>> ^renatojj:

a good guiding social principle is not imposing one's values on others, specially when it comes to money. Do you like that one?
Do you think it's worth it for society to pay with more discontent and oppression so you can have power over their money, and choose their jobs, and endeavors, so you can make decisions that are better for the economy according to your superior ideals and values?
I guess their sacrifice is a price you're willing to pay, am I right?


That's a terrible principle; it's anarchy. We don't all have the right to fly about doing whatever we want at any cost to society.

We live on a desperately crowded and impoverished world surrounded by a desert that goes on forever. There aren't enough resources on earth to fully satisfy even one person's desires, let alone seven billion. Efficiency and restraint are moral necessities.

>> ^Sagemind:

There is something to be said for Anarchy. Not a pleasant world it would make, but some digression through anarchy would be progressive for government to be more productive and less corrupt.
Of course anarchy can bread its own corruption as well.


The real meaning of anarchy is what modern Americans would call libertarianism - did you watch the recent Chomsky vid on political semantics? Check out prince Peter kropotkin.

>> ^Porksandwich:

Dude hasn't seen V for vendetta......
I've always wondered about that, if they have to make sure not to watch other stuff covering their material so they don't get influenced by it.


The movies of vendetta and from hell are not even remotely worthy of the comics.
Although to really enjoy the comics you have to be a depressed young person in Thatchers Britain. Listening to 'a forest' by the cure might be the only way back..:)

There is something to be said for Anarchy. Not a pleasant world it would make, but some digression through anarchy would be progressive for government to be more productive and less corrupt.

Of course anarchy can bread its own corruption as well.

Well, it's all Hamlet, isn't it? What I mean is that it's all been done before, at least most of what's good has. What I love about SoA is its context. I think even Ol' Bill himself would've been intrigued by the export.

I agree that the seasons three and four were a lot of "shit or get off the pot" and none of the characters in a position to do either did so. BUT, I have faith in Sutter.

Your point about Gemma is interesting. I'll like seeing how her character (considering the actor is the writer/creator's wife) plays out.>> ^therealblankman:

SPOILER ALERT: It's Hamlet. Everybody must die in the end. Except probably for Gemma- she'll likely live to witness the complete destruction of her family.
Frankly the past couple of seasons have just pissed me off. Jax is such a pussy. He's all posturing and bluster with absolutely no decisiveness or action. You know, kind of like Hamlet.

>> ^Encumberance:

Anyone who has to get a Top Secret security clearance knows how much info they demand. Then the FBI follows up on that info with interviews and fact checking. I could not get a clearance if I lied about one thing. The president is put under a microscope by the security agencies of the US. He would not even be allowed near the oval office if he did not check out. I mean really.


but youre forgetting the FBI NSA and the CIA are all in on it! ANARCHY ANARCHY

Awww did someone call out a bigot and hurt your feeling Quantum? WAAAAAH! Cry cry cry.
You clearly don't understand the meaning of the word bigotry if you think Dan Savage poking fun at 'christian' bigotry is bigotry.
btw, Jessie Jackson is a bigot too. I don't see anyone denying that.

When you talk about freedom you are talking about anarchy. Freedom without conscience is anarchy in its purest sense.

Fuck off, I'm not wearing that shit.
>> ^Lann:

Great, so now my mate and I can both smell like an aerosol version of a taxicab air freshener.

I was going to post this with the title "Corporate America Cashes in on OWS Movement."

Anarchy? Corporate America is trying to make a profit off anarchy?

Weak minded is dead on accurate, @kymbos. Jeesh.

>> ^kymbos:

Nothing diffuses a situation like shooting someone dead with a gun.
Situation: diffused.
(I'm not supporting any argument here, I just like the term 'diffused' to describe killing someone).


Indeed, there isn't anything good about bad situations, only that it wasn't worse than it was IE dead baby and parent. In situations like these, I can't really have any sympathy for the shooting victim either, though. If you play by the rules of anarchy, you might get burned.

>> ^vaire2ube:

You spelled Bigot wrong in the tags.
Ron Paul non-racist quotes appear about 2 min in and continues... and Cenk's issue? He purports that Ron Paul says we should have anarchy. What a wierd thing to say.
Really? A vietnam era Air Force flight surgeon, physician and statesmen just wants the system to fall down on us ... yea.
ok.
so why does he fight so hard to change things in a legitimate, lawful fashion? to trick you all?Keep talking but really... research


Did you even watch the video? Cenk says that Ron Paul is a black-and-white libertarian. He says that what Ron Paul wants is almost anarchy, and he's right. Libertarianism shares many of the same ideals as anarchism. Problem is that it just doesn't work in the real world, where most people understand that we are constantly faced with "lesser of two evils" decisions, and that one cannot blithely apply a simple good/bad proposition to everything.

As for your videos, the first one is Ron Paul claiming he is electable and can win the 08 GOP nomination. I think he's pretty self-evidently wrong on that one. I would be willing to bet good money that he won't win this time either.

You spelled Bigot wrong in the tags.

Ron Paul non-racist quotes appear about 2 min in and continues... and Cenk's issue? He purports that Ron Paul says we should have anarchy. What a wierd thing to say.

Really? A vietnam era Air Force flight surgeon, physician and statesmen just wants the system to fall down on us ... yea.

ok.

so why does he fight so hard to change things in a legitimate, lawful fashion? to trick you all?





Keep talking but really... research

Anarchy Arm!

Oh i know that effect all to well. Happened to me with Breaking Bad, Dexter (well, not series 05 and 06), Game of Thrones, Sons of Anarchy and The Wire. I spent whole days and nights in front of the TV for those. But BG? Meh. :-)

AHAHAHA!!! best laugh i've had all day thankyou.

>> ^Diogenes:

>> ^berticus:
the psychology of the military fascinates me
"it's a game you have to play"
"too busy trying not to piss yourself"
"stripped of your dignity"
so bizarre

it should be both fascinating and bizarre to you
sad to say but there has always been and continues to be a need for soldiers in civilized societies
training them necessitates making them different from the rest of the populace, otherwise in wartime you could just give your everyday citizen a gun, wave vaguely in a direction and tell them to fire at will... and watch them be slaughtered
soldiers need to be trained to a higher level of discipline in order to react appropriately in stressful situations, to suffer a higher level of discomfort routinely, to more easily shrug off pain or fatigue that might incapacitate a civilian population
for this reason, there are various and sundry methods of training to achieve the desired effect -- are they perfect? of course not...
will this paradigm seem odd to you? sure, you're not a soldier - you're an ordinary citizen who probably never thinks for a moment about the underlying structure that protects you from complete anarchy

>> ^berticus:
the psychology of the military fascinates me
"it's a game you have to play"
"too busy trying not to piss yourself"
"stripped of your dignity"
so bizarre


it should be both fascinating and bizarre to you

sad to say but there has always been and continues to be a need for soldiers in civilized societies

training them necessitates making them different from the rest of the populace, otherwise in wartime you could just give your everyday citizen a gun, wave vaguely in a direction and tell them to fire at will... and watch them be slaughtered

soldiers need to be trained to a higher level of discipline in order to react appropriately in stressful situations, to suffer a higher level of discomfort routinely, to more easily shrug off pain or fatigue that might incapacitate a civilian population

for this reason, there are various and sundry methods of training to achieve the desired effect -- are they perfect? of course not...

will this paradigm seem odd to you? sure, you're not a soldier - you're an ordinary citizen who probably never thinks for a moment about the underlying structure that protects you from complete anarchy