search results matching tag: inhumane

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (46)     Sift Talk (4)     Blogs (3)     Comments (374)   

the enslavement of humanity

coolhund says...

Where is the option for the cotton planter to change careers to something they find interesting and challenging?

Does it matter? If you have a job that you studied for in college and suddenly notice it doesnt fit you, you have to work a lot to correct that for no pay, you actually have to pay for it. Also if youre 40+ and want to start a new career human resource managers will rather take someone who didnt have the issues like you and has the years experience in actual work at the same job. So you will always be at a huge disadvantage if you decide to change professions.
All these "super successful" people you see on TV that proudly talk about how they did all that so well, "just because they worked soooooo hard" (everyone either does that, or claims it), are exceptions to the rule!



Where are the benefits of infrastructure?

Uhm, those infrastructures are mostly used to get to your job or do your job anyway. What good are they if you work where you live, like those slaves?



How about healthcare?

AFAIK slaves got good healthcare, since they were property and the owner would lose money if they "broke" and couldnt be fixed.
Also I wouldnt call American healthcare good. People have to pay for it. And often have to take huge debts on themselves and their family to survive or be still able to work.



How about individual's rights?

Individual's rights? Yeah, maybe against other "slaves", but not against the state or rich people. They will always have a huge advantage compared to you. And actually they do what they want all over the world. Just look at those cesspools Syria, Libya, Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Millions killed for what? Are you safer now than before 9/11? No. The whole world is actually MUCH MUCH unsafer now. All thanks to your masters that care so much about the "individual's rights".
They even have the audacity to threaten NATO countries with invasion if they ever dared to bring one of them before an international tribunal.



How about protection from hostility?

Hostility from whom? Terrorists? Are you kidding me? Terrorists who are only created due to inhumane politics aswell? Criminals? Do you know that crime is actually not something we are born with, but we actually learn to do, because of our surroundings? If a lot of people feel treated unfair and cant do anything about it, crime rate will skyrocket. It has been that way for thousands of years. Look at other countries that treat their people much more humane and actually even pay then enough to live a good life even if they dont work, or have never worked! They shudder when seeing American crime rates. You can compare yourself more to Brazil than to Europe.



How about ever improving quality of life?

Most people are extremely stressed in their life, due to their job, not having enough time because of their job, being frustrated because other people have more then them, while working less (or not at all), having health issues due to their work and they know they cant change the job because they wont get another one, they simply hate their job, but also know they cant get a better one, etc, etc, etc.
There was a study a few years ago where they found out that people 500-1000 years ago were actually very happy. They didnt have to work nearly as much as we do nowadays! It wasnt rare that they only worked 6 months a year, and even if they worked they had MUCH longer breaks every day and didnt work as long. And they lived a good life for those times. Of course nowhere near as good as the monarchs, but it wasnt nearly as bad as its commonly claimed.

One thing has changed though: If youre smart and/or lucky (as in having a rich family) you can open your own company, do what you love. But even that gets harder and harder because the competition gets higher in numbers and in quality.

Barbar said:

It's definitely not spot on. It makes some points, but it misses them elsewhere.

Where is the option for the cotton planter to change careers to something they find interesting and challenging?

Where are the benefits of infrastructure?

How about healthcare?

How about individual's rights?

How about protection from hostility?

How about ever improving quality of life?

I'm all for complaining about the clown show that is the current state of US (amongst other countries) politics. But don't pretend that you are afforded no benefits by the state.

This has the intellectual honesty of a Bill O'reilly segment.

Just Another Day In The Snake Room

Jon Stewart on Charleston Terrorist Attack

GenjiKilpatrick says...

Now do you get why the "Angry Black Person" Stereotype exists?

Now do you get why a bunch of teens would riot & destroy their own community?

Stop trying to nullify, neutralize, invalidate the institutional oppression of People of Color!!

Non-whites will NEVER be treated with such kid gloves.

We see it OVER and OVER and OVER again. Daily. Weekly. Monthly.

People of Color are treated less than human, constantly.

Since the founding of the country!

The American Empire was build upon the suffering & oppression of Indigenous Peoples, Kidnapped Africans, Kidnapped Chinese.

White Privilege is the resultant REAL Institution of all that oppression and suffering.

Denying White Privilege is denying People of Color their humanity.

Denying ANY human their humanity makes you inhumane.

So FUCKING STOP IT!!

Just your everyday harassment, courtesy of the NYPD

JustSaying says...

Would you feel more comfortable if he wore a white hood? Maybe talk about 'gang lifestyle'?
I prefer my racists in white hoods and displaying swastikas, so I don't have to wade through subtext to id them. Open racism is stupid but at least honest. I despise political correctness and its ability to sugarcoat hatred. I'd rather engage a Neo-Nazi or white pride, god-hates-fags biblethumper than a Rick Santorum or Bill O'Reilly who are too much of a coward to say what they believe because they know how the broad public reacts.
The notion of not publicly voicing those idiotic, inhuman opinions because its offensive is more offensive to me than the opinion itself. I'd like to know if you're an idiot.
I believe in freedom of speech, even if that proves you're a terrible idiot. You have a right to be.

