Trump

[Ketraar]

Even the "discovery" of the US was gov funded, and the tech to sail oceans, the tech read books and idealize words and I could on and on and on...

MFG

Ketraar

[felter]

I've lost my way again so I don't know what's going on in this thread but to go with what's being said about funding.

Conservative governments do not fund things, so don't expect any kind of discoveries to be made with their help, unless it is military. Though America does have NASA but even them Trump wants to cut their funding. The conservative way is to leave everything to the public sector.

Just look at Trumps government, they are slowly stripping all the funding to public school education, so soon they won't even have a population that has the education, let alone the funding.

[Observe]

There are some things that are for the social good. Some people think that having a healthy society is a good thing.

Other people think having a society where people are unable to pay for basic needs, without working two or three jobs is a good thing. This thinking leads to having people dying outside hospitals, because they can't afford the services. Too bad. Tough luck. Not my problem. Get a job....

[Mightysword]

There is NOTHING natural about social constructs.

Oh really? So you mean in the history of humanity, every form of society we ever had, every changed that had come and go, had never been somehow influenced by the natural instinct, desire, and need of human? There is just ... so many wrong with this that I feel a thesis would probably needed to properly tell you why it's wrong.

So I'll go with a light weight response: it's a common theme in a lot of writing about what choice humanity will make, to live in an imperfect world where human is human, or live in a perfect engineered paradise that defile human nature. I have yet come across one single instance that the ultimate choice is the latter.

You insulting people that fight for things to change faster so the effects can be felt and possibly make life better for a bunch of people is just idiotic and frankly pisses me off.

It pissed you off? Good, at least now I know the feeling is mutual. I mean, put yourself in my shoes here, do you think your comment didn't piss me off? Idiotic you say? With all due respect, I'm not calling you an idiot, but - frankly - saying social change is a large and heavy freight train coming down a hill at 200km/h is an idiotic statement. Insult? I believe I gave it the exact amount of respect it's deserved! My dude, you are not the only one who want a better tomorrow. You are not the only one working toward change for the better. But You ARE the one who is damaging a noble cause by making idiotic statement such as the one above. Why do you think people like me grew allergic and distant about activism?

Ask any train engineer what will happen to a large and heavy freight train coming down a hill at 200km/h, and they'll all give you the same answer: a fiery crash. And that's exactly what would happen if we all entrust the future to your branch of activism. The scary part for me is I know it wasn't something you blurted out in the heat of moment, I know it's something people like you believe in. Progress at any cost is some kind of a motto for you guys isn't it?

If you dont like that women want equality NOW and not in 50 years, that minorities want to be treated as humans NOW not in a 20 years, than frankly you are part of the problem. Its only natural that once a problem is discovered we want it fixed asap, not in some made up "natural" time frame.

MFG

Ketraar

PS.: Also activism is the state of ACTION, meaning DOING something, not just talk about it. If you dont want to do anything just sit down and do nothing, no one asks you to do anything, but dont tell what I can or should do, I have the same freedoms as you.

If you dont like that women want equality NOW and not in 50 years

I love that part, because I knew you gonna say something like that. I admitted a few page back myself that these day it's kinda hard to make a stand against a liberal/progressive agenda without making yourself look like an arshole. After all, your branch of activism had honed your messages and adorn your banners to ensure that every disagreement with your cause can be framed in the worst way possible. It's a influence that you know you have, and it's a power you have no shame of abusing. To answer you: yes, of course I want women equality now, I simply don't do it your way.

Did you go back and read what you wrote, did you realize how unoriginal you sounded? What is that? Unless you 100% agree with me, doing exactly what I say than you are insert something here. My dude, it's used by people like you, by people who doesn't agree with you, by people who love Trump and by people who hate Trump. It's what making our politic uncompromising and toxic. The irony you accuse me of being part of the problem ... because so are you, and infact, your tone and device are the more CHRONIC part of the problem.

Who are you to determine that just because we don't go at your speed, it means we're not doing anything? It's true, your branch of activism can get things move very fast, you probably can make 3 steps forwards when someone like me can only make 1. The problem is, because you ignore every other variable, the movement also suffer 2 steps back after making 3 steps forward. But you people are so high and mighty in the justice of your cause that you can only see the 3 steps forward that you make, that leave people like me have to freaking deal with the 2 steps back - aka the mess that you lots left behind. My dude, you shouldn't be pissed, I should.

