Sciencemadness Discussion Board
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

Printable Version  
 Pages:  1  2
Author: Subject: Outside-of-the-box ideas for government/economies
497
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 778
Registered: 6-10-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: HSbF6

[*] posted on 19-4-2012 at 23:27


Quote:
People of the older generation do understand that social engineering has polluted the schools with a "new morality" that is fully statist and collectivist in its aims. Public schools have become “brainwashing camps” operated by socialist and “progressive” (communist) “social engineers” who seek to enlist parents children as little "neighborhood watch brownshirts" and spies against their own parents to report on their parents personal behavioral habits, details about their home environment, religious affiliation, means of livelihood and amount of income, whether firearms are kept in the home, whether any drugs or alcohol are used by the parents, what methods of discipline are used by the parents, and on and on…


Yes, plenty of brainwashing camps indeed. But I'm pretty sure that the motivations behind them have a lot less to do with the 'commies and a lot more to do with the continued function of our own recently developed socioeconomic system...

You are very right about the ongoing destruction of normal respectful relationships. But again, I'm pretty sure the "collective" has fairly little to do with this trend. There are a multitude of reasons that destroying the parent-child connection would be attractive. For one thing, I'm sure that children who grow up without an understanding of respect and responsibility will be more easily manipulated/enslaved by anyone. When you were progressing through that system it very well may have seemed like the communists were exerting some control, and hell maybe they were, I wasn't there. But when I went through that system, that was most definitely not the impression I got. The evidence doesn't seem to support it very well either.

Sorry I can't just take your word for it...

Politicians are much better at saying what we want to hear than anything else. You could find quotes from any president that most people would strongly agree with.




A word to the wise: NEUROFEEDBACK

http://citizenworks.org/corp/dg/s2r1.pdf
http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/article/mg21228354.500-re...
http://www.shadowstats.com/article/no-414-hyperinflation-spe...

"To expose a 15 Trillion dollar ripoff of the American people by the stockholders of the 1000 largest corporations over the last 100 years will be a tall order of business."
Buckminster Fuller

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."
Albert Einstein
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 20-4-2012 at 00:52


I'm not talking about five decades ago when I went through the system ....I'm talking about the gradualized implementation of an increasingly regulated "post constitutional America" which has been inflicted as the social norm on my children and now even moreso upon my grandchildren. There is a "prison security" sort of atmosphere with the drug sniffing dogs and locker inspection weapon sweeps, armed guards and other sorts of "security" and all the other security related activity particularly at the middle school and high school grade levels ......it just is really disheartening to see what level of "supervision" has become the norm. The nutcases kiddie and adult alike have made all the "countermeasures" against nutcases a burden and reminder on all the normals to the point of standardizing paranoia as the "new normal".
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Aperturescience27
Harmless
*




Posts: 39
Registered: 5-4-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 25-4-2012 at 22:23
Rosco Bodine, WTF are you talking about?


Quote: Originally posted by Rosco Bodine  


wa wa wa wa nanny state wa wa wa wa freedom wa wa wa wa Glenn Beck bullshit wa wa wa



I am a public high school student and let me tell you, high school students are totally self-obsessed (the opposite of collectivist). You aren't even a little bit right, you are totally disconnected from reality.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
*****




Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 25-4-2012 at 23:28


It really depends which school. I have visited certain schools in Sweden and California which were essentially political-indoctrination institutions for young people. Students were actually punished if they expressed dissenting beliefs! They are constantly taught over and over again about "economic and social oppression" not only in their history class, but also in their reading/writing classes. Even in sport and health class, activities which emphasise group equality rather than competition are mandated. Girls are grouped together with boys, along with the physically challenged in the running activities. And here is where affirmative action is introduced: the girls and physically challenged are given higher marks with lower expectations, and the whole class is specifically informed of this. This schools are in many ways like miniaturized left-wing kingdoms. There is sever disciplinary action if a student brings a "weapon" to school, such as a small dull knife to cut an apple in their lunch.
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
anotheronebitesthedust
Hazard to Others
***




Posts: 189
Registered: 24-6-2007
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 26-4-2012 at 11:38


Quote: Originally posted by AndersHoveland  
I have visited certain schools in Sweden and California which were essentially political-indoctrination institutions for young people.



Sweden
Quote:
Amid all the grim economic news from Europe, it's worth noting that there are also some success stories. Well, of course, you say: Germany. OK. But there's another conspicuous candidate, and it may seem surprising: Sweden. To many Americans, Sweden is a bloated, inefficient welfare state. But the reality and the stereotype don't match.
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2012/04/swedish_...


California
Quote:
“This is really a tale of two economies,” said Stephen Levy, the director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy. “The coastal areas are either booming or at least doing well, and the areas that were devastated still have a long way to go. The places that existed just for housing are not going to come back anytime soon.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/14/us/californias-economic-sp...

