Yeah, I'll just quote this...

"Truman did not cower at the mention of the word “socialism,” which in those days was distinguished in the minds of most Americans from Soviet Stalinism, with which the president—a mean cold warrior—was wrangling.

Nor did Truman, who counted among his essential allies trade unionists like David Dubinsky, Jacob Potofsky and Walter Reuther, all of whom had been connected with socialist causes and in many cases the Socialist Party of Eugene V. Debs and Norman Thomas, rave about the evils of social democracy.

Rather, he joked that “Out of the great progress of this country, out of our great advances in achieving a better life for all, out of our rise to world leadership, the Republican leaders have learned nothing. Confronted by the great record of this country, and the tremendous promise of its future, all they do is croak, ‘socialism.’”"

You are like a small child afraid of the monster in the closet when, in reality, there is nothing there. Do public servants like police/fire brigade etc draw pensions on retirement? That's socialism. Capitalism says that they are at the end of their useful life, and if they haven't saved for their retirement, fuck em.

And let's not even get started on christianity (love they brother and money is the root of all evil), damn Jesus and his socialist bullshit... X D

Because a whale is murdering its oppressors, which is ALWAYS fun and funny. I mean, I like British people but there's something about Mel Gibson murdering them in movies that just... that's also why we hate Mel Gibson, because he became the oppressor which we need to kill (socially). And now we are the oppressor.

If I saw a giant whale flying over my city, I would welcome it with dying arms. It's funny to know deep down inside that your own death, not out of self hatred or injustice, but out of a post-human sense of justice, could be absolutely hilarious.

Would the death of your civilization yield positive results?

Or at least laughs?

It did in this animation!!

Money is the root of all evil? Evil is the root of all things -- and it's funny to exist within the frames of constant existential doublethink!

Also, it's a cute whale, sort of like a Stay Puff of our current meme cycle -- which is over, because meme cycles are like 5 minutes or something.

"God's word is truth", so you better go kill yourself for wearing that cotton/poly blend bitch. That's much much clearer in the bible than the minor anti-gay stuff.

"Christians follow Christ" ...except when he said things like 'don't judge other people', 'be inclusive, not exclusionary', 'love your neighbor as yourself', 'money is the root of all evil', 'don't make or own any statues or sculptures that aren't impressionist...etc.

First off, the city is already a powder-keg over segregationist tactics that were employed by the predominantly white city government to prevent affordable housing for lower income residents in the affluent parts of town.

http://www.ibtimes.com/mckinney-north-texas-city-center-pool-party-video-controversy-was-sued-over-housing-1955995

Now, the pool was in a upper crust luxury community and to celebrate the end of the school year, quite a few non-whites obtained passes to the pool. It was not until a bunch of the adult white residents of the community started calling in reports of fights and trespassing (people without passes).

These same nice white folk made the visitors feel wanted by throwing out racist comments "Several adults told the black teens to go back to their “Section 8 [public] housing” developments."

Now, the white kid who took the video, and who was not thrown to the ground by the police (he said they basically ignored him), said that most of the kids had passes and that the problems began before the few people who did not have passes showed up.

“I think a bunch of white parents were angry that a bunch of black kids who don’t live in the neighborhood were in the pool,” said Brooks, who is white.

Grace Stone, a white 14-year-old, told BuzzFeed News that when she and her friends objected to the racist comments about public housing an adult woman then became violent.

So the story is pretty much that a bunch of upper class white folks didn't like the 'darkies' getting uppity and brought the cops in. Everyone except the guy in the blue hat was released after being 'put in their place' by the cops for a while. Blue hat guy went to jail on charges of interference and evading arrest.

On Sunday afternoon, a sign left at the pool thanked McKinney police “for keeping us safe.” Because, as we all know, ethnic teens are the root of all evil and could hurt us white folks!

I doubt the cop loses his job, but he fucking should. Pulling a gun on unarmed teens is ludicrous. Putting your full weight on the back of a teen girl half your size and resting there for minutes is uncalled for. The jackass was PISSED that he tripped while chasing kids and felt he needed to get his own back.

As far as the community, they don't mind taking money from rich black folks to build a sports center, but don't let those uppity blacks think they can hang out there.

*promote

Understand, for people who have faith, faith is knowing the unknowable.

Example: I know that intelligent life exists on other planets. It is a 100% certainty in my mind. I am so certain of this "fact" in fact, that I think it's ridiculous that there are people who even question it. Yet, there is no actual scientific proof. Nothing published. Nothing discovered. I believe it though. I know it to be true. If someone were to tell me I shouldn't believe or talk about it, I would find it nonsensical and offensive. This is what faith feels like.

