who like to pretend that they're in a world where they're the heroes or villains. That's how I used it.

When I use "woke" it's in informal settings and I use it to convey a specific meaning for a concept that really didn't require a word to represent it until now. If you want to complain about these words, don't complain that they're being used on an internet forum. Instead, it's reasonable to complain that there is such a thing that a word needs to define. Who the **** was ever "woke" 20 years ago? It's not used as an incorrect form of wake or woken. It means something else. It means being conscious of social justice. But it's morphed into meaning either a person who virtue-signals (there's another term we should never have needed) their own consciousness of social justice, or the state of a person who is a bat **** crazy social justice warrior. The latter one is how I generally mean it.

Anyway, I don't think T.Lex is wrong that it would be better for people just to use the right words. My complaint was that he is being so idealistic he reacts to hyperbole as if it should be take seriously. We should scoff at it. We should even ridicule it. I damn sure am not going to get bent out of shape over it.

I said that people are too hysterical to use the right words. He's not going to get Trump to use the right words, and he's not going to get congress, or the media or anyone else to use the right words. He can only control himself and try not to let himself become hysterical too. That's why I said, calm down and stop getting bent out of shape when someone uses the wrong words. He's not going to stop it. You're not either. You can only control you. And you can complain all you want at me. I can't stop the words people use either and when I think it's the right word to use to convey a meaning, I'm going to use it. I think the world could live without terms like "woke". But until the thing that it means stops being a thing, it's a fine word to use to describe the thing in informal settings like INGO.

BTW. What was your problem with "conflate"? I recall you had some hairs up yer ass about that a few weeks ago. I agree it's overused. But the current fascination with society using it is likely a fad. Like "doubling down". I hate that one. Woke is probably a fad too. Someday when the culture war is over, maybe no one will need to be "woke" anymore. LARPing I'm afraid is here to stay.

 

[jamil]

Oh, Alpo! One can only assume that if someone brings up how fast their laptop processor is clocked you envision the repitition rate at which they strike it, possibly with a mechanical timepiece?

Now come on. Don't poke too much fun. He's kinda set in his ways.

 

[jamil]

I wouldn't have expected a different response from you, Bug. Bravo.

As to the insidious nature of socialism, it seems that we've given the present generation worldwide access to a communication system and information databases. Couple that with immaturity, increasing demands for immediate gratification and a reduction in parental supervision while at the same time believing little Johnny is a special snowflake.....

it isn't socialism, dude. It's the decline of western civilization.

Translation. GET OFF MY LAWN!

 

[jamil]

I would say so. Just like when people who say Trump is literally Hitler, it's equal disingenuous to place the ideas of American "Bernie" socialism on par with that of Soviet or PRC Socialism/Communism.

True. Bernie got kicked out of a commune because he wouldn't pull his own weight.

 

[jamil]

Absolutely. Capitalism and socialism can work hand in hand, with capitalism obviously being the more dominant. You just have to be vigilant that neither overtakes the other.

I think you have the formula wrong. Capitalism harmonizes with human nature, mostly. Socialism doesn't. It's fine to have some public services, the kind where human nature has dissonance with capitalism. So Police. Fire. Roads. Infrastructure. Also, some social programs, like a social safety net--which isn't socialism per se. So an open market capitalist system where capital is privately held. I think the US does fine. We probably do too much. But we certainly don't need to socialize education, or healthcare. That's retarded.

 

[jamil]

Your nose is broken then. You want to pin something on Obama, give the specific allegation and illustrate his personal involvement.

You want to pin something on Trump give the specific allegation and illustrate his personal involvement. And I mean objectively. Not a transcript that could have any of a dozen different interpretations.

I'm okay with letting Obama slide because I don't have all the facts. It just smells bad. And that's about as far as I could go with it. There's nothing wrong with my nose. It's kinda big. It works really well.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I think you have the formula wrong. Capitalism harmonizes with human nature, mostly. Socialism doesn't. It's fine to have some public services, the kind where human nature has dissonance with capitalism. So Police. Fire. Roads. Infrastructure. Also, some social programs, like a social safety net--which isn't socialism per se. So an open market capitalist system where capital is privately held. I think the US does fine. We probably do too much. But we certainly don't need to socialize education, or healthcare. That's retarded.

The vast majority of the existence of Homo Sapiens says differently.

 

[jamil]

The vast majority of the existence of Homo Sapiens says differently.