View user's profile View All Posts By User
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
*****




Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 26-4-2012 at 22:55


I have noticed this type of correlation also. The pleasant places to live tend to lean more to the left politically (of course, so do the bad places in America's inner cities). But I think it is not merely a simple cause and effect relationship.

Race affects Politics
The ethnic/racial composition seems to play an important role in the USA. Wealthier whites that do not live near poor minorities tend to vote progressive, while wealthy whites that do live near poor minorities tend to vote conservative. But in the less populated rural areas, which do not have high levels of economic inequality, most of the people tend to vote conservative, even though there are few minorities. "Working class" whites typically vote conservative, but the poorest whites still vote progressive. Teachers and public employees almost all vote progressive, while small business owners usually vote conservative, regardless of their ethnicity/race.

California
Most of the reason for that the coastal areas in the southern part of California are progressive leaning is because there are so many Hispanics, that tend to be poorer. The northern coastal areas tend ot be progressive for different reasons. There have traditionally been fishing and lumber industries along the coast here, where worker's unions were influential in politics. There are also cultural reasons, as there was also a migration of idealistic "hippies" toward the northern part of the state along the coasts around 1960-1970. Those rebeling against the current social and economic system sought more land to found new communities, so moved north where it was less populated.

The population density and ethnic diversity is not evenly distributed throughout the State. Nearly 1 out of 5 people in California both live within Los Angeles County and are non-white.

The county of Riverside has been especially devestated by the housing collapse. Many people moved to Riverside, away from the coasts, to escape to overcrowding and unaffordable housing in the southern part of the state. But most of the local economy was just based on construction, it could not last. Now the people here are very desperate and angry, and the county has become politically polarised into extreme left and right: there is both a Communist and National Socialist political party, with plenty of obnoxious political stickers on peoples cars. The right is resentful of the high levels of immigration (many working class whites were displaced from jobs and housing away from the coast) and the left wants redistribution of wealth, presumably from all the wealthy that live in Orange county to the west.

Sweden
In Sweden, the people in the cities tend to vote progressive, while the people in the rural areas tend to vote for conservatives. And it seems that females are much more likely to vote for progressives, while males are much more likely to vote conservative. The wealthiest people tend to be conservative, while the poor in the ethnic communities all vote for progressives, which is in one way ironic since most of the muslims would be considered socially ultra-conservative. Politics in Sweden, of course, is more complicated than the two-party politics in the USA.

Washington
Going beyond the simple connection between wealth/poverty and political affiliation, I think it is the pleasant environment itself that creates progressives, not the other way around. And unpleasant environments create conservatives. This can clearly be seen in the American state of Washington, where the west side is progressive and the east side is conservative. Both sides are becoming more ethnically diverse in recent years, but in different ways. The eastern region is seeing an influx of very poor mexican farm workers, while the western region has many asians (from eastern asia) that tend to be highly educated. Many of those asians are conservatives, while the mexicans will become progressives, but this will have just the opposite effect on the white population. The whites in the east will resent all the poverty and crime, and high fertility rates, while the whites in the west will embrace the minorities with similar wealth levels. So it is to be suspected that this increasing ethnic diversity will only perpetuate the political divide between the two regions of the state. (now back to California again...) This is also probably the same reason that San Bernadino, Kern, and Tulare counties in the southeast part of California are so conservative, because of all the agricultural workers who have come from mexico. The other people in these counties do not want to be taxed to pay for these poor mexican workers and their families. But I predict this will change as the mexican population increases and the newly arrived migrants establish themselves politically, as has already happened in Imperial county (to the far southeast of the state).

[Edited on 27-4-2012 by AndersHoveland]
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Aperturescience27
Harmless
*




Posts: 39
Registered: 5-4-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 29-4-2012 at 21:26


In the US, we definitely have plenty of religious indoctrination schools, but I've never heard of collectivist indoctrination schools. And surely you wouldn't suggest that physically disabled students should fail their PE classes because they can't perform as well as other students?
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 30-4-2012 at 09:56


Quote: Originally posted by Aperturescience27  

Rosco Bodine, WTF are you talking about?

Truth unvarnished by the propaganda and newspeak political correctness of deceptions crafted by tens of thousands of liars to whom you have most likely been compelled or had no better alternative choice to listen for a lot of what failed to ever be any genuine "guidance and education" is what I am talking about. What some people get while believing it is an education is actually conditioning but learning enough for realizing that will require some individual initiative .....because Darwinism and socialism deprogramming was never a required class to be passed as a graduation requirement from a state funded public school.

