Leaderboard

I'm 32 and have come across a great struggle with the state of affairs in the Western world. It seems that the pipe dream of a decade old South Park episode is coming into reality at a more than steady pace. That said, after hearing about the bombings on the children at the Ariana Grande concert tonight, I felt myself compelled to look at the other side of the coin, that is, the "nazi" side. What could the national socialists have possibly thought in order to motivate them to the point of war-inflicted suicide? Are any of these thoughts compelling, or is it simply straw man rhetoric that they had used in order to amass an army for their own selfish cause? I decided I would indulge in some literature on the subject, and what better than "My Struggle" by Adolf Hitler. Having never actually read the book, I had become overwhelmed with positive reviews from Amazon. Positive reviews? From a book written by possibly the most hated man in recent history? I succumb to my curiosity and find a free English translation online. After skimming through the first few chapters, a sudden snare of interest had captured my mind; almost as if stepping on a bear trap of intellectual altruism. This book does not appear to be written by a man who would simply wish to sacrifice any soul he could in order to gain the most from a financial or narcissistic standpoint. From what I've gathered thus far, these are the words of an individual who was trapped in an isolation cell of worry for his own species. Despite the fact that this literature was written nearly a century ago, as I read along, the points made seem to speak to even the nearest moment of our own reality. In closing, I'd like to share a quote from the chapter I am currently working through, to give you an idea of what I'm talking about. This quote directly reflects upon some of the philosophy which Stefan articulates, and I find extremely important.

Sorry, I couldn't help posting that. I had no choice.

I put it a little differently. They *coldly* planned the repeated mass murder of innocents. The intent is to bring about political changes. Their vision for these changes is diametrically opposed to a free society, reinforced by religious teachings who baseline understanding of consent is incompatible with Western common law. The only possible merging with Western culture they see requires one-sided reform of Western culture. The answer is, "no."

Sure. But not every determined event is computable. You don't have to be able to compute something to tel if it's determined or not. My understanding is that QM is deterministic but has random elements. The wavefunction is determined, but when it collapses a state is chosen at random.

I have no experience with what you're talking about, I have very rarely seen real abuse in public. I would suggest curiosity instead of judgment. If your goal is to at the least, inform the child that there are people out there with empathy, and to also show them that their parents are exercising choices and have responsibility for their actions, then I would suggest maybe having detailed information about studies on spanking/abuse. Like that multi-generational study that was recently released showing the inefficacy of abuse and the damages of it on the children. Get the specific information on it, even print some business cards with the detailed info that can be Googled--like a bibliographical notation--and hand it to the parent and encourage them to look into the effects of spanking/abuse and to reconsider their choices. This would achieve both goals in my view. 1. The child has witnessed empathy and assistance from another. 2. The child has witnessed the presentation of facts and choices to the parent. It would be hard for the parent to say "We didn't know any better....We did our best....Our parents raised us like that and we turned out fine", etc. The kid, presumably grown at the time of a later discussion could answer "Well, I remember a time you were hurting me in Wal Mart and some people told you there was new information and even handed you a card to research it yourself, so how did you not know better, and how did you do your best?"

Claiming that I'm joining in on the "retardation" or that I don't wear "bigboy panties" is passive aggressive behaviour - indirect expression of hostility. You do not have the authority nor my respect to tell me what I can join in on or what phrases I cannot use - that's the kind of authoritarianism we fight against. Please note that your statements are also not arguments. You claim to "have no desire whatsoever to engage with [DaVinci]", yet you communicated to him using verbal abuse. Your logic has failed. If you're not going to communicate with him, why insult him then try to block him? I suspect it's because you knew your behaviour is inappropriate. You also claim "I wasn't making an argument" when you insulted DaVinci - then it is true that your statement was "not an argument" and people are correct to point this out to you. Here's where the problem originally started: You were dissatisfied with how neeeel was responding in his thread. You were first confused, then claim he wasn't putting effort into this thread, and finally claiming the short posts are a waste of time - all without defining: what you were confused about what constitutes "effort" why short posts are a waste of time This is neeels thread and if you're dissatisfied with it, you're impatience is not going to help neeeel communicate what is clearly a difficult subject for him - this is why DaVinci recommended you to leave and allow neeel to respond how he wants to. He was direct with you about the problem he had with you - that's quite the opposite of the passive aggression that you claim he was behaving like. He was being assertive with you - this does not give you the privilege of calling him names. Where is the freedom in Freedomain Radio in you're behaviour? I hope you take the time to understand my arguments - the evidence is clear.

That's not an argument. Try again without your verbal abuse.

Thank you for empathizing. As for what else could be done, keep in mind that the parent is likely to become violent with you (which was the case with my dad). Actually, my dad would regularly take out completely unrelated frustrations out on me physically. So I think it is best not to create any agitation. What I would do is simply report the situation to the police. Either that, or take a few years to learn MMA well and actually approach the parent. If they get physical with you, give'em hell and still call the cops and report the incident.

You're retarded. Stop responding to me.

don't join in on the retardation. He has a problem with me and was being passive aggressive. I wasn't making an argument. I was making it clear I have no desire whatsoever to engage with him at this point. It's also why I've put him on ignore. Don't use #NotAnArgument unless you have bigboy panties on. You'll ruin it for the rest of us. Interesting how you didn't pick up on the passive aggression.

Holy crap man get over yourself

Figure it out. I wasn't making one. You're not doing this right. Stop hijacking the thread. EDIT: You know what? If you actually want to have this conversation with me, then I will engage you over private message. Send me a message and I will respond to you there.

This might be a long one, and I apologize in advance for that. Also, if I get hit points on my account for this, I don't really care. I have something to say. This morning, when I heard on the news that it was a guy with an Arabic-sounding name who committed the bombing, I swear to God I thought to myself, "Muslim". I was SO ashamed, totally disgusted with myself. As if my brain were just on autopilot and thinking that it would have been a Muslim to conduct those bombings. Kids, don't do what my stupid head did. I know it's hard, because every single day in the media, there are those stupid little micro-aggressions that add up to a really big problem, directed at the minority group of the moment. Every century picks a new minority group to pick on: disabled people, gay people, people who just aren't white, anyone of a different religion, and so on. This decade, it's Muslims...and a whole bunch of others (thanks Trump), but mostly Muslims. We brand people as "other" or as "enemy" or as "different" in the negative sense, but it's these labels that CREATES the so-called "other" or "enemy". People honestly don't get this and it's REALLY annoying, but it's like saying to someone that they're a piece of shit. The more you say it, the more it gets ground into that person's head, and, despite whether it's true or not, the more the person will start to believe it. It's called the "thousand paper cuts" phenomenon: a paper cut is one little thing, but then cut and cut and cut away until BAM, you've bled out, or are so injured that you just can't function. I am NOT condoning what happened in Manchester. Not in the slightest. I think that people who attack others and especially children or animals (i.e. groups that can't defend themselves) are terrible. However, it may indeed be the case that they are terrible because they themselves have suffered greatly. Think about what's gone on in Syria: can you honestly imagine being so incredibly oppressed by your government that such a large proportion of people choose to leave a country? It's very difficult for anyone living in Europe (at least Western Europe) and North America to imagine this, because we have always lived lives of relative ease compared to those who live in war-torn nations. It's called white privilege. Whites, myself included, have had the privilege to live in these relatively peaceful, orderly nations, but very much at the expense of nations in which these privileges are not at all present. I've made this point on another page before, but it is fear that most often makes us revert to the mindset that we must kill in order to live. But why should we have to kill in order to live? I see no reason for that other than those reasons that are found in a mind that has been warped by fear: fear of death, fear of retribution, fear of the pyramidal structure that our world has become, and so forth. And it will be fear that makes people retaliate, and blame the "other", while in reality we create that "other" by aiming guns rather than reaching out hands. I do NOT believe that this issue is beyond repair, mind you. It's going to take some doing, but for God's sake, people, I have just two things to ask of you, and this applies not only to anyone here who cares but to the world generally, if I may be egotistical enough for a moment to make such a bold request... 1. Put down the fecking guns 2. Stop saying "us versus them" and "the other" and "the enemy"; it's not helpful And I'm done. Like I say, I don't give a damn if I get bombarded for this. People who feel the need to perform violent attacks are only ever doing so out of fear, which comes out as aggression because we as humans know of no other way to deal with fear. And that's all I have to say about that, except to express my condolences to anyone here who's from Manchester and witnessed this shit go down first hand. No amount of money or compassion towards the families that now suffer could ever compensate for such losses, ever.