No. They lived in caves and grass huts and in tribes and murdered and pillaged each other. But, to the extent that peace existed was arguably because of markets and trading with each other instead of stealing **** from other tribes. And the peace we enjoy in the West today is fairly unique in the world. Not all because of capitalism but because of the idea of the sovereignty of the individual and individual rights. Which kinda goes hand in hand with free market capitalism. And when I say free market, I'm not talking about Laissez-faire capitalism.

This "democratic" socialism is nonsense. Socialism doesn't scale without heavy government control, which is prone to curruption, which in the hands of a few people with absolute power over society is very dangerous. Socialism is therefore dissonant with human nature especially at high enough scale where power tends to corrupt most. But on a smaller scale, like a family or a tribe, within the tribe, it works fine. You just have a bunch of warring tribes then.

 

[ghuns]

The vast majority of the existence of Homo Sapiens says differently.

The vast majority of our existence was characterized by kings and queens, ordained by some god or another, ruling over the masses who generally toiled in abject poverty.

Capitalism is a very recent development on our timeline. It's done more, in far less time, than any system previously conceived.

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk

 

[Kutnupe14]

No. They lived in caves and grass huts and in tribes and murdered and pillaged each other. But, to the extent that peace existed was arguably because of markets and trading with each other instead of stealing **** from other tribes. And the peace we enjoy in the West today is fairly unique in the world. Not all because of capitalism but because of the idea of the sovereignty of the individual and individual rights. Which kinda goes hand in hand with free market capitalism. And when I say free market, I'm not talking about Laissez-faire capitalism.

This "democratic" socialism is nonsense. Socialism doesn't scale without heavy government control, which is prone to curruption, which in the hands of a few people with absolute power over society is very dangerous. Socialism is therefore dissonant with human nature especially at high enough scale where power tends to corrupt most. But on a smaller scale, like a family or a tribe, within the tribe, it works fine. You just have a bunch of warring tribes then.

So essentially you just saying we got better accommodations?

 

[Kutnupe14]

The vast majority of our existence was characterized by kings and queens, ordained by some god or another, ruling over the masses who generally toiled in abject poverty.

Capitalism is a very recent development on our timeline. It's done more, in far less time, than any system previously conceived.

Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk

"Civilized" existence yes... but those were the days that Capitalism began to flourish via an emerging middle class. Homo sapiens have been around for at least 500,000 years, communism has existed indeed the vast majority of our species' existence.

 

[jamil]

So essentially you just saying we got better accommodations?

Did you read the rest?

 

[Mongo59]

So essentially you just saying we got better accommodations?

Come on Kut, how do you know I didn't have a seed pop and burn down my grass hut the other day?

 

[jamil]

"Civilized" existence yes... but those were the days that Capitalism began to flourish via an emerging middle class. Homo sapiens have been around for at least 500,000 years, communism has existed indeed the vast majority of our species' existence.

No. It hasn't. Communism is a specific thing. It was supposed to be the system that society evolved into naturally. You could say socialism existed the majority of our existence. But not at scale. Families and tribes. Basically collectivism starts to fail when you scale much past 150 individuals.

 

[ghuns]

..communism has existed indeed the vast majority of our species' existence.

Yeah. And for the vast majority of our existence humans endured untold misery at the hands of it. Those who ruled lived in opulence while masses "shared" in the misery of it for the communal "good".

I gotta admit, I'm two bourbons in, but WTF is your point, exactly?


Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk

 

[jamil]

Yeah. And for the vast majority of our existence humans endured untold misery at the hands of it. Those who ruled lived in opulence while masses "shared" in the misery of it for the communal "good".

I gotta admit, I'm two bourbons in, but WTF is your point, exactly?


Sent from my HTC 10 using Tapatalk

Well, not untold misery at the hands of communism. It didn't exist until it existed in theory, and it didn't exist IRL until some people got tired of waiting for the promised natural revolution. So they concocted one to get **** started.

But like I said, there was socialism for most of human existence in the form of tribal life. That may have looked a lot like a commune, but it was not communism. And life was untold misery and dying because existence was hard. But also because tribes were constantly trying to steal each other's ****. And then societies scaled, and as they scaled they formed monarchies and such. So armies got bigger and war got bigger and still misery and superstition and whatnot. And then came the enlightenment. Within a few hundred years, capitalism, individualism, and a very steep progression in comfort and safety.

Life got WAY easier. So easy we get to argue on the internet about why we should or shouldn't try to scale socialism.

 

[Brad69]

As the resident Warren supporter I feel you people have too much stuff and your stuff needs to be shared!