Quote: Originally posted by Rosco Bodine  

wa wa wa wa nanny state wa wa wa wa freedom wa wa wa wa Glenn Beck bullshit wa wa wa

When you quote someone, at least quote them accurately and that way you don't come across as being an imbecile and dishonest. Freedom is not a dirty word. The supreme law of the land is the constitution which was intended to protect freedom is not an obsolete document and neither is the constitution surpassed by any codified doctrines which contradict the constitution and are deceptively advertised to be law or forcibly imposed as law when it is an inherent oxymoron that what is unconstitutional can ever be actual law. Too many people fail to understand this fundamental which is the basic reason we presently have a country where unlawfully the government has "evolved" and "progressed" to become a corrupt fascist police state far removed from what the founding fathers would have ever intended or tolerated. What the country has become is in great part against the grain of patriotism and freedom. That is simply a fact.
Quote:

I am a public high school student and let me tell you, high school students are totally self-obsessed (the opposite of collectivist). You aren't even a little bit right, you are totally disconnected from reality.

Being self-obsessed is not necessarily the opposite of what is collectivist when you have come to believe that what is good for you is also what is best for the collective. Having any true perspective about either aspect has purposefully been denied to you by controlling the information you have been supplied and crafting the meaning and terminology of language which you have been taught to use so that the end product of such efforts is a "boxed product" of known specifications. The natural inclination of anyone who has been manipulated and brainwashed is to deny it and responding to the suggestion that some thought they have was "planted" there by someone else or a crew of someone elses, will generate an expected denial and assertion that the individual has only thoughts and beliefs that are their own. Examining the premises about that by self- interrogating reflection and complete honesty may lead to a different conclusion .....but it will definitely take more than five minutes.....and may even require divine help although that may not be essential.....in some cases it assuredly could not hurt.

Below I offer a perfect example. Watch the 3 part video.
Masses of people are presently brainwashed about the NDAA...which is absolutely unconstitutional in section 1021.
One person has the balls to call it what it is. Is it some
young hot shot who grows a pair and does the right thing ?..No...it is a 78 year old great grandfather of four
one of the few men who started out and remains an honorable and honest statesman and patriot for first knowing what that means and then by walking the walk and not just talking the slick talk which too many of the others do.
A reasonable conclusion may be drawn concerning what are qualifications to be president purely in terms of honesty and honor all other considerations including charismatic personalities aside. But that would require grappling with truth on an individual level. That is not such an easy challenge for persons comfortable with their illusions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzNNsLB5Ra8 NDAA and the Constitution Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIawimcXGmU NDAA and the Constitution Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKBshvnXay0 NDAA and the Constitution Part 3

playlist for three parts in sequence

<iframe sandbox width="622" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/videoseries?list=ULQzNNsLB5Ra8&amp;hl=en_US" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Aperturescience27
Harmless
*




Posts: 39
Registered: 5-4-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 3-5-2012 at 13:28


Quote: Originally posted by Rosco Bodine  

Truth unvarnished by the propaganda and newspeak political correctness of deceptions crafted by tens of thousands of liars to whom you have most likely been compelled or had no better alternative choice to listen for a lot of what failed to ever be any genuine "guidance and education" is what I am talking about. What some people get while believing it is an education is actually conditioning but learning enough for realizing that will require some individual initiative .....because Darwinism and socialism deprogramming was never a required class to be passed as a graduation requirement from a state funded public school.


Political correctness is, at its very worst, annoying and unnecessary, and I really don't feel threatened by it. Not really sure what you're talking about regarding education, could you be a little more specific? And by "Darwinism" do you mean evolution by natural selection? Because if you don't think that should be taught in schools, then I'm not even going to bother trying to reason with you. Evolution is irrefutable fact. Regarding your claim of "socialism", I have never seen a textbook seriously criticize the free market (beyond the possibility of monopoly, which is mentioned only briefly). History textbooks don't DARE to question the government's actions in any way, they gloss over things like Agent Orange, "accidentally" failing to mention birth defects at all, and are pretty forgiving on the Iran-Contra scanda, to name just a few examples. This is a genuine problem, and it does teach children, or rather would if they were paying any attention, to put their trust and faith in the government. However, it does ensure that the textbooks praise the free market as inerrant and perfect (while also defending the New Deal, [with which, I should note, I mostly agree] Reaganomics, [with which I partly disagree] and every other government economic policy). If the government were to become socialist, by which I mean fundamentally socialist, rather than fundamentally capitalist with a little socialism added, the textbooks would, no doubt, defend it. But the government ISN'T socialist, and at the moment seems to be redistributing wealth UPWARD with massive subsidies to oil companies and other corporations and tax cuts to the rich.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Aperturescience27
Harmless
*




Posts: 39
Registered: 5-4-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 3-5-2012 at 13:55


Quote: Originally posted by Rosco Bodine  

The supreme law of the land is the constitution which was intended to protect freedom is not an obsolete document and neither is the constitution surpassed by any codified doctrines which contradict the constitution and are deceptively advertised to be law or forcibly imposed as law when it is an inherent oxymoron that what is unconstitutional can ever be actual law.