I had said this many times to you specifically, but your branch of activism are built on anger, frustration and just generally negative emotion/energy. You don't seek to change people thinking for the better, you seek to guilt them into it. I may make one step at a time, but when that step is made, I want it to be make by every players of the party - willingly.


The only reason I still hold a measure of respect for you simply because objectively, I know we travel the same path and have the same goal. But I will never get on your bus, because to me, you drives too irresponsibly and recklessly, you only see the destination and pay no respect to others on the road or the condition of the road itself, treating them as mere obstacle to your goal.

[Masterbagger]

There are some things that are for the social good. Some people think that having a healthy society is a good thing.

Other people think having a society where people are unable to pay for basic needs, without working two or three jobs is a good thing. This thinking leads to having people dying outside hospitals, because they can't afford the services. Too bad. Tough luck. Not my problem. Get a job....

What did government meddling do for health insurance? Were the things that were promised delivered? For me it only reinforced a view that if something has to work well to benefit the maximum amount of people that government should be involved as little as possible. Government has no motivation whatsoever to be responsible with money and no accountability when they waste it.

[Skism]

^ Let me say right now that Mightyswords response is the height of reason

If you had threatened me with a heavy freight train moving at 200 KM/h my response would be that it would be imperative to resist you and all you stand for to the absolute death.

It would be nothing short of of a holy duty Ketrarr if you are going to say that you MUST be for you and what you stand for or be crushed by a force of nature you liken to a train (that you unleashed so by definition NOT natural)

Then people should NAY must oppose, you with all their might to allow a tyranny such as yours would be an affront to all men such despotism will and shall be destroyed.

You inspire the very thing you claim to be against.

[RegisterMe]

There are some things that are for the social good. Some people think that having a healthy society is a good thing.

Other people think having a society where people are unable to pay for basic needs, without working two or three jobs is a good thing. This thinking leads to having people dying outside hospitals, because they can't afford the services. Too bad. Tough luck. Not my problem. Get a job....

What did government meddling do for health insurance?

In my country, essentially created it.

[Masterbagger]

I just think social changes should rightfully die out in the planning stages when trying to figure out who will pay for them.

News flash for you. Its inevitable. Social change is a large and heavy freight train coming down a hill at 200km/h there is no stopping it, no matter how much you try, you can hop in or stand aside and be left behind. History is not very kind to people that try to stop progress, it is like gravity a force of nature.

MFG

Ketraar

The foundation of any social change you might want to see needs to be that others get a say as well. You can't force free people to obey your agenda or you become the bad guy.

[felter]

Back on topic which means talking about Trump;

It looks like once again Trump says something and people are all pissed off at him. So what is it this time turns out he says that well the first paragraph in the BBC news story really tells it all.

President Donald Trump has been criticised for hailing the US response to the deadly Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico last year as "tremendous".

Was that just a year ago, it feels more like a lifetime. I remember that Hurricane and the destruction it caused, and the only way I would use the word "tremendous" to be associated with it, is that it was a tremendous ****up on Trumps part. Hell he didn't even know Puerto Rico was associated with America, he only knew it as an island surrounded by lots of water. What an Idiot, only he would claim a screw-up as a success on his part.

[muppetts]

He has to say it is a success, he can't challenge the illusion that he is a complete failure, still existing off his dads money and company, minus the billion he lost. Dead Americans mean nothing to DT unless they are rich, white and voting for him.

[Grim Lock]

I just think social changes should rightfully die out in the planning stages when trying to figure out who will pay for them.

News flash for you. Its inevitable. Social change is a large and heavy freight train coming down a hill at 200km/h there is no stopping it, no matter how much you try, you can hop in or stand aside and be left behind. History is not very kind to people that try to stop progress, it is like gravity a force of nature.

MFG

Ketraar

The foundation of any social change you might want to see needs to be that others get a say as well. You can't force free people to obey your agenda or you become the bad guy.

Oh the irony.

[BugMeister]

- we know you're up to..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZAPwfrtAFY

- sort of Rambo-style politics..

[Observe]

You can't force free people to obey your agenda or you become the bad guy.

Are you a skunk, aardvark, badger or one of the other solitary creatures? If not, then you are part of a social species. As such, you are NOT free of responsibility to your fellow-man. Perhaps you will be reborn as one or other of the animals who actually are 'free'. Let us know how that works out when some human has you on their dinner table or has you laying on the floor as a rug.

[Morkonan]

I find it dangerous that you equate activism with rioting. Not every form of activism is a violent demonstration where a "mob focuses on releasing their anger and frustration [by] smashing in [...] windows". ...
You don't usually see members of Amnesty International rioting in the streets and throwing in windows.

You are right, of course, and that was wrong of me to lump "activists" in with "rioters."

But, sometimes those who are actually rioters call themselves "activists." I am in favor of activists who work for positive change and denounce disruption and violent demonstration.

[Chips]

But, sometimes those who are actually rioters call themselves "activists." I am in favor of activists who work for positive change and denounce disruption and violent demonstration.

If it weren't for rioting, the US of A wouldn't exist. You'd have paid your taxes and we'd have drunk our tea!

[Morkonan]

You'd have paid your taxes and we'd have drunk our tea!

I notice you didn't mention that we'd have eaten your food... 'cause that would have made rebellion a certainty.

You've got an interesting point that should be expanded, I think.

Do all activists see themselves as "righteous warriors?"

Let's take a common view of someone we'd define as an "activist." I don't mean people who volunteer as citizen scientists for Green Peace and never make the "front page." It's not about the lawyers who volunteer to defend someone's "Rights." I mean the wholly dedicated "activist" who makes "activism" their life in a more personally defining way. The women who burn their bras in public, the PETA people who throw blood on someone if they're wearing a leather jacket, the "One Percenters" that squat and crap on the grass, leaving garbage everywhere and destroying public and private property because they say it's "their right to do so."

We know what happens to people when they believe that they are a "righteous warrior," right? The "cause" becomes their lodestone on which their judgement of right and wrong is based. All for the cause and the cause for all... There come a point, the deeper down the rabbit-hole you go, where an "activist" could become a "fanatic."

It's not inevitable, of course. Many activists are level-headed and well-meaning people, right? But, the world creates ideas based on extremes. We're great at doing that. It's part of what I fell afoul of in an earlier post, pushing the meaning of "activists" to the extreme of... "extremist."

So, when is an activist a fanatic and when is a fanatic capable of actually doing good?

When "The Colonies" got pissed and dumped a bunch of tea into a harbor, was that extremist act "good." /shrug? And, once the American Revolution got started, mostly through the hard work of "activists" backed by some deep pockets and notable figures, was that good? Well, we seem to think so. But, what did those fanatics do while they were "doing good."

Loyalists were persecuted, sometimes even killed. Many had their property confiscated. Many were imprisoned. Eventually, those that remained Loyalists were deported with nothing.

ALL of these things were things that the "Founding Fathers" would have abhorred and they actively promoted laws to protect against such things... for their own people.

Sure, "revolutionaries" can do good things, but they have to ward themselves against committing atrocities while they're doing those "good things."

[clakclak]

[interesting stuff]

I would like to add that change even extreme social change does not necessarily need violence to happen.

The fall of east Germany to peaceful protests (and an economy in shambles) illustrates that.

[Santi]

Have to say that East Germany also benefited from the violent unrest of other countries of the Soviet Union that weakened Moscow, and Western countries support, it was a combination of those forces that achieved change.

Similar but obviously not the same because of the outcome, was the Arab Spring, Western countries intervention in the Middle East coupled with a lack of advancement in living conditions and lack of democratic choices, made people demonstrate peacefully into the streets to demand change. They were meet with repression an death while western countries looked the other way. And being my own devil advocate, funny how suddenly those peaceful protesters turned into heavily armed brigades, may be that it is traditional to have a few dozens rocket propelled grenades in your cupboard.

Social change is down to people well being, the less we have to worry about money, the chances are that we can dedicate more time to think about what is around us and to change society. It is a constant in history, The Golden age, The Renaissance, The 80's.

My thoughts are if people is living well and their concerns are being addressed, then we do not have a need for people like Trump.

[pjknibbs]

Do all activists see themselves as "righteous warriors?"

As the late great George Carlin once said, "So, firefighters fight fires, and crimefighters fight crime. What do freedom fighters fight?".

[BugMeister]

- he was joking..

Bob Dylan - Jokerman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XSvsFgvWr0

- best excuse going..