There's a difference between passively not believing in God and actively hating people who do.

If someone offers some bullshit as fact, and you know it isn't, welcome to every day on earth (or at least the internet). It doesn't matter if it's religion or not.

For example: (paraphrasing) 'Most people proselytize'.

Most of the (almost 6 Billion) people who believe in God go through their day to day lives without ever even mentioning their beliefs let alone trying to proselytize when they do.

And on that note I will say that proselytizing is not necessarily wrong either. You believe what you believe and they believe what they believe and everyone gets to express themselves (all proselytizing) and everyone can make up their own minds. Now, I'm talking about people expressing themselves, not entities who have an agenda.

Which brings me to my last point. None of this is to suggest that I disagree with Bil Nye. Kids should not be fed bullshit. Adults either. The real problem? It's not "money is the root of all evil". It's "the love of money". Greed is behind the majority of evil.

There are those who desire positions of power and pervert religion into a tool to achieve their own agenda. This is a very old story. And it is these people who "take God's name in vain". But that's just one hammer in their toolbag. Religion is one. Anti-intellectualism another. Manipulation through fear. On and on.

Science is truth but it is not the only "truth" in life. Art exists. Beauty exists. Love exists. There is more. Maybe all of that can be boiled down to some chemical reactions in the brain and sociological pressures, but I believe there is a greater truth.

Sorry for ranting. Don't take any of this personally please!

You seem to be relying on quite a few assumptions yourself, and this doesn't really deserve a reply (and you probably don't want one anyway), but nonethless -- I've a few minutes to kill:

None of what you say explains how you justify the stupid assumption that we need a monopoly of law enforcement in order to enforce the law.

Another assumption is in thinking that people are "evil" but somehow the politicians and the bureaucrats are somehow "good" and are what maintain law and order. (Maybe you think of yourself as evil. But in any case that is irrelevant.)

The "60's hippies" comment sounds like a Faux Noise pundit!

"What EXACTLY prevents me from taking everything someone has, by force? Private security? If you can afford it? If you can't?"

Go ahead, try it. And I can afford it. If you can't, then you should maybe look into that and your own finances instead of ranting about libertarians. Seems like a better strategy.

Do you actually think police services now currently "free?" Even if you happen to be a nonproductive tax consumer, you are still paying for it in other ways.

Competing private security or insurance would be cheaper and more efficient than the police force, since it would not be the monopoly we have now. And there are also those willing and able to defend themselves on top of that.

"All of Europe was effectively ungoverned when Rome fell."

Learn your history; there was never a time where all of Europe was "effectively ungoverned" when Rome fell.

"3. The appropriate information will be available to make rational decisions."

Obviously you're making the erroneous assumption that individuals don't have the info needed to make their own decisions and yet government/central planners somehow do. This is, in fact, the opposite of what Hayek demonstrated (not to mention what common sense indicates). (Maybe you feel incompetent, but that's another issue.)

Bemoaning the end of the Roman empire is like bemoaning the end of the Nazi regime; with its constant wars, the destruction of the 2nd Jewish Temple (an earlier holocaust), its intolerances, etc. Any problems with the "dark ages" (a label that historians are increasingly abandoning as it is glaringly inaccurate) reveal what happens when a poorly run state collapses due to war and bad economics. A lesson on where we are heading, whatever you might think. Good luck to you.

Edit: "You really act as though government is the root of all evil."
Which of my actions do you mean? Posting my thoughts? Are you the thought police?

Sweet Jesus, you and your ilk are out of your fucking minds. You really act as though government is the root of all evil. As though if the mean ole' government will just get out of the way the world will be a happy fun-time place.

FUCK THAT.

I can easily say that without government regulations our industrial complexes would have poisoned us all to death years ago. Take a polluted shithole like Beijing, multiply that by every city in the world, multiply that by how much worse it would be without someone to say "you can't do that"

All your nonsensical libertarian blathering relies on many assumptions:

1. People are rational
2. People aren't evil.
3. The appropriate information will be available to make rational decisions.
4. People that are on the short end of the economic stick won't kill you for food, steal your women for fun, and riot because they can.
5. Industries will compete with one another.
6. Etc.

I really have one question though. In your utopian fantasy. What EXACTLY prevents me from taking everything someone has, by force? Private security? If you can afford it? If you can't?

You know, there was a period of institutional anarchy following the collapse of the Roman Government. All of Europe was effectively ungoverned when Rome fell. You know what that time was called? The fucking DARK AGES.

Disney is the root of all evil.

Blind adherence to the cult of personality.

Why do liberals love Obama?

1. he's black (not really...he's half white) so...white guilt
2. big choom smoker back in the day
3. has a great smile
4. young, so he's cool
5. trying to lessen the impact of America in the world, because they believe America is the root of all evil
6. supports abortion

How Obama gets away with it:
1. No one wants to be the person in the history books who 'brought down' Obama.

But don't give up hope, people, his chickens will come home to roost.

child pornography is the root of all evil

i am loathe to respond in bullet form,maybe because i find it the weakest and laziest form of debate in a text format,but let me address a glaring misconception you seem to have concerning the occupy movement.you seem to be under the impression that its driving force is against rich folk.

now lets put that aside for a second and i shall not deal with just how utterly inaccurate that statement is because what REALLY intrigues me is this: how did you formulate that opinion when so much information is already out there revealing a totally different animal?how did you derive this conclusion and by what information did you base it on?
now THAT is a far more interesting conversation.

Its driving force is against the powers that be. "They". They say money runs the government, and they are right. Money is at the root of all evil. Who controls all the money? The "1 percent", although it's really more the ".001" percent. So it is essentially against the rich and powerful, the income divide they have engineered, and the entrenched power structure they orchaestrate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is an ongoing series of demonstrations initiated by the Canadian activist group Adbusters which began September 17, 2011 in Zuccotti Park, located in New York City's Wall Street financial district. The protests are against social and economic inequality, high unemployment, greed, as well as corruption, and the undue influence of corporations—particularly that of the financial services sector—on government. The protesters' slogan We are the 99% refers to the growing difference in wealth in the U.S. between the wealthiest 1% and the rest of the population.

you also put forth that your main premise was that the students were warned that they would be removed,by force if need be.
maybe i am misunderstanding your thinking but it appears that if there is an announcement then any use of force is justified.
yet in your previous paragraph you stated you understood the necessity to disobey then turn around and become an apologetic for police force.
these two premises are in conflict.

I was merely countering the assertion that they were sprayed without warning, which was a lie. I do believe police have the right to use force, however, I think they could have handled that situation a little better. I do believe we should disobey authority when it runs contrary to what God has commanded, but then and only then.

then in the next paragraph you continue with a verbal denigration of the people of occupy using tried and true tactics of any powerful institution.you literally have just regurgitated state propaganda and i dont think for a second you even realized that fact.do you even know what a marxist,anarchist or socialist actually is? i ask that sincerely not as a slight towards you,because it doesnt appear that you do.

I am not on the side of the state, I am on the side of God. Governments tend towards corruption and unless they adhere to biblical principles they will fall into decay and injustice will be the normative state of the land. So I do not prefer the state at all, but neither do I favor removing it, at least until Jesus returns. It is, as the founders believed, a necessary evil.

Yes, I know what they represent, and their positions are often interchangable. They were out in force waving their communist flags, talking about income redistribution and private property rights, distributing their anti-capitalist propaganda. Here is a quick portrait:

http://www.lookingattheleft.com/2011/11/zuccotti-utopia-portraits-of-revolutionaries/comment-page-1/#comment-22376

They even had maoists:



again i find your premise in conflict.
on the one hand you agree and are aware of the corruption gnawing at our democracy and then turn around and dismiss those who are protesting that VERY corruption you just acknowledged as somehow being unworthy.
i even posted the playbook that powerful institutions use and you fell into lock step with that message.

then lastly you again use a perjorative to describe the occupy movement with obvious disdain and then chastise me for comparing occupy with the civil rights movement.
either you dont understand my point or didnt think it through.
i was not comparing them as being similar in intentions.i was comparing them to how the power of the people are the ONLY way to enact change.
and if you truly agree that this government is corrupt and has been purchased by corporations who use their immense wealth to further their own profit margin at the expense of the average american citizen then i do not understand why your premise is so diametrically opposed in thought and in reason.

your argument is a contradiction.

The fundemental disagreement is this. What I recognize is the corruption gnawing at all of mankind. Everyone is looking at this catastrophe called civilization and thinking "how can we rearrange this so a utopia emerges?" Some people think the inequitable distribution of resources is the source of eivl, and believe that if we just set up a system to share the resources equitably then all goodness will follow from that. Other people think that just having a system is the source of corruption and want to eliminate it altogether and live without any central authority. The issue is that these schemes are all predicated upon the assumption that human beings are generally good. The reality is, human beings are generally sinful and tend towards corruption and not goodness. It isn't the system, or lack thereof that is the problem, it is the human heart:

Jeremiah 17:9

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

If you wiped out everything and started with a blank slate, putting the population of the world into an instant utopia, it would only be a matter of time before the whole thing was rotten to the core. The problem isn't the system, it is us. The only solution to this problem is Jesus Christ. Humans are incapable of governing themselves equitably. The founders recognized this, which is why they instituted checks and balances into the constitution, to try to offset mans sinful nature. They knew no man could be trusted with power. In the same way, to switch systems we would simply just be trading one polished turd for another. When Jesus returns and sets up His kingdom, only then will there be peace upon this Earth.

one last thing and while i hope you know .i shall state openly here.
what i am about to ask i ask in all sincerity and humility.
where do you think jesus would be sitting on this issue?
would he be on capitol hill with the plutocrats and corporate lobbyists?
think about it.

What Jesus is interested in is our salvation. Neither the plutocrats or the protesters are doing anything to reach or to further His Kingdom. They both outside of His will and are following man-centered doctrines and philosophies which glorify themselves and give God no acknowledgement what-so-ever. Jesus wouldn't be happy with any of them.

Luke 11:28

But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”

Luke 18:8

I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

>> ^enoch:
>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
Making a foray into politics?

so it appears and not a very impressive one.
@shinyblurry
i.

@SDGundamX

Yogi has his/her own, personal issues with reality, so jumping in with the "Doctor" doesn't gain you a whole lot of juice.

Assuming 2.3% is correct (and it isn't even close*), that makes only 161 million, according to you, that could potentially care about the death of Mr. Hitchens. Not very Christian of the rest of you lot, now is it? I'm not even sure what your point is, yet you dedicated a whole paragraph to it. What do you think is the minimum number of caring human beings required for someone's death to matter? Why does it seem so important for you to believe that so few will care about Hitchen's death? Are you trying to dismiss his importance in this world by claiming only a few TENS OF MILLIONS of people will miss him? How many people will give a shit when YOU die?

Shinyblurry seems to have some delusion that witnessing here in the lion's den of VideoSift will score him bonus points with Allah. His every comment and video is part of a personal crusade to save us lowly heathens, and I find it offensive and TIRESOME. His comments used to get a "fair shake" from me. Now, they don't. And I'm sure I'm not the only one who is tired of his relentless, delusional lunacy. The only thing that can truly save him are an unmarked black van with heavily tinted windows, some nice men in white coats, and about 6 months of heavy deprogramming.

Christopher Hitchens is my mf'ing jesus! He hath shown me the way! Religion is TRULY the root of all evil in this world. Hitchens is one of those "crazy ones" who "move the human race forward". Religion will die a slow death, but, unlike Hitchen's legacy, it WILL die. We may even get to Mars after all.

All I have is some Momokawa saké, but I'm sure you'll understand, Mr. Hitchens. Bottoms up!




*It's around 14%. Yep, about 1 Billion atheists/agnostics (and rising).

>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

I'm suggesting you join the No State Project and support the thousands of other people who have realized that governments are nothing more that controlling, self-important groups of monkeys playing some game with arbitrary rules.

Like I said, I'm not really all that interested in implementing some radical right-wing ideology.

Even if I were to grant the central flawed premise (government is the root of all evil), no one's ever given me a plausible reason to believe that any stateless society wouldn't turn into one with a state rather quickly.

I have the a similar view about the people far to my left who want to abolish money and markets. Even the Soviet Union wasn't able to prevent a black market from forming -- the incentives to trade are too great, and the means to execute a trade too simple to ever stop it.

Same goes with government. The incentives to form one are too great, and the means to operate one are so ridiculously simple, even children do it.

That's why my interest in politics isn't to try to knock over the table, but to refine both markets and governments so they maximize human welfare.

False. Self-interest indulged to the extent that it becomes at the expense of others is the root of all evil.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

If there is one thing the bible got right it's this: the love of money is the root of all evil.

Dude love of money, not money itself. i.e. avarice. Jesus' anger at the money-changers was not because he wished they were bartering...

>> ^Stormsinger:

>> ^JiggaJonson:
If there is one thing the bible got right it's this: the love of money is the root of all evil.

Possibly the one and only thing Ayn Rand actually got right...her refutation of this old saw is amazing. An eleven page (IIRC) monologue by Francisco refuting the claim is actually readable, understandable, and quite logical. Money is a symbol and a tool, and quite a powerful tool at that. It expands our capability far beyond anything that could have been accomplished when limited to a barter economy.
The part she failed to grasp (or refused to admit, I'm not sure) is that unrestrained greed is -not- a virtue. Once you throw away ethical behavior in the pursuit of unbridled acquisition...once you start treating people as tools to be used rather than human beings...once you begin to look at people as sheep to be fleeced rather than trading partners to make mutually profitable deals with...you -are- evil.