I ABSOLUTELY agree with you on this, and I think those videos are spot on. I don't know what's wrong with the Supreme Court, their job is to determine whether a law is consistent with the Constitution, not whether it meets with their approval, or whether they think it's "necessary". The government as a whole doesn't even seem to care about the Constitution anymore, because they know the Supreme Court won't enforce it. People said, "the government would never actually use these new powers" but now we're arresting peaceful protesters and spying on everyone,and we have presidential candidates literally advocating theocracy and rewriting American history (Apparently the founding fathers didn't try to prevent tyranny of the majority, they welcomed it! Go figure! [sarcasm]).
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 3-5-2012 at 19:50


For at least a hundred years the U.S. has been politically regressing into a tyrannical socialist state and becoming less and less a diligently adherent and honest constitutional republic due to the brazenly unconstitutional conspiratorial agendas and big government ambitions of both Republican and Democratic "parties" conniving and colluding and "partying" together way too much on the exploited and deceived taxpayers money. Courts have co-conspired in many ways to subvert the constitution. Nobody needs to be a lawyer or a constitutional scholar to understand this has occurred. What is subversive is whatever violates basic principles of the constitution which is the supreme law of the land in what it actually says....not just what any subversive activist judge with a robe and gavel "declares" as a ruling which twists and distorts the constitution's meaning by "judicial interpretation" so that somehow the constitution does not any longer actually say or mean what it plainly says. Some things you cannot have two different ways as if to have your cake and eat it too. A constitution is such a thing. The only way to change what it says (and means) is by formal amendment of the constitution ....not by statute of any legislature nor by "case law" of any court decision ...but only by formal amendment. Lawyers and judges who say otherwise are liars.....and to be perfectly clear such "activists" are also traitors of the most insidious variety who violate the very oath which is supposed to bind their allegiance to the constitution absent any mental reservation about what either the constitution or their oath actually means. Clearly both important things mean exactly what they say or else neither one of those things means anything at all. The plain reality of just how subversive has become the government has many people openly calling the U.S. today not just "post 9/11 America" which is bad enough descriptive rhetoric....but post constitutional America which is even more disheartening for those who love freedom because that is exactly what America has become. Socialists and hardcore communists have been for at least a hundred years waging a culture war with patriots who are principally "christendom" demographically but include libertarian and conservative secularists also. Subversives have their agenda and their narrative and what is called "political correctness" has become a glaring aspect of the wholesale deception served by disinformation and propaganda. The lamestream media lies almost uninterruptedly because they are operating as propaganda ministries furthering the disinformation which serves to shape and control the narrative via information control.
The lamestream media get owned and busted for blatant propagandizing by bloggers who tag them at it on a regular basis. Does that slow down the river of B.S. ....not even a little. It just keeps getting deeper. Legions of demagoging race baiting poverty pimps and other variant social conflict agitators are sowing discord as part of a divide and conquer machiavellian scheme to make gangrenous the moral heart of america.....hoping that a confident charismatic personage promising hope and change can walk down the street ringing a bell of Marxism and the shell shocked rabble will be roused from the rubble of what was once America to follow the man ringing the bell.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/

Here's a couple of videos relating to cultural Marxism and political correctness. Because of gradualism people do not recognize what it is in which they have been immersed deliberately to accomplish very imperceptibly incrementally a sort of brainwashing done over decades of time. It is a game of wits for the propagandists who are attempting to redefine reality.

<iframe sandbox width="622" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/4fo5jLdJlgI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe sandbox width="622" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/WeTt5N80rvg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This is from 1965 ------ prophetic ?

<iframe sandbox width="622" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ZaGVCO6CByQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>










View user's profile View All Posts By User
jamit
National Hazard
****




Posts: 369
Registered: 18-6-2010
Location: Midwest USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 3-5-2012 at 21:19


@Rosco Bodine The Youtube channel above is AWESOME!

Why waste your breathe on kids who can't follow logic and truth -- oh I forgot, there is no such thing as absolute truth only relative truth? haha.

The quote you gave on Ronald Reagan is prophetic... I really hope that we're not one generation away from losing our freedom here in the US. Once a nation goes down, its falls rather quickly... that's what history teaches us. And if "nature abhors a vacuum", who knows what terrible consequences will fill its void.

Anyway, you and DeAlte... your comments are wise... and worth reading and thinking about. thanks guys!!


[Edited on 4-5-2012 by jamit]

[Edited on 4-5-2012 by jamit]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
MagicJigPipe
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 1553
Registered: 19-9-2007
Location: USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: Suspicious

[*] posted on 4-5-2012 at 22:40


Quote:

In a like vein I would expect social security and medicare to be underfunded while some other things like national parks or the space program would do well.


bbartlog: I think you've got it backwards. Do you really think that Joe-Sixpack cares more about space exploration and national parks then getting bling bling when he retires? Hogwash I say!