And now wake me up from that strange dream where I defend @lantern53.

GenjiKilpatrick said:

I'm gonna dig into you untill you learn that it's extremely offense & not-okay to publicly voice those stupid opinions.

Louis CK Probably won't be Invited back to SNL after this

poolcleaner says...

Mild racism: Watching the two black band members react to Louis' jokes. How will they take the jokes?

Mild racism: Watching Age of Ultron and exclaiming, "Everyone has a black superhero friend!"

Captain America <3 Falcon

Ironman <3 War Machine

Thor <3 Heimdall

Black Widow <3 Black Nick Fury

Hulk is black Bruce Banner

Daredevil <3 the Night Nurse

Jessica Jones <3 Luke Cage

Need i get into the black on Asian, black on white, Hyde on Asian action going on in Agents of SHIELD -- you're an inhuman happa hacker that fires earthquakes out of your fingers, welcome to the future.

Yeah, mild racism!! Eventually it's all meaningless because no one cares. Don't need to be getting all Ulysses Klaw on no Wakandan kings or nuthin'.

Marvel's Ant-Man - Trailer 1

EMPIRE says...

Well, brace yourself, because there's a LOT of them still coming.

Marvel:
Fantastic Four (again... again)
Deadpool
Gambit
Doctor Strange
Black Panther
Inhumans
Captain Marvel

DC:
Suicide Squad
Wonder Woman
The Flash
Aquaman
Shazam


And all this... in the next 5 years.

As a comic book fan... yay!

Lab Chimps See Sunlight For the First Time

newtboy says...

While it's great they're out now, this kind of thing really makes me hate humans. I thing someone needs to imprison the people who imprison animals that way. 30 years in a cage! F-ing speciesists!

I think they got the definitions' of "humane" and "inhumane" backwards, because humans treat others horrendously when they can get away with it.

Pasco police pursuing, and shooting, an unarmed man

newtboy says...

I could go along with that, but I don't think all 3 cops needed to empty their clips (or close to it) shooting to kill, especially when NO one saw a weapon, just arms flailing. That's text book definition of 'excessive use of force' in my eyes.

It's outrageous to me that not one of them had a taser, baton, or pepper spray out, and instead they all had their guns out ready to kill. It's inhuman to me that they always seem to think it's proper to kill rather than disable, and worse that they are supported in that contention by fellow officers AND the law (in many cases).

It's also outrageous and quite telling to me that they initially shoot at him 5 times as he's running/walking away with his hands completely visible. Apparently all those rounds missed the target and flew down the street where there were many bystanders. Absolutely no excuse for that part. That alone should get all 3 fired, or at least on desk duty until they all 3 pass a gun safety class.

All that said, I expect you are correct and this will be seen as 'justified' because...he had hands that might have had a gun in them? Sad but true.

I'm really starting to think we need to do what England did and stop allowing street beat cops to carry guns and only special weapon and tactics guys should have them, and they should be trained to not use them unless needed. These terrified bullies running around our country armed to the teeth with an immunity shield protecting them from consequence is not working.

lucky760 said:

Yes, @eric3579 is correct. This falls under the Sift's definition of snuff, so it has to be *discarded.

After viewing the video, though, I'd consider this a justified shooting because the suspect's hand went out of the officers' view (behind his body) and when it came back around he put his hands together as if attempting to fire a weapon.

american prison warden visits the norden in norway

enoch says...

@Jerykk
i cant make heads nor tails what you are trying to convey.
are you making an argument for harsher prisons?
or an assertion that if they were less harsh people would WANT to go to prison?
that recidivism is irrelevant so we should just execute prisoners?

i agree that poverty leads to desperation which can lead to criminal activity.there is plenty of statistics to back that up,though interestingly those numbers are dropping in regards to poverty=crime.

as for your deterrence argument.
yeah..no.the numbers obviously dont add up.
right now there are more american citizens incarcerated than the soviet gulags of the 80's.in fact,america incarcerates more citizens per capita than any other nation in the world.

americas prison population=2.4 million..and rising.

which leads me to my next point.
what is the purpose of prison?
well,it should be to remove those violent elements from society and for the offenders who are non-violent a way to pay a debt to the society they betrayed (fill in the offense here ____).

when their time has been served (paid) then they are free to rejoin society and reintegrate themselves back into society.

but what if that system of punishment strips you of all dignity and humanity?treats you like an abandoned dog at the local animal shelter?physically beaten and spiritually shattered,just HOW to you rejoin normal society?

