| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The King Of Karaoke |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 09:57:21
So sad, as well.
http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=17961
-------------------------------------
|
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| VoVat |
Posted - 11/03/2004 : 17:55:31
I don't think humans are naturally good or bad, but I do think they're largely selfish, yet they also need others to survive, a contradiction that makes me wonder how we lasted so long as a species. I do think the gung-ho laissez-faire capitalists and Social Darwinists are somewhat self-defeating, in that their lack of concern could easily come back to bite them in the ass. Sure, there are a lot of cases where it doesn't, but it certainly could. You think the poor and weak should just go and die, because they're nothing but a drain on society? Well, what happens if YOU end up poor and weak, or if you somehow need the help of poorer, weaker people? I think circumstances working out like that might cause a lot of these people to change their minds.
Mind you, I also find Social Darwinism morally repulsive, but I realize that its adherents don't care much about my opinion in this matter, since I AM low, ugly, and weak. (On the other hand, I consider myself to be quite principled.)
quote:
Freedom plugs. Hee!
I still call them FRENCH plugs, thank you very much!
"Signature quotes are so lame." --Nathan |
| KimStanleyRobinson |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 17:18:34
I like you when you're tired, Erebus. :-)
Go forget for a while man. |
| Erebus |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 17:06:10
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
It's pretty easy to see that the human condition will continue to vascillate between war/chaos and such peace/order as we can achieve. Perhaps only those who would expect, or desire, otherwise are wrong? Even insane?
I've never understood how you can on one hand believe that people are driven evolutionarily to cheat and screw over each other (which to a lesser degree I believe), and yet be a libertarian who thinks people should be free to do whatever they want. It seems like a weird combination.
Don't most libertarians believe (or at least say) that people are fundamentally good and that they will make good/fair choices if freed from government interference?
darwin, I am a bundle of contradictions, but then so are we all, I guess. It's even worse than you surmise. Within a realm of law protecting persons and their possessions, people would be driven to "freely" pursue their own advantage. So, no, I wouldn't go for "free to do whatever they want", given restraint by law. Don't know whether libertarians believe people are fundamentally good, but would agree that the "market knows best", leading to more efficient production and pricing, thus benefitting all. But sure, the race would be to the swift, and many a child would be left behind, or at least to the mercy of private charitable impulse. Would it be worse than what we have? In the short-run it probably would, but after libertarian principles had reigned as long as have those of social welfare, I think not. People will rise to challenges, much more than the left credits them, I think. But we'll never know.
I'm exhausted. Been involved in a similar debate over at the pixies site where the Swimmer pasted my first reply to KoK. Running on pre-election stress, most likely. How's that for a guy who refuses to vote and generally loathes democracy as we have it. Most likely Homer was right: democracy never works, at least at this scale. I mean, just look at it. Better than the alternatives? Maybe, at least until it falls into its natural successor condition.
Just to deepen the contradictions, I don't believe in "free will", not even a little bit, and yet I'm will to blame and condemn all over the place, not least to include myself. And all the while obviously judging like hell, I consider myself a nihilist, or at least a pseudonihilist. That's where the sociobiology comes in, with all of nature red of tooth and claw, or however Thomas Hobbes put it. Being is just an eternal avalance, sliding down an infinitely tall mountain into in infinitely deep valley, complete with boulders other boulders call Bush and Kerry. And I'm a pebble that cares about what the other debris does, pretending to believe that none of it matters because it's all plummeting just exactly the way it must out of deference to mathematical law.
Ebb is right about the idealism. Taken to extremes, all "isms" point to their own absurdity. Thanks CoF for the thanks. You too, speedy m. Best I can say is that I think Kerry is variously wrong or incompetent, depending upon the issue. KSR, you're right to mention my penchant for invoking violence. Though I betray my subconsious by doing so, I rationalize it by reminding myself that the human race is in denial, so somebody has to bring it up. But maybe I enjoy it too much. I am a piece of work. Sure you can understand. Kok, thanks for asking, and for thinking me smart. Smart enough to fool myself, which is all I guess anyone can want.
Monday Night Football beckons, or maybe Turner Classics Movies. At least it's another year before we have to again wade through days of that horror shit that's been all over the TV this past week. Man I hate that stuff. |
| Ebb Vicious |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 16:16:16
hahahah erebus debating thoughtfully. maybe for a junior high debate class?
give me a break, his arguments are juvenile, dogmatic and tedious. he is taking the easy, childish road of arguing ideals instead of arguing realities.
i don't waste my time trying to have a real conversation with someone who doesn't even acknowledge the limitation of reality.
edit: it's also a sign of how a militant crazy like erebus functions that he came into a thread about a COMIC STRIP and tried to start a "real" debate.
edit #2: i partially take that back, because at least he had the good sense at first to just make a quip, KoK is the one who actually initiated the discussion.
regardless, my other points still stand. |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 15:29:24
Just wanna say thanks to Erebus for being level-headed and discussing calmly, even while being asked such well-thought out questions as whether his parents are nazis. And to the rest of you who are willing to debate thoughtfully.
 "Join the Cult of Frank 2.0 / And you'll be enlightened (free for 1.x members)" |
| Ebb Vicious |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 15:28:19
another thing homer said:
"when will they ever learn? democracy just doesn't work." |
| speedy_m |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 15:12:22
Erebus, I like that you look at both sides, that's a very wise thing to do. I don't however see how you come to to the conclsions you do. From what you beleive, I don't see how you can support George W. It seems to me you don't really agree with the Republicans on much, but you find them more appealing than the left. Since violence/war seems to be a pervasise issue for you, naturally you side with a more militaristic government, even if it tries to control you (something which you clearly despise). You're voting choice reminds me of Homer when voting Sideshow Bob for mayor: "I don't agree with his Bart killing policy, but I do agree with his Selma killing policy". |
| darwin |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 14:59:41
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
It's pretty easy to see that the human condition will continue to vascillate between war/chaos and such peace/order as we can achieve. Perhaps only those who would expect, or desire, otherwise are wrong? Even insane?
I've never understood how you can on one hand believe that people are driven evolutionarily to cheat and screw over each other (which to a lesser degree I believe), and yet be a libertarian who thinks people should be free to do whatever they want. It seems like a weird combination.
Don't most libertarians believe (or at least say) that people are fundamentally good and that they will make good/fair choices if freed from government interference? |
| The King Of Karaoke |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 14:07:05
"FYI, I watch little Fox News."
Hey, you sound pretty smart by the way. When is that little Fox news on? I think I've caught it before. Is it Saturday mornings from 8 -11? They push all that genetically modified cereal on the kiddies, right?
-------------------------------------
|
| KimStanleyRobinson |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 14:02:26
Erebus, I see a trend of a tendancy towards violence and/or conflict in your position.
Unfortunately, you are not a minority among your comarades.
When there is violence, the assholes that enjoy it and are ready for it will always "win".
Its not a game. Put down your controller. |
| Cheeseman1000 |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 13:55:28
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
Further, I consider all mandated participation in welfare, education, and risk pooling schemes to be moral tyranny and simple theft. If you and yours want to go forth toward what you deem good, more power to you, but to insist, essentially under threat of imprisonment, that others participate as though they would share your moral assumptions, to include your means and ends, is criminal, or at least would be in a just state. I do not share your moral assumptions about what is good for persons and peoples and resent being forced to act as though I do, through taxes and worse.
How do you feel about forcing people to drive on the right-side of the road rather than the left? Shouldn't we be left alone to make our own decisions?
Exactly. Drive on the left hand side, it makes tons more sense.
"You ever seen a man say goodbye to a shoe?"
"Yes, once..." |
| Ebb Vicious |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 13:52:13
erebus where is the portal to the mystical magical parallel dimension where you live?
i'd like to check it out sometime it sounds funny. :) |
| The King Of Karaoke |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 13:51:04
Oh, uh?... Fair enough.
And here I was thinking you were pissed about the plastic flags.
-------------------------------------
|
| Erebus |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 13:06:18
quote:
Originally posted by darwin
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
Further, I consider all mandated participation in welfare, education, and risk pooling schemes to be moral tyranny and simple theft. If you and yours want to go forth toward what you deem good, more power to you, but to insist, essentially under threat of imprisonment, that others participate as though they would share your moral assumptions, to include your means and ends, is criminal, or at least would be in a just state. I do not share your moral assumptions about what is good for persons and peoples and resent being forced to act as though I do, through taxes and worse.
How do you feel about forcing people to drive on the right-side of the road rather than the left? Shouldn't we be left alone to make our own decisions?
Don't think the analogy holds. Not only would I support arbitrary convenctions such as this that don't infringe on people in a meaningful way, I would also try to fund road infrastructure expenses through fuel taxes or some other means that could be shown to respect proportionality between use and maintenance. In the case of social programs, the moral position of individuals is impinged. The left (and too often the right) says not only do they know best but also that they're sure enough of it that they're going to force you to act as though you agree. This constitutes a deep imposition upon the very personhood of those who would disagree, whereas highway conventions can't be seen as so instrusive.
However, having said that, I think a powerful argument against me can be made. I admit that I am willing to accept, and would expect fellow citizens to accept, some imposition in the name of national security and law enforcement, whereupon you could say:
"Well, isn't equal opportunity for education relevant to issues of security and law? After all, security and lawfulness depend upon a strong, secure work force, which in turns depends at least in part upon education and fulfillment of basic human necessities. You have admitted you are willing to accept some sacrifices, so you cannot argue against sacrifice on principle, calling it 'theft' as you do. So it's not a matter of substance categorically rejected but rather is a matter of degree. Just how much sacrifice of individual liberty is justifiable toward a secure and lawful state?"
I realize that your side-of-the-road does point toward just such a conundrum. I have struggled with this issue for some time without arriving at a principled position. Social and political philosophy are such muddy disciplines, if they can be so termed, that sometime's I think we may be fortunate that we have resort to violence and force. Nothing muddy there.
It's pretty easy to see that the human condition will continue to vascillate between war/chaos and such peace/order as we can achieve. Perhaps only those who would expect, or desire, otherwise are wrong? Even insane? |
| Erebus |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 12:40:13
quote:
Originally posted by speedy_m
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
but to insist, essentially under threat of imprisonment, that others participate as though they would share your moral assumptions, to include your means and ends, is criminal, or at least would be in a just state.
An interesting read:
http://www.nerve.com/dispatches/kurutz/toystory/
Yes, I should have mentioned that I am also against moral tyranny from the right, but I guess it goes without saying that I think it is the left from which we have more to fear. |
| speedy_m |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 12:13:45
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
but to insist, essentially under threat of imprisonment, that others participate as though they would share your moral assumptions, to include your means and ends, is criminal, or at least would be in a just state.
An interesting read:
http://www.nerve.com/dispatches/kurutz/toystory/ |
| darwin |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 12:04:19
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
Further, I consider all mandated participation in welfare, education, and risk pooling schemes to be moral tyranny and simple theft. If you and yours want to go forth toward what you deem good, more power to you, but to insist, essentially under threat of imprisonment, that others participate as though they would share your moral assumptions, to include your means and ends, is criminal, or at least would be in a just state. I do not share your moral assumptions about what is good for persons and peoples and resent being forced to act as though I do, through taxes and worse.
How do you feel about forcing people to drive on the right-side of the road rather than the left? Shouldn't we be left alone to make our own decisions? |
| Erebus |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 11:57:15
FYI, I watch little Fox News.
Over the last couple years I have tried to explain why I support Bush, which mostly comes down to having absolutely no trust in the Dems with anything I'd consider remotely important, especially in regard to human nature and resultant security issues. To my mind 20th Century Dem leadership was despicable, especially Clinton, Carter, and FDR, and of course Kerry the Traitor. Further, I consider all mandated participation in welfare, education, and risk pooling schemes to be moral tyranny and simple theft. If you and yours want to go forth toward what you deem good, more power to you, but to insist, essentially under threat of imprisonment, that others participate as though they would share your moral assumptions, to include your means and ends, is criminal, or at least would be in a just state. I do not share your moral assumptions about what is good for persons and peoples and resent being forced to act as though I do, through taxes and worse.
Hardly affluent, I have never made more than thirty-five thousand dollars in a year, have about fifteen thousand in savings, and no prospect for inheritance. No Nazis in the immediate family, though if one googles my name about half the hits will link to residents of Germany.
Frankly, were it not for destruction of the non-human forms on our planet, I would care little whether humans nuke themselves or not.
Have you read Nietzsche's "Geneology of Morals"? If so you will perhaps recall his characterization of the contrast between the noble/heroic figures and the low, parasitic advocates of the left. Much of what I find repulsive about the left can be understood there. Or perhaps you remember Elsworth Tooey in Ayn Rand's "Fountainhead"? I offer these two references just in case they might provide shorthand for insight into where I come from. In large part my rejection of the left and its creeping socialism comes down to matters of aesthetics. The left defends, supports, and is, low, ugly, weak, and unprincipled. I realize there is little to be said in defense of Bush-Cheney, but at least they can recognize an enemy when they see him.
You and I are probably not so different in terms of certain important aspects of personality. We both care, and we like to argue. I would be remiss if I did not confess a suspicion that much of the reason I advocate as I do is that I love debate. I like the combat, and the victory. Some days I think people should vote with guns. Dem vs. Repub, small arms vs. rifles. Wonder who'd win, at say 200 meters? Wonder who will when it inevitably comes to that? No contest. Could say more. Probably said too much. |
| The King Of Karaoke |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 11:04:01
quote:
Originally posted by Erebus
Possesses all the intellectual content, and honesty, we've come to expect from the left.
Yep, there's more truth obtained in reading one of these comic strips, than obtained in twenty four hours worth of watching Fox news.
Why are you so in favor of what this administration does, Erubus? I don't think we've ever discussed this. Are you particularly affluent? Were your Mommy and Daddy Nazi's? Do you think the human race has been on this planet long enough and desire a NUCULAR holocaust to take place? What is it? Help me understand. You're obviously intelligent. Many of the Bushies I encounter are modified rednecks that don't want to admit all those plastic flags were a waste of money. Or Christians. Or rich. Many of the people that are pro Bush seem to have very selfish reasons for being so. Why are you? Seriously.
------------------------------------- |
| Erebus |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 10:58:34
Hell no, the media isn't biased:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-11-01-cheney-hawaii_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA
Cheney visits Hawaii in hopes of stealing it for GOP
By Richard Benedetto, USA TODAY Nov 1, 2004
HONOLULU — Vice President Cheney, an orange-and-gold lei around his neck, made a personal pitch for Hawaii's four electoral votes late Sunday by flying 3,225 miles overnight from New Mexico to Waikiki Beach and asking for them. ....
|
| ramona |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 10:53:35
Freedom plugs. Hee!
_____________________________________________________________________
If you see me, look surprised
If you don't, then pass me by
And I might even touch your sleeve
Oh, as you turn to leave
________________________________
http://buymediamonds.blogspot.com |
| Erebus |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 10:41:22
Possesses all the intellectual content, and honesty, we've come to expect from the left. |
| apl4eris |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 10:12:22
Alrighty then.
 |
| The King Of Karaoke |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 10:08:16
quote:
Originally posted by apl4eris
This Modern World is damn good. Thanks for reminding me.
Shall I host the image for you?
Yes please.
-------------------------------------
|
| apl4eris |
Posted - 11/01/2004 : 10:06:26
This Modern World is damn good. Thanks for reminding me.
Shall I host the image for you? |
|
|