EDIT

I was scrolling up after typing this and I saw that Reagan quote/picture. Before scrolling up to see who posted it, I thought, "Rosco Bodine. It's gotta be him.". And, sure enough.

And notice Reagan says, "men". And I'm usually the realist (at least I hope so) in the face of reactionary, extremist feminism. But why couldn't he have said men and women? I guess it's what you really mean and not how you say it...

And I was kind of getting into your videos, Rosco, until the secular conspiracy one. "Conservatism" will soon loose all credibility unless it drops the fundamentalist Christianity thing. People are slowly waking up to the inanity of beliefs in supernatural phenomena and any ideology married to those beliefs in such an inseparable way will suffer for it. It already is. I know a lot of people who ignore a lot of "conservative" ideas because of the religious fanaticism. I'm not saying that's necessarily right, but it's happening.

2nd EDIT

Anotheronebitesthedust:

Quote:

If I value babies more than the elderly and I have to work for my money why can't I decide where my money goes.


While I do have a strong belief in a democratic society, that part of me is at war with the part that knows a lot of people aren't very smart.

With such a system I fear that things like science and innovation funding would suffer and a lot of money would go to a "Department of Goin' 2 Da Club".

I suppose that most politicians aren't much smarter than the average person. But is that really true? I can't say.

Also:

Quote:

“This is really a tale of two economies,” said Stephen Levy, the director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy. “The coastal areas are either booming or at least doing well, and the areas that were devastated still have a long way to go. The places that existed just for housing are not going to come back anytime soon.”


I interpret that map as conservatism being a mostly rural/poor thing and liberalism being mostly urban/rich. It's not a coincidence that most "urban" centers are next to large bodies of water and most rural areas are not.

[Edited on 5-5-2012 by MagicJigPipe]




"There must be no barriers to freedom of inquiry ... There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors. ... We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it and that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. And we know that as long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think, free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost, and science can never regress." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
View user's profile View All Posts By User This user has MSN Messenger
AndersHoveland
Hazard to Other Members, due to repeated speculation and posting of untested highly dangerous procedures!
*****




Posts: 1986
Registered: 2-3-2011
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 5-5-2012 at 03:15


Quote: Originally posted by MagicJigPipe  
And notice Reagan says, "men". And I'm usually the realist (at least I hope so) in the face of reactionary, extremist feminism. But why couldn't he have said men and women? I guess it's what you really mean and not how you say it...


Women are a form of men: womb-men

For the same reason, the word "she" is just "he" with an "s" added to the front of it.

The word "he" could formerly be used as a gender-neutral word to refer to both men and women. But then the feminsts came along and demanded everyone only use the word "they" when not specifically referring to males.

This is the proper english, before feminsts tried to alter it:
Quote:

Is it your brother or your sister who can hold his breath for four minutes?

The average American needs the small routines of getting ready for work. As he shaves or blow-dries his hair or pulls on his panty hose, he is easing himself by small stages into the demands of the day.

All men are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights— both males and females.


[Edited on 5-5-2012 by AndersHoveland]
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 5-5-2012 at 03:29


Quote: Originally posted by MagicJigPipe  

I was scrolling up after typing this and I saw that Reagan quote/picture. Before scrolling up to see who posted it, I thought, "Rosco Bodine. It's gotta be him.". And, sure enough.

And notice Reagan says, "men". And I'm usually the realist (at least I hope so) in the face of reactionary, extremist feminism. But why couldn't he have said men and women? I guess it's what you really mean and not how you say it...


You are pointing to a perfect example of the Frankfurt School "Critical Theory" application of "political correctness" like a good cultural Marxist would be expected...play the sexism or gender card....or the racism card....or whatever other kind of "Critical Theory" criticism can be wedged into any situation having opportunity to advance the cultural Marxist "create chaos by criticism" narrative. It is like a "logic glitch" which is very deliberately socially and psychologically "programmed" into a persons thought process as an alleged "sensitivity consciousness". So your "conditioning" and "brainwashing" is telling on you. I am in better company with Reagan than you are for your own being (halfway?) into bed with with practice of the Critical Theory Frankfurt School formula for political correctness of cultural Marxism. Anyone should watch out for and use protection against philosophically transmitted disease in that particular bed. Reagan's use of the word "men" is plainly done in a noncontroversial and gender neutral way. If the Frankfurt School building is on fire you may be in danger of burning to a crisp if you refuse rescue from anyone except a properly gender neutral and non sexist "fire person" :D Sometimes only a good "man" will do and mankind is a good example. Ladies and Gentlemen understand this thing which is kept mysterious from the politically correct. Only the worthy conservatives and classical liberals are permitted to know the mystery which resides with common sense.
Quote:

And I was kind of getting into your videos, Rosco, until the secular conspiracy one. "Conservatism" will soon loose all credibility unless it drops the fundamentalist Christianity thing. People are slowly waking up to the inanity of beliefs in supernatural phenomena and any ideology married to those beliefs in such an inseparable way will suffer for it. It already is. I know a lot of people who ignore a lot of "conservative" ideas because of the religious fanaticism. I'm not saying that's necessarily right, but it's happening.

