Originally posted by Jazzratt+May 24, 2007 01:26 pm--> (Jazzratt @ May 24, 2007 01:26 pm)Yes but you see whether or not I personally purchase drugs these things will continue to be in effect, and me not being a lifestylist like yourself I shall continue to do whatever the fuck I like.[/b]
Boy, that's a real "revolutionary" way to look things chief. "Things aren't going to change anyway, so I might as well continue what I'm going." Well, the revolution isn't coming anytime soon, someone even predicted it will most likely happen when we're all dead, so why bother trying at all? Of course, you're not trying at all, and are an extremely finicky "revolutionary" who is waiting only for HIS style of revolution to happen -- the one where we all have Gateway and Dell computers -- instead of one that will benefit the people in general.
In other words, you do nothing and are only driving people away from revolutionary beliefs. As a "realist" (not a "lifestylist") I see that the drug war is something that can be changed, perhaps within our immediate future. But it won't be won with such persuasive online arguments as "it's just harmless, man," "feel the vibe" kind of nonsense.
[email protected] 24, 2007 01:26 pm
What bourgeois lifestyle?
The lifestyle that puts you in the top 1% of the population around the world in privilege and resources. You don't want to give that up, but still will criticize others for not being "leftist" enough for you.
In the past month I have taken precisely 0 types of illegal drug and 3 legal ones (caffeine, nicotine and alcohol). As for it "affecting my thought process" I think someone is projecting just a little.
You're right. You have no thought process, so it can't be adversely affecting it. Carry on then with your revleft and drug addiction.
Brezhnev and Stalin had completely diffrent goals. Georgie is simply advancing neo-liberalism, just like his pappy. Fox News and The Nation are both shitty bourgeois news sources, so fuck 'em.
Bullshit. Stalin and Brezhnev did not have "completely different goals" -- both of them wanted to keep the USSR in tact, they just had different foreign and domestic policies, just like American leaders. They were not the same, but nor were they completely different "Socialists." For all his condemnations of Stalin, Brezhnev was just as bad and didn't get half as much accomplished. Even still, had someone like him been in charge instead of Gorbachev, it's unlikely the USSR would have fallen.
As for Fox News and The Nation, it's been shown that people who get their information from Fox News are less likely to be informed about the world than people who get it from The Nation, PBS, or even mainstream news. And these are mainstream geopolitical facts and such, not your Toys-R-Us style revolutionary BS. So they're not the same. Furthermore, Fox News is mostly a propaganda outlet for conservatives and they have no journalistic credentials, even issuing edicts down to their reporters and pundits telling them how to shape and distort the news. The mainstream media is far more subtle at this.
So they're not the same at all. For someone who's supposedly against "conspiracy," claiming all newspapers are of the same credentials and are merely propaganda for the upper class, run by a bunch of capitalists in dark rooms, is a conspiracy. There's no evidence to support it, and that's not how it works. There are good ones and then there are bad ones, good journalists and bad journalists, and the news process itself is more complicated than your pothead theories.
I understand you have no interest in comprehending how the world actually works and do nothing other than whine and call other people "out" on their revolutionary beliefs, though. That's why you're so worthless.
As I said, I'm not a fucking lifestylist and I don't see you shying away from those things either. Stupid fucking clunge.
I use them for productive things; not just *****ing at other leftists on websites.
Still suffering from the delusion you're witty I see. If only more of you internet toughguys would stop suffering from "The Wit Delusion" places like this would become more tolerable. As for Irony doesn't the fact that, as a member of revleft, are attacking the entire membership of revleft and telling us to do something you clearly have no intention of doing yourself strike you as a little ironic?
First, I'm not the one talking about "executing 1.5 million capitalists in the first week" and then millions of others later and so on during this supposed "revolution" that is going to take place only in your mind. You're the one talking about revolution, but the last thing you'd want to do is actually go and fight one.
Did you not claim that I wasn't a "revolutionary" and that I'm not a real "leftist"? Well, there are two ways to be a revolutionary, the first is to actually go fight in one, but as already shown, like fashion designer, you're very picky about the type of revolution that's right for "you." Even the revolutionaries in Latin America are apparently too conservative for you. The second way is to be a revolutionary thinker, to come up with new ideas in science or whatever. And it's obvious you're not any kind of a "thinker," you have no mind. So you're no more "revolutionary" than anybody else, and should stop claiming it.
As for being "more leftist, more anti-authoritarian" etc. than I am, as you also claimed, Libertarian-Socialism often preaches the idea that people will be able to transition to a better society WITHOUT the need for any "revolutionary," which are by their very nature authoritarian and brutal, furthermore, almost all revolutions have led to brutal dictatorships. So why are you claiming you're more "anti-authoritarian" in your beliefs when you're obviously not? It's probably because you have no comprehension of leftist theory or even any idea of what you're advocating, and are indeed a "political idiot."