what then?
do you blame the inmate who was thrown into a inhumane system?or maybe..juuuuust maybe..it may be the SYSTEM which is the blame.

let us look at some stats shall we?
the private prison industry is the 9th largest lobbiest in the country.who lobby for stricter sentencing,zero tolerance and mandatory jail time.a new trend in this area is now regarding teens AND pre-teens.they also make contracts with the local government to have a certain % occupancy.(meaning that even if those beds are not filled,the company STILL gets paid).

and lets not forget those kick backs to the local judges.already 25 judges this year got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

the idea that prison is a deterrence has been debunked.
there are over 5000 federal laws NOT including state and local.so at any given time,in any given day,YOU have perpetrated a federal crime.

the idea the prison is for rehabilitation is utter bullshit,another liberal feel-good "look at the good we are doing" trope.

prison is a business.
based on the mafia principle.
it is about making the poor a commodity and exploiting their lack of resources to fight back.
recidivism?
thats just repeat customers.american prisons care zippo about recidivism.

again i reference the milgram experiment.
treat people like animals and they will soon behave like animals.
treat them with humanity and dignity and the outcome is far more positive for a society as a whole..we ALL benefit.

but the private prisons dont want that..it means less profit for them.

the norden is doing it right and the results are impressive.

police shooting of mentally disabled man

SDGundamX says...

It's hard to say from the angle of the video, but it looked like he was going to walk away, then a cop called out something and he moved back towards the officers. At that moment someone opens fire. You only hear like one or two shots and then suddenly all the police are firing.

Just based on this video, I would guess that the shooting was ruled as justified because he walked towards the officers (although it's unclear if that was because the officers ordered him to do so). My guess is everyone is tense, and when the first shot is fired everyone kind of just piles on and opens fire too.

It's a tough situation. It really looked to me like the cops were trying to de-escalate before things got out of hand. They called the dog back and some of them lowered their weapons and moved out of a firing stance. I think it was the fact that the guy moved erratically (suddenly stepping back two or three steps like he was going to leave and then suddenly moving back towards the cops a couple of steps) that caused them to open fire.

Dunno, this doesn't look like an open and shut abuse case to me. He had a knife, he wasn't acting in a rational manner, and he moved towards the cops. Legally, they were within their rights to shoot (if I'm perceiving the situation correctly).

Now, should they all have just backed off? I dunno. If they back up too far he could make a run for it and possibly reach an innocent bystander before they could catch up.

Should they use a taser? Again, I dunno. The range on those things isn't great, meaning someone would have had to get close to the knife-wielding dude. And if you don't get a precise hit, then knife-wielding dude is not only in range to counter-attack, but is probably royally pissed as well.

Tough situation. I feel for the family. It's unfortunate it went down like it did. I don't see how the cops could have won here. Sending the dog in to take him down seems inhumane to both him and the dog. Trying to down him with rubber bullets or beanbag shotgun rounds could have severely injured and killed him and probably weren't available to the officers anyway.

Damn shame.

(Also, amazed this video hasn't sparked a snuff debate in discussions yet. This isn't a news video of the event, it's the raw footage of a man being gunned down. I'll leave it to others to decide if that's against Sift guidelines or not).

Cenk Uygur debates Sam Harris

enoch says...

@Truckchase
i was referring to how harris was crying on how he is so misunderstood and how everybody is getting his ideas wrong,or misrepresenting them.
i agree with him when he postulates that some people may be misrepresenting him to further their own agenda but i found it beneath him to whine due to disagreements with certain people who were just espousing their opinion based on his words.

maybe write clearer and more succinct in order to convey your ideas?

as a philosopher he should be accustomed to this,it is practically expected but it can further the discussion.

meh..thats how i took it anyways.just my opinion.

@gwiz665
you were the guy who encouraged me to look further into harris work.which i did.
and happily so..i found him far more reasonable and nuanced than my original impression.

so thank you my friend.

the arrogance i am speaking of is in the latter part of the video where harris does the two-step when cenk calls him out on some of his positions in regards to foreign policy.

you cannot acknowledge that certain historical events were monsterous and then double back and suggest we still have moral authority to USE the very same power structure,that only a second ago you admitted had perpetrated inhuman crimes,to impose your own sense of what a society should be.

and THEN,when cenk doubles down and calls you out AGAIN,suggest that what you are REALLY asking is just a hypothetical "philisophical" question.not actually offering a policy solution.

another point harris got stuck on and,in my opinion,where his REAL arrogance was exposed,is to suggest that democracy is the best form of government but islamic nations are not ready and would need a 20year buffer and maybe the western worlds could place a leader in order to help the transition towards democracy.

check,point.match.

this is where harris always loses me.i understand his criticisms of religion,others have done it far better than him but when he dips his toes into foreign policy,history and politics he wades into waters where his expertise is revealed to be severely lacking.

harris makes many exceptional points and i love that when given time (which cenk gave him) a lot of his ideas are allowed to flourish and blossom.this is a good thing.i may not be a harris fan but i am most certainly not a harris hater either.

i just dont think he is the best atheist thinker out there.

henry giroux-we have lost the language of compassion

Seat belt violatiation ends w/ Police Smash Window and Taser

newtboy says...