Conservatism of today is actually aligned with classical liberalism. Contemporary progressives have subverted and confused the meaning for the term liberal and have also subverted the term conservative. It is part of a scheme to cause chaos by tampering with language and corrupting thought. Identification of the actual and existing culture war as a product of the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School of cultural Marxism is perhaps too precisely on target for your comfort. Bad mouthing christendom may win you points in some circles just like Bill Maher gets a lot of laughs in some rooms and hip hop is what some people think is poetry and music. It just could be that different strokes for different folks does have something to do with I.Q. but maybe you just don't know yet which crew are the bright and which crew are the not so bright. Maybe being in whatever alignment there is like virtue, its own reward enjoyed by the subscriber. Still more Frankfurt School "Critical Theory" is there as you play the antichristian anti-religion demagogy bigot card, while simultaneously advancing a deception which advocates as the alternative to "foolish belief" in such a "supernatural" being as God that somehow Darwinism and atheism and "naturalism" are supposedly "more rational" or more ethical concepts, ignoring that fundamental secularism is drenched in the blood of murdered millions as the ultimate discrediting of any illusion of superiority accorded by propagandists for such a deceptive and amoral philosophy as is Marxism. Guile and deception have had a few thousand years to become a practiced art. But liars are still liars even if they become good at it. Truth has a way of getting through like a breaking news story...the signal gets out.

[Edited on 5-5-2012 by Rosco Bodine]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Aperturescience27
Harmless
*




Posts: 39
Registered: 5-4-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 5-5-2012 at 16:56


Rosco Bodine, do you understand what Communism is? Communism means that the means of production are publicly owned. In the U.S., not only are the means of production privately owned, but so is a large and growing proportion of the government's work. Somehow, I don't think Marx would have supported privatized prisons.

Also, keep in mind that there is a difference between a secular government and an atheist government: an atheist government enforces atheism, a secular government doesn't enforce any religious belief. Personally, I'm an atheist, but I would rather die than see an atheist government in America, just as willingly as I would die rather than see a government that enforces a religion. A secular (not atheist) government allows people to believe what they want and is one of the most important founding principles of this country. We do not have an atheist government, in fact we don't even have a fully secular government. As long as politicians use religious arguments to back up political decisions, we will not have religious freedom.

Again, I don't understand why you are threatened by political correctness. Sure, it's annoying at times, but is it really a Marxist conspiracy that's destroying our country? I don't think so.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
watson.fawkes
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 2793
Registered: 16-8-2008
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 5-5-2012 at 17:41


Quote: Originally posted by Aperturescience27  
Rosco Bodine, do you understand what Communism is?
He's proved time and time again he doesn't. No need to waste your breath.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
White Yeti
International Hazard
*****




Posts: 816
Registered: 20-7-2011
Location: Asperger's spectrum
Member Is Offline

Mood: delocalized

[*] posted on 5-5-2012 at 18:47


I love how people think Communism is a form of government, when in fact it is merely an economic ideology. This is the reason why most communist regimes have collapsed.



"Ja, Kalzium, das ist alles!" -Otto Loewi
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Aperturescience27
Harmless
*




Posts: 39
Registered: 5-4-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 5-5-2012 at 20:02


Quote: Originally posted by White Yeti  
I love how people think Communism is a form of government, when in fact it is merely an economic ideology. This is the reason why most communist regimes have collapsed.


Yeah, people tend to associate communism with dictatorship in the same way that they tend to associate capitalism with democracy.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 5-5-2012 at 20:41


Quote: Originally posted by Aperturescience27  
Rosco Bodine, do you understand what Communism is?
Yes and I also understand the secular or atheist and Marxist precursor philosophy which serves in great part as basis for it. You seem to be redefining reality about what is the narrative and leaping ahead saying that what will ultimately result is not what we have now so the course towards a predictable destination is not evident for what it is.
Quote:

Communism means that the means of production are publicly owned. In the U.S., not only are the means of production privately owned, but so is a large and growing proportion of the government's work. Somehow, I don't think Marx would have supported privatized prisons.
Functional equivalency for anything which can be propagandized and sold as something different by another name would have suited Marx just fine. But it isn't communism that was the condition realized during "the long march" of cultural Marxism .....the communism is a destination and outcome intended for the endeavor.
Quote:

Also, keep in mind that there is a difference between a secular government and an atheist government: an atheist government enforces atheism, a secular government doesn't enforce any religious belief. Personally, I'm an atheist, but I would rather die than see an atheist government in America, just as willingly as I would die rather than see a government that enforces a religion.
That simply is not true, because secular humanism is a pseudoreligion or quasi-religion which only claims not to be a religion, while it very plainly is the de facto religion of the new atheism or the new agnosticism which practices an idolatry of a sort where man himself is held and reverenced, in effect deified to be the ultimate authority and the ultimate definer and dictator of what is right and wrong. Therefore a secular government after a fashion already enforces a religion of secular nature, through its laws which govern in great part how people will live their lives. The "church" of state collects its "offerings" by tax collectors who confiscate the property of citizens, and its courthouses and other government buildings are its temples.
Quote:

A secular (not atheist) government allows people to believe what they want and is one of the most important founding principles of this country.
Wrong. Anyone can always believe what they want because what you believe is your own internal thought process ....it is rather how those beliefs are expressed by actions which become subject to governance.
Quote:
We do not have an atheist government, in fact we don't even have a fully secular government. As long as politicians use religious arguments to back up political decisions, we will not have religious freedom.

Wrong again. You first confuse "freedom of religion" with the practice of a religion by actions.....and now you confuse freedom of religion with freedom from religion because you have a preference for the religion of secularism, philosophical Darwinism, or the new atheism or new agnosticism .....which you probably deny is a religion .....while at the same time you probably also assert that religion is incompatible with reason and incompatible with science .....because that is precisely what is the radical secularist narrative. That same narrative is the identical Frankfurt School Critical Theory of cultural Marxism. The nexus for these things is absolutely there and is plainly evident and is historical fact.
Quote:

Again, I don't understand why you are threatened by political correctness. Sure, it's annoying at times, but is it really a Marxist conspiracy that's destroying our country? I don't think so.
Political correctness is subversive to truth and it is a deception which serves an agenda which is evil and destructive to freedom. It is contradictory to any bona fide enlightenment......it is repressive and despotic and tyrannical. Persons who love freedom should all resist that destructive agenda and the propaganda which serves it.
You seem to have the wrong idea that I am confused about what are subtler differences about the techniques of oppression whether fascist, socialist, or communist or that I somehow do not understand also the tyranny of a majority which makes pure democracy nothing but mob rule.
Quote: Originally posted by watson.fawkes  
Quote: Originally posted by Aperturescience27  
Rosco Bodine, do you understand what Communism is?
He's proved time and time again he doesn't. No need to waste your breath.

Oh I think I have covered the subject well enough to prove I do understand and have provided plenty of linked sources to others who can express much better arguments supported by a portfolio of facts which remove any doubt. But it seems no matter the subject I may rely upon watson.fawkes readiness to offer kind and constructive criticism just as well and graciously endowed with a total absence of rebuttal information links. So yeah ...that's what you think ....right on schedule ......an authority of one who is my perennial critic.

Here is the latest from PJTV --- a non lamestream online media for thinkers. Most of this material is from what I understand so far should be generally moderate to center right conservative or libertarian in terms of content, and I haven't watched all of it, but it looks like it could be decent material as a media watch sort of commentary and analysis.

http://www.youtube.com/user/Pajamasmedia#g/u PJTV channel page

John Stossel interview
<iframe sandbox width="622" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/um9pi0eNgfs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Bill Whittle does some interesting short videos similar to the
video linked above and (here below)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6c_dinY3fM
concerning Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness. I have not watched all of these so more pot luck here on the playlists. This first video is a humorous commentary concerning some of the recent "narrative" which has been in the lamestream media.....providing analysis of propaganda which likely won't ever be heard on any lamestream media. Some have accused me of not understanding what is Marxism or what is propaganda either. The theory has been advanced that I must only get my information from Fox News or the like ....and that media "spin" and "the narrative" is something I just don't get. Actually I got it a long long time ago concerning both.

<iframe sandbox width="622" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6Aopwcn-N1E" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The next video addresses freedom of religion which is pertinent to my answer above

<iframe sandbox width="622" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/VgrktRgjBXk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Bill Whittle Firewall Playlist Video 1 of 35 videos

<iframe sandbox width="622" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/videoseries?list=PLABCC53F051B98328&amp;hl=en_US" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Bill Whittle Afterburner PJTV Video 1 of 21 playlist

<iframe sandbox width="622" height="350" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/videoseries?list=PLA7B1FE089B55B376&amp;hl=en_US" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Edited on 6-5-2012 by Rosco Bodine]
View user's profile View All Posts By User
jamit
National Hazard
****




Posts: 369
Registered: 18-6-2010
Location: Midwest USA
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 6-5-2012 at 04:15


@rosco

I agree with basically most of what you are saying and you're way more patient than I am... but I wouldn't waste my time trying to convince some people on this forum, who are intellectually incapable of understanding most of what you are trying to say... or are blinded by their presuppositions to assess fairly what is being said. They are more like Bill Maher, an ignorant secularist, bent on name calling rather than engaging in finding out the truth -- objective truth!!

@Aperturescience27

You're wrong my friend, the Constitution of the United States does not establish secularism but rather the freedom of individuals to practice their religion. Secularism is the philosophy that "man is the measure of all things", whereas the Founders were all operating within the theistic perspective. God is the principle foundation of the Constitution, at least philosophically.

Most of the Founding Fathers left the church of England and established the Constitution in part to protect religion liberty. Just because they did not establish a state church does not mean that "secularism" is the default position. Secularism is the opposite of theism and belief in God.

Ok, enough ranting!:mad: This is a science forum. haha:D

So whatever your worldview, religious or secular, Christian or atheist, good scientists exists on both side. Now back to science and to the lab!!!:cool:

View user's profile View All Posts By User
Rosco Bodine
Banned





Posts: 6370
Registered: 29-9-2004
Member Is Offline

Mood: analytical

[*] posted on 6-5-2012 at 11:24


Quote: Originally posted by jamit  
@rosco

I agree with basically most of what you are saying and you're way more patient than I am... but I wouldn't waste my time trying to convince some people on this forum, who are intellectually incapable of understanding most of what you are trying to say... or are blinded by their presuppositions to assess fairly what is being said. They are more like Bill Maher, an ignorant secularist, bent on name calling rather than engaging in finding out the truth -- objective truth!!


It is not a "waste of time" to try to put sunshine on an evil deception and propagandists con game as very plainly is "political correctness" and "the narrative" of the Frankfurt School Marxists or to identify any recognizable media spin disinformation and propaganda that is patterned so closely to Frankfurt School Critical Theory as to be a functional equivalent which is indistinguishable from the model. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then call it a duck.

Truth is not a waste of time when it can be affirmed to those who already know it, or can be reminded to those who may have forgotten it, or especially if truth can be put before those who have never found it or recognized it for the first time. Virtue is absent from deceitful schemes of ambitious men who seek power through defrauding their followers, and effectively blowing the whistle on the con which tends to be a specious lie .... can provide personal satisfaction.

Truth has no agenda, and if truth is timeless then it would be difficult to waste time on it, and it would be difficult to choose when is the right time for it, since it could be a good time for truth any time whatever. It is like addressing the question of what time tomorrow morning "should" the sun rise, and then laughing at the prospect dawn would be a really good "time". :D It defines itself when it arrives and removes all doubt or speculation.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Aperturescience27
Harmless
*




Posts: 39
Registered: 5-4-2012
Member Is Offline

Mood: No Mood

[*] posted on 6-5-2012 at 16:20


I'm honestly getting really sick of this debate. You don't address my arguments, you redefine words like "secular" to refer to people who call themselves "secular humanists", when I clearly meant "secular", "not overtly or specifically religious" (Merriam Webster). Secularism is not a religion, it isn't even a belief, other than the political belief that personal beliefs regarding religion (for or against) should be kept out of government. Your arguments are entirely without substance. Also, how are private businesses "functionally equivalent" to publicly owned means of production? Because the government regulates them? Because companies aren't allowed to poison our water or our food? Because companies can't fire workers for joining a union? Give me some specific examples, I'm still really not sure what you're talking about.

Would you rather discuss religion directly? I think if I can prove to you that God doesn't exist, I can end this argument sooner, because if you understand how the universe works, you can begin to make rational decisions about things like politics. One of the most common arguments for the existence of God is "How could the universe come into existence without a creator?", but how could God come into existence to create the universe? Occam's razor tells us to remove God because he adds complexity without improving our model of the universe. How do you explain radioactive dating that proves that the Earth is 4.6 billion years old? How do you explain the fact that dinosaurs and humans are never found in the same layer of sediment? How can you reconcile science, which is a belief that the universe is governed by laws, with religion, which is a belief that the universe is governed by God? Can you give me one bit of evidence backing up your belief? "Faith" is not evidence, nor is unverifiable scripture. I generally try to avoid going after people's beliefs, but you've gone after mine (or rather my lack thereof), making yours fair game.
View user's profile View All Posts By User
Polverone
Now celebrating 18 years of madness
*********




Posts: 3163
Registered: 19-5-2002
Location: The Sunny Pacific Northwest
Member Is Offline

Mood: Waiting for spring

[*] posted on 6-5-2012 at 17:21


Quote: Originally posted by Aperturescience27  
I think if I can prove to you that God doesn't exist...


Millions of people over thousands have years have argued over the existence and nature of the supernatural. You're not going to resolve the mystery to everyone's satisfaction in a series of forum posts. It looks like anything novel about this thread has been lost in the usual fashion.




PGP Key and corresponding e-mail address
View user's profile Visit user's homepage View All Posts By User
Polverone
Now celebrating 18 years of madness
Thread Moved
6-5-2012 at 17:23
 Pages:  1  2

  Go To Top