Second, as a *thinking* leftist, which is rare around here, I want my ideas to be comprehensive and to make sense. And mine do make sense. Yours, on the other hand, make no sense. You claim to advocate "technocracy" which is about putting educated technocrats and the right people in the right places, and that is supposed to be achieved through an intelligent process. But revolutions are necessary a "dumb" process by any serious technocratic standard. Furthermore, they have nothing to do with any kind of leftism in general. They're often claimed to be socialist, but socialism is contribution according to deeds, not just putting people in certain places based on their education in case they *might* do something useful. And it certainly isn't communism. It's not anarchy, either (no rulers).
So just what kind of perverse leftism are you advocating here? The only thing good about a technocracy is that people like you wouldn't have any power or say in anything (just like now), you're strongest argument. And the reason I make fun of revleft is because your lame-brain theories actually make you one of the "smart" ones around here.
Oh yes because just about anyone can afford to jet off half way across the world to partake in armed struggle.
What are you talking about? It'd be relatively cheap to do that. People from the US go down there all the time in church missions to give aid to the need etc.. Conservatives are even doing more than your "revolutionary" ass.
What's amazing is this is from the guy who takes his Internet Personality War more seriously than Class War.
I'm not the one starting fights over who's more "leftist" and throwing around stupid insults like "fucking ****," "spack," "idiot" "piss ant" etc. as if anyone born after 1980 gives a flying fuck.
Yet another case where you are sitting in your glass house chucking stones about like a child having a tantrum. Why are you even here to make criticisms if you are so fucking revolutionary?
You're the one here calling out other people for not being "revolutionary" or "leftist" enough, but you were refuted immediately given the fact that you're as far away from being a revolutionary as one can possibly be.
Are you sad because you've yet to achieve that feet yourself? Here's a handy hint for convincing others you're not an imbecile: shut up, at least that way no one will here you say any of your outright idiocy..
"Waaah, stop pwning me." You're the one who keeps challenging my beliefs without backing yourself up. I don't care if I make crybabies like yourself uncomfortable. The only "idiocy" that has been exposed here is your own, and anybody with an IQ above room temperature can figure out that you're completely full of shit.
Your pissant "conflict" with Publius is no interest to me beyond the fact it's intensely amusing.
You're the one who keeps bringing him up. This is the fourth time now you've said you "don't care about it" but nevertheless keep replying anyway.
Casual homophobia doesn't just disappear if the person doing it tacks on "not that there's anything wrong with that".
How is stating that I'm not gay homophobia you fucking idiot? You're the fucking moron who keeps using words like "****," retard," etc. in place of argument, which probably would be offensive to some people, i.e. women. Not to mention your use of "mongoloid" might be offensive to some Asians as it has been used derogatively in the US for quite some time now, causing most of the scientific community to drop it.
Again, the height of hypocrisy: accuse others of not being sensitive to other people, while not giving a fuck yourself.
I really didn't ask for this stupid lecture on your views of punk rock and you Captain Bushler are in no position to call others "Kid".
I'll debate you on Bushler's destructive policies any day of the week. If you don't care about punk rock, why do you keep bring it up then?
I know quite a few RASH and SHARP that would like to have a few pointed words with you about their music being "relegated to the far right sidelines".
You don't have to "threaten me" (funniest thing I've heard since you tried to have Publius call the police on me) online with SHARPS you supposedly know, there a few of them here.
But not all SHARPS are left-wing and the RASH movement is hardly growing, at least in the states. Furthermore, I said skinhead rock, which IS predominantly right-wing. In fact, all of it is.
"In place of an argument" your accusation carries no weight, all my insults are in addition to the argument, fuckwit.
You're entire arguments are ad-hominems you idiot. It's just your one line, idiotic refutation of something, and then your insult. Like, "Bush is not Hitler, you fucking pissant."
And that is an ad-hominem attack. Nothing you ever say is ever substantial.
Where the fuck did you get the idea I was in out-and-out opposition to Marx.
Because you clearly have no comprehension of any of his theories.
[snip some more stupid shit about Publius and whining, proving only you're an idiot]
But you didn't say "Bush is a fascist" did you? You implied that he was like Hitler.
However you failed to take into account:
Arabs =/= Jews (just ask a Palestinian)
Imprisoning Without Due Process =/= Concentration Camps
TWAT =/= "Final Solution"
9/11 =/= Reichstag Fire
Your weak Hitler comparison doesn't work, go back to school.
BULLSHIT. First of all "Bushler" is just a comparison, a name bestowed upon him to show his similarities to Fascism, it's not saying that Bush is equal to Hitler in every way. I did not say Arabs are Jews (although they actually do have some connections historically) or that the TWAT is the same thing as the Final Solution.
The similarities of Bush between Hitler are numerous: suspension of habeas corpus, shifting of power into the highest branch of government, weaker but more effective propaganda, harassing and/or paying off journalists, rejection of international law, illegal wars, spying, and so on.
Bush has done all of this, and is by far closer to Fascism than any other US president in history.
As for the TWAT, like Hitler's wars, it is doing massive damage to the world and putting our human survival itself at risk. Because of the massive stupidity I have to reply to in this thread to "address" you I can't really elaborate here, but needless to say his destruction of Iraq and Afghanistan is very detrimental to both regions.
His wars are detrimental to the Middle East because they only fuel Islamic fundamentalism, nuclear proliferation, etc., making more conflicts (more loss of life) inevitable and subjecting millions of people to worse conditions that what they had. His policies have been detrimental to Afghanistan because now they're back to tribal thuggery and petty conflicts, rather than having any kind of stability whatsoever. He has a replaced a harsh Islamic region with a new one, without any stability. They'll most likely only get worse, not better. Had Bush left both regions alone, it's quite possible that they would have taken the path of Indonesia (the most populous Islamic country in the world) and started building a democracy.
Furthermore, calling America a fascist state can take into account its foreign policy as a whole since the cold war, which has indeed led to deaths in the millions, not to mention, torture, terror, and oppression that was far worse than the torture even undertaken by the Nazis.
I was only guessing based on the fact you're a paranoid fucknut and believe that Bush is the same as Hitler - which is insulting to all those who had to suffer under Hitler.
I never said they were the same. Second of all, there are many holocaust survivors who have spoken out against Bush for his similarities to Hitler, in leftist publications, some scholars, and even George Soros.
So don't denigrate them by claiming "all those who suffered under Hitler would never say this" when in fact several who did suffer under Hitler have claimed Bush does have many comparisons to him: "So far, I've seen nothing to eliminate the possibility that Bush is on the same course as Hitler. " There's another one interviewed in the documentary "Liberty Bound."
No one is denying Global Warming as a fact. However you, falling for the loudest of the "scientist/high priests" fail to realise the controversies surrounding it: Anthropogenic or not for example (although it's mostly accepted that there is a strong Anthropogenic influence), long term damage, whether it can be reversed and so on.
Anthropogenic Global Warming IS the fact, stupid. Scientists now more about AGW than they do about gravity; it is absolutely a "fact of science" and the scientific community is in agreement on this point and there a few dissenters.
Saying that they are "bourgeois scientists" or "elite scientists" or "scientists with an agenda" (when it's the other way around) or that scientist are pretending that they're "high priests" is just more of your kooky conspiracy claims.
Does your life revolve around the internet or something, dumbfuck? I thought by saying "friends" you would at least realise that I meant people in real life, the kind of person you could go out for a drink with (or do you not drink for "political" reasons?) or shag or whatever.
Because we're on the internet, and because you keep bringing up other "comrades" here, I thought you meant here. And you're the one with the higher post count than me, dumb-ass.
Look at the keyboard you have, notice that it is not an endless expanse of purely smooth plastic and that there are corners. Further note that if you were to smack someone in the eye with that corner it would hurt like fuckery.
LOL. Does your stupidity know no bounds? You'd have to have one of those old d | i | g | i | t | a | l keyboard or those heavy, old school Northgate OmniKey Ultras (http://wiki.merkey.net/wiki/Northgate_OmniKey) to actually be able to hurt yourself/somebody else with a keyboard.
Further note that if you were to smack someone in the eye with that corner it would hurt like fuckery. Although, to be fair yo you, they probably have to give you an extra large one so you don't hit the wrong keys. Probably put a waterproof sheet over it to, to prevent your mongoloid spittle damaging the circuitry.
It's a logitech elite (uh-oh, not revolutionary, I better turn myself in), and there are no sharp corners on it. Most keyboards are ergonomically designed nowadays with a nice place for your wrists, and with rounded corners so nice, fragile revolutionaries wont hurt yourselves between chit-chat secessions and gaming. You'd have to work at it to hurt yourself with one of these things.
And despite your endless "projections" of me, I'm not a fat kid who sits around drinking soda pop while I'm at my keyboard, but if I was and I did spill some Pepsi or something on my keypad, it most likely would do some damage, mucking up the keys and so forth, and nobody wants that. I also spend a relatively short amount of time on the internet "debating," I'm not on all the time, but my advantage is that I'm usually smarter than my opponents which is why I always end up winning the debates. This is no exception to that.
What does this even mean?
I thought it was funny the only thing you had to say about Hegel was that he was "lol" while using a pathetic "insult" towards me about how I'm going to hurt myself on my Logitech keyboard if I'm not careful.
Really, you're too much.
But, instead of ranting and bringing up comrade Publius ad-nauseum, why don't you instead create a thread entitled "Bush is not a fascist, nor is America" and I will gladly go down the list of reasons why America's massive corporatism, social conservatism, religious extremism, media monopolization (America ranks about 50th in freedom of the press) etc. As for Bushler, I will explain why he is the most extreme American president we've ever had in regards to foreign policy, not just another "fucked up American president," and why, in fact, he HAS driven us further into the red than any other president before him, thus explaining why your "haven't you had a 100 presidents" is not a witty exaggeration to make a poignant point but another one of your mindless, incorrect idiocies in the context of "serious debate."
Your debate tactic is to flame with a bunch of irrelevant, pointless shit (keyboards, pissants, ****s, Publius, etc.), while embedding any serious subject (the Iraq war) within so people have to reply to a lot of straw men garbage before they can get to your point. Why don't you debate me on an important topic, instead of getting pissing contests, and I'll gladly "pwn" you on something like that.
Since I know that you're on all the time, I'll be back in an hour to check on your progress, and we'll debate it.