Search the Community

I was at the university the other day and I passed in front of the social science department and something so outrageous happened I thought I'd share it with you guys. The building had speakers all around it so that people walking on the sidewalk could hear loud and clear what the speaker had to say (right there you get this 1984 Orwellian feel from the setting =P). The guy that was talking was making some anti american, anti republican, pro communist speech. The kinda thing you would expect from social science. What struct me was that he never used the words: Marxists, communist, socialist.. The way he worded it was ''the republican elites are so greedy, so capitalist, that they are against economical equality''. And I stopped right there on the sidewalk. I had a million things to say about this buzzword salad that was utter garbage. Instantly I was looking for a way to go talk to that guy and set him straight, but I came back to my senses knowing that he was probably in a room that I did not have access and probably would have gotten arrested or thrown out of the university for harassment. But the level of bullshit in that sentence was EPIC. You could have smelled the stench a mile away. Sorry, but I need to deconstruct this bullshit: - right from the start, this is typical leftist propaganda. They redefine words. He didnt use the word ''communist'' because it has such a bad quo notation to it. He went the feminist way and used the word ''equality''. Because, who in his right mind wouldnt want equality in the word... you must be a greedy monster if you dont... Bullshit. What his words means is that he wants a redistribution of wealth through the coercion of the state and some uneducated people are going to fall for it... - And he tries to portray the republicans has the evil people who wants to keep poor people in misery. This is stupid. Of course republicans are against communism. It is the system that has created nothing but death and suffering, it is a system that robs you of every freedom you have. People starve by the tens of millions under communism. Capitalism, on the other hand, has brought 2/3 of the worlds population out of an hopeless misery and has been the system that has ended the most hunger in the world. - Thirdly, I find it funny that he calls the republicans ''elite''. This is typical leftist propaganda to turn things around and accuse the enemy of all the thing you have done (i'm not sure my sentence is quite clear). We have seen this throughout history: the left blames the right of slavery and racism when it was the republicans who were the abolitionist party and the democrats were the party of slavery. They blame the right for Mussolini and Hitler, when these 2 monsters were on the far left and followed the Marxist doctrine to the letter. They blame Queen Victoria for oppression and slavery around the world, when she spent her life abolishing slavery around the world and bringing wealth and prosperity to her empire. And today, they say that republicans are the elites. Well, most republicans are honest folks who are hard working. Many of them work in factories or do some for of hard labor. The ''elites'' are the democrats and liberal who own multinational corporations and want to piss on the little guys by flooding the country with 3rd world population to bring down wages so they can save a buck.... You know, its always striking to see how far this Marxist cancer has grown and how it is still growing. October is coming and I can see flyer of the communist flag on lamp posts. You see antifa and feminists doing marches in the streets. Some countries live under a complete information lock down. You see Theresa May and Merkel controlling all information in their countries. We werent paying attention and it creeped out on us. We are living in 1984. Its no longer fiction. =(

Is this a serious post? Speaking as a double major in biology, and chemistry, and as a person who has more then 18 months experience working in a biochem lab. I can reasonably say you have some fundamental misunderstandings of what evolution is (assuming that this is a serious post). The theory of evolution makes no claims on the origin of the universe, so I'm not sure why you mentioned the big bang. The theory of evolution makes no claims on abiogenesis because evolution is the change from one population of organisms to another. It is an undeniable fact of nature that organisms change, and I might add that I witness the change of bacteria on a weekly basis. This occurs after thousands of generations. It seems that you are implying that a dog gives birth to a cat or something. Do you mean to deny that organisms change from one population to another?

Be warned: These kids are about to cuss their heads off for Feminism. Oops... already a thread with this video/topic. Sorry! I'll be more thorough at checking next time.

Hello! This is my first time posting on this forum. I think I'm posting this in the proper place, and I apologize in advance if that is not so. To preface, I will mention that I am just finishing up a diploma in Radio Broadcasting. I have ambitions to strike out on my own if possible, because I don't feel comfortable making a living as a promoter of our current brand of popular culture. That being said... I recently listened to one of Stefans call in shows; I apologize for not knowing which one it is at this point in time. (That's 2 apologies already, yes I am Canadian.) The first caller was discussing his departure from the Mormon faith, and how he was dealing with his girlfriend, who was still very much a part of the faith. They also discussed the origins of just how people become indoctrinated into these sorts of beliefs, and something Stefan said struck a chord with me. The caller mentioned that early in his life - when he was much too young to understand the basic concepts of the religion, he felt an overwhelming sense of community, or, emotional attachment to what was happening inside the church, rather than what was being preached. This kind of emotional attachment created a bond, which strengthened the tendrils of faith around him, before he was able to think critically about what it was that he was being taught to believe in. Stefan replied that this is common in many religions, and even within nationalism. The idea that a bond is being created emotionally, without "intellectual content", bypasses a person's critical faculties. IE: it doesn't matter what's being taught, or what they're saying/singing/listening to, because the weight of the emotional attachment is so great. Also, people just enjoy dancing, This made me think a lot about how popular culture affects a great many young people in our society. This is where I've more or less extrapolated that idea, and pointed it in another direction. I've always felt that popular culture was very culty. That people when asked why they enjoy a certain style of music, or fashion, etc...Were generally unsure, but they seemed to enjoy it because it offered them a community to take part in, much like religion. No one really wants to be the weird, unpopular kid at school, and in my experience, cliques in grade 6-graduation are often formed through what kinds of music one enjoys. This worries me, because the level of worship seems alarming to me. The level of intellectual content found within a great deal of popular music is mostly nonexistent. In fact, a great deal of these "artists", don't even play instruments, or write music at all. I've tried to argue these points in class, and for the most part, my peers think I'm out of my mind. I've tried to make the analogy that popular culture is a lot like fast food. It tastes good, and it is available everywhere. It is cheap to produce, and its marketing budgets are extremely high, making it hard to find anything else, unless you look for it yourself, or make it yourself. However, fast food doesn't nourish you in any significant way. It is devoid of the nutrients that we humans require to stay healthy. It tastes good, but all this is purely on the exterior. It is merely a form of instant gratification. So essentially, just like fast food, it makes you happy in the moment, but if you do nothing but eat it, it will slowly kill you from the inside. A little melodramatic maybe, but as an artist I feel a strong sense of worry about this topic. Which leads me to another question: Can art be measured in its "goodness"? Or is it purely subjective?I'd love to hear some feedback on my ideas, even if people think that I am completely out of my mind. "Americans are addicted to the slow death of fast food."I think this quote, by George Carlin, could be re-tooled a bit, and applied to our culture as well. "People, are addicted to the slow death, of superficial culture" Thanks for reading.

Boy, oh boy. I just got out of my BS geology class at uni, and my prof was spewing so much statist propaganda for over half the class period talking about natural threats to humans on this earth of ours, and how it's the governments responsibility to protect us with their money. In my mind, I could see myself jumping up on stage beside this human microphone for blindly consenting to evil, and debate him on every point he made. I have a feeling it's going to be a long semester for me, and I don't know how long I'll be able to hold my tongue before I verbally lash out at this guy from my front row seat in our auditorium style classroom. I feel frustrated, annoyed, and helpless. I understand of course it's my responsibility on whether not I engage this man or not on his misguided and destructive theories about how state power should be used to fund his rock hobby. Honestly, I could care less about what this asshole thinks, but it's just that there are roughly 300 of my fellow students may actually believe what he says. I have another professor for my sociology class I have to leave for in just a little less than a half hour, and she's the bad kind of feminist as well as a statist. I can't just help, but think about how these two instructors of mine have failed in the private sector after they had graduated with their degrees to turn back around to the state out of their udder incompetence to suckle from it's tits like a baby without the ability to function outside from under the breast of the state.