Perhaps, but they have not ordered that you can search them all without cause, or question them, only put them where you can see their actions for safety.
Your second sentence does not make sense. If you have no reason to believe the passenger is a criminal (and not knowing is not a reason to believe they are) you have no right to manhandle them, question them, search them, or detain them.
This is always your advice, just bend over and take it up the ass, and don't expect a reach around or a 'thank you'. If a cop stopped you, you must be a piece of shit criminal that deserves the inhuman treatment you will get.
My suggestion is to respond with "am I under arrest" and "am I free to leave" and NOTHING else...and to have it all on tape so the officers can't just lie about what happened, which they tend to do if they can't be irrefutably disputed (and even when it can).

lantern53 said:

The courts have ruled that police officers can order all passengers out of a vehicle during a traffic stop.

You don't know if there is a wanted person indicated on the vehicle registration because this video only shows one side.

I would advise you to get out of the car if ordered and you can avoid all of this unpleasantness.

Very Realistic Computer Graphics

jmd says...

Well... there is a lot missing here. But for sure they are really getting the look of skin right. It is amazing how complex skin is to render, not because of texture but of light. We don't notice it at first but when you take away the ability of our skin to pass through and refract light, it immediately starts to look fake and inhuman.

Should drug-sniffing dogs be discredited

newtboy says...

No, a police dog is a dog. A tazer is a tool. (I could have made a terrible joke there, but will refrain)
I understand that humans being more 'valuable' than 'animals' (as if we aren't animals) is the normal way of thinking, but you make the knee jerk assumption/implication that they are the only options, either let a dog attack a dangerous armed person that WILL hurt/kill the dog or do it manually and be hurt yourself. There are MANY other options always available that don't involve releasing the unsuspecting dog into harms way. Most don't even involve deadly force. It would NEVER be proper to let the dog attack a known armed threatening person instead of using one's brain to deal with the danger in a safer manner, but that is what you've said you would do.
As a society, we have partially reversed the thinking that 'humans are more important than animals'. That is shown by the creation of many 'preserves' that stop people from farming/hunting on land to save animals, and that ends up killing some people (through starvation, malnutrition, etc). So while your statement is usually correct, people do usually consider humans more valuable than animals, as an absolutist statement it is wrong. That kind of thinking has put us in a position where the food chains are being broken because we only thought about humans (and not very thoroughly).

I'm sorry to hear about your cat, it's a terrible thing to have to help them go, but often the right thing for them. :-(

Your comments were "a dog is a tool" and "If I were tasked with taking a person with a machete into custody, I would be happy to have a dog take a chance over a person risking their life." Both show a complete lack of concern for the dog, or even thought for it as a living, thinking, feeling being. The latter also shows a propensity to put the unsuspecting dog in far greater danger rather than accept a manageable danger themselves. In your scenario, you could easily disarm 'Machette' with your Taser, firearm, car, other officers, etc. with minimal or no danger to the officers, only more time taken, but you say you would send in the dog to get sliced. I find that terrible and not the words of someone that truly cares for the animal.
EDIT: " I would be happy to have a dog take a chance over a person risking their life." really translates to 'I would be happy to have a dog risk their life over a person taking a chance.'...and I and others find that thinking uncaring and irresponsible towards the living, feeling being (your tool) who's care and welfare you took responsibility for.
You are quite correct, I could never be a cop. I don't have the mentality to constantly tell others what to do (and insist they follow my directions), or to deal with the drudgery of writing people tickets, paperwork, etc. I could not dehumanize people I think are criminals daily and treat them like the inhuman scum they 'are'. I would have too hard a time enforcing laws I disagreed with, and I would fear that dealing with people at their worst would make me think the worst of all people, and so cause me to treat them all like the awful criminals they are (in my mind), making me a douchebag with authoratah. I don't want to be that in any way.
I feel like being a cop is a truly hard job that screws with one's mind. Again, why I think therapy on the job should be mandatory.
Honest discussion is never a waste of time.

lantern53 said:

No, a police dog is a tool.

Humans are more valuable than animals.

But I must say, you make an incredible number of assumptions in your thinking.
It just so happens that in less than an hour I must take my cat to the vet to be euthanized and it's about all I can do to keep my composure.

Any officer who loses a dog to a criminal act is devastated, but the officer still realizes that people are more important than animals.

You constantly demonstrate your knee-jerk emotionalism and animus to a difficult job that you would undoubtedly be unable to do.

Now to end this waste of time.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon