TheBerlin Wall
Stavros of Pureshitland
with mixed feelings. It's about the word “Freedom” that has been used
in the press. There is no question that the communists really lost
something in their ideology. They forced submission by sending to
gulags many who simply expressed their ideas. Often is was just a
better way to run communism.
What I am about to say may upset some. Before I say it, I need to
express that I have many gay friends and I support them I also raised
a black son and suffered much discrimination in the process.
Have we gone in the direction of the communists. Today it is not only
a crime to hit someone but to hit some one and say “You gay bastard”
requires extra punishment. Why is this so? If someone hits me because
he hate me there is no extra punishment.
I also have a problem with this idea of punishing anyone who hates.
Is it right to deny a person his job because he hates Jews, black or
gay? Karl Jung said that we we suppress our feeling it is going to
come out is an terrible way. Are we making the possible of a Nazi type
revolutions by suppressing there feelings? When I look at what the
communists did to someone of opposing views I wonder if we are not
going in that direction.
This is just for thought. I reiterate that I love gays, Jews and
blacks. I, however, feel that our attempt to silence bigots is going
to backfire.
Love
bac.an...@gmail.com says...
>
>As we celebrate the downfall of the Berlin Wall I am finding myself
>in the press. There is no question that the communists really lost
>something in their ideology. They forced submission by sending to
>gulags many who simply expressed their ideas. Often is was just a
>better way to run communism.
>
>What I am about to say may upset some. Before I say it, I need to
>express that I have many gay friends and I support them I also raised
>a black son and suffered much discrimination in the process.
>
>Have we gone in the direction of the communists. Today it is not only
>requires extra punishment. Why is this so? If someone hits me because
>he hate me there is no extra punishment.
>
>I also have a problem with this idea of punishing anyone who hates.
>Is it right to deny a person his job because he hates Jews, black or
>gay? Karl Jung said that we we suppress our feeling it is going to
>come out is an terrible way. Are we making the possible of a Nazi type
>revolutions by suppressing there feelings? When I look at what the
>communists did to someone of opposing views I wonder if we are not
>going in that direction.
>
>This is just for thought. I reiterate that I love gays, Jews and
>blacks. I, however, feel that our attempt to silence bigots is going
>to backfire.
It does backfire when it's obviously taken to stupid lengths
like when someone is scolded for referring to black humour
or something. It brings all kinds of efforts of that kind
into disrepute. I'm not sure there's a clear line between
too far and not far enough though. The communism analogy is
quite strained. A better analogy would be the Red Scare and
McCarthyism which persists to this day with "socialist" being
used as an insult.
There's zero doubt that an environment of expressed intolerance
leads to the actual habit of intolerance. If it's okay for
us to insult gays or veterans without limit then pretty soon
it will be okay to beat them up, steal from them and kill them.
Hate speech is a form of incitement. The problem, it seems to
me, is that some control-happy fuckwits are always just looking
to do some enforcement and to prove what big dicks they are.
So in conclusion I think we need laws against control-freak
fuckwitism.
Naturally I will be the arbiter of the standards.
--
Love
Kitty P
"Stavros of Pureshitland" <bac.an...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:daff1f56-49c1-40fd...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
-------------
You're right in that political correctness seems to have forced bigotry into
something that now lurks beneath the surface. It doesn't fool the people who
are the focus though as you will find asking anyone who is being
discriminated against. When it's beneath the surface, people know something
is wrong, but there are no ways to fix it or make it right.
But the alternative of not having some kind of intervention is worse. Our
history shows when that kind of hate is left unchecked, a young gay boy can
be killed and strung up on barbed wire in the desert, a black man hung in a
tree in Alabama, or a Hitler. So maybe the first baby step is what we have
now, bigotry underneath the surface, with the next steps leading to less
actual feelings of hate towards anyone who is different than the hater. It
has to start somewhere, maybe this is what it looks like to at least start?
Guess that works unless one believe that hate is part of our human makeup
and can never change...
Kitty
Ned Ludd
"Kitty P" <pain...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:r00Km.14581$ET3....@newsfe17.iad...
> "Stavros of Pureshitland" <bac.an...@gmail.com> wrote in message ...
>> I also have a problem with this idea of punishing anyone who hates.
>> Is it right to deny a person his job because he hates Jews, black or
>> gay? Karl Jung said that we we suppress our feeling it is going to
>> come out is an terrible way. Are we making the possible of a Nazi type
>> revolutions by suppressing there feelings? When I look at what the
>> communists did to someone of opposing views I wonder if we are not
>> going in that direction.
>
> history shows when that kind of hate is left unchecked, a young gay boy
> can be killed and strung up on barbed wire in the desert, a black man hung
> in a tree in Alabama, or a Hitler. So maybe the first baby step is what we
> have now, bigotry underneath the surface, with the next steps leading to
> less actual feelings of hate towards anyone who is different than the
> hater. It has to start somewhere, maybe this is what it looks like to at
> least start?
>
Unless, of course, Stavros' comment is right and the suppression of our
feelings is going to come out in some other terrible way. (Which I think
is closer to how things work than hoping that forcing bigotry "underneath
the surface" will lead to less bigotry.)
> Guess that works unless one believe that hate is part of our human makeup
> and can never change...
> Kitty
Why is it wrong to think that hatred is part of our human makeup?
Ned
Kitty P
"Ned Ludd" <ned...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:HM6dnSiKRIYLAmXX...@earthlink.com...
If thinking along biological survival lines, hatred and accompanying
violence was more than very likely a part of human evolution. But it just
causes no end of pretty stupid consequences at this stage of evolution. It's
becomes the justification for one group of people to kill another group of
people for things like religion, oil, or ethnic cleansing. The response is
more hate through retaliation. Hate is just an emotions and emotions are
neither right or wrong. As always, it's what people do with them. Out of
curiosity, when you've felt hatred towards someone (probably me at the end
of this post heh), does it feel good and righteous, or like a pelican shit
in your gut?
Kitty
Déjà Flu
http://www.mcphee.com/shop/products/Angry-Mob-Play-Set.html
--
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Kitty P
"D�j� Flu" <cha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:POednUR5R9rMT2XX...@posted.toastnet...
I especially like the part about teaching children the concept of mob rule.
Ned Ludd
>
>> Why is it wrong to think that hatred is part of our human makeup?
>> Ned
>
> If thinking along biological survival lines, hatred and accompanying
> violence was more than very likely a part of human evolution. But it just
> causes no end of pretty stupid consequences at this stage of evolution.
> It's becomes the justification for one group of people to kill another
> group of people for things like religion, oil, or ethnic cleansing. The
> them. Out of curiosity, when you've felt hatred towards someone (probably
> me at the end of this post heh), does it feel good and righteous, or like
> a pelican shit in your gut?
> Kitty
Why do you presuppose that hate serves no biological function?
Xenophobia is a universal human trait. How could it have remained
a selected trait if it served no purpose?
When two elks smash their horns together, do they hate each other?
You're damn right they do. Does it serve a biological function?
You're damn right it does.
What makes you think you are so damn much more special than an elk?
Ned
P.S. As for what we feel in our gut, hate is righteous. Hate is Yang.
Hate is light. Hate is firm.
Love
Oh humans are frakking messy and ugly. Hate, violence, war,
rape and murder ARE part of our makeup and they can probably
not be expunged, but that doesn't mean that we have to give
up on ourselves. We don't have to be permissive about the
ugly parts even if we acknowledge that we can't (and probably
shouldn't) try to get rid of them. We just need to decide
what level of control is reasonable to try to achieve. I'd
suggest that adding a hate crime on top of an ordinary
assault just because someone hurled a racial slur in the
heat of the moment is not a useful way to proceed. I'd also
suggest that ignoring slurs until they lead to violence is
not useful either. We're always just feeling our way around
as much as we like the illusion of mechanical certainty we
can get with laws and principles. I think you're right that
this is what it looks like to at least start. We're not
going to get good at it until we've made a lot of mistakes,
and at the rate we're going we're going to be VERY good at
it someday.
--
Love
May Shai-Hulud clear the path before you.
Love
ned...@ix.netcom.com says...
>
>
>"Kitty P" <pain...@charter.net> wrote in message
>news:r00Km.14581$ET3....@newsfe17.iad...
>> "Stavros of Pureshitland" <bac.an...@gmail.com> wrote in message ...
>>> I also have a problem with this idea of punishing anyone who hates.
>>> Is it right to deny a person his job because he hates Jews, black or
>>> gay? Karl Jung said that we we suppress our feeling it is going to
>>> come out is an terrible way. Are we making the possible of a Nazi type
>>> revolutions by suppressing there feelings? When I look at what the
>>> communists did to someone of opposing views I wonder if we are not
>>> going in that direction.
>>
>> But the alternative of not having some kind of intervention is worse. Our
>> history shows when that kind of hate is left unchecked, a young gay boy
>> can be killed and strung up on barbed wire in the desert, a black man hung
>> in a tree in Alabama, or a Hitler. So maybe the first baby step is what we
>> have now, bigotry underneath the surface, with the next steps leading to
>> less actual feelings of hate towards anyone who is different than the
>> hater. It has to start somewhere, maybe this is what it looks like to at
>> least start?
>>
>
> Unless, of course, Stavros' comment is right and the suppression of our
>feelings is going to come out in some other terrible way. (Which I think
>is closer to how things work than hoping that forcing bigotry "underneath
>the surface" will lead to less bigotry.)
Funny how I might have agreed with you at one time but
it now seems so obvious to me that "forcing it underneath
the surface" is precisely the way to proceed since bigotry
is itself mostly a learned thing. There is natural racism,
I believe, but it's a tendency nowhere near as prominent
as our learned tendencies. Undo the learned stuff and
you'd need some kind of science experiment to prove the
existence of a biological source of racism.
If one acts as if one doesn't feel hate one will eventually
not feel hate in fact. We are creatures of habit.
Now on an individual level unexpressed pain can build up
until it expresses in some possibly worse way, but I
think it's trivialising the subject to extend that
phenomenon to every habit and reaction we have. Bigotry
is not the same as being tormented by some repressed
trauma.
>> Guess that works unless one believe that hate is part of our human makeup
>> and can never change...
>> Kitty
>
> Why is it wrong to think that hatred is part of our human makeup?
Makeup is the key! Don't just wear the face, be
the face.
Love
Biological arguments all meet their match with disease.
If we should just allow racism to exist then we shouldn't
ever take any antibiotics either.
As usual all kinds of arguments from essences suck big
pelican shit. heh
Love
says...
>
>Kitty P wrote:
>> If thinking along biological survival lines, hatred and accompanying
>> violence was more than very likely a part of human evolution. But it just
>> causes no end of pretty stupid consequences at this stage of evolution. It's
>> becomes the justification for one group of people to kill another group of
>> people for things like religion, oil, or ethnic cleansing. The response is
>> more hate through retaliation. Hate is just an emotions and emotions are
>> neither right or wrong. As always, it's what people do with them. Out of
>> curiosity, when you've felt hatred towards someone (probably me at the end
>> of this post heh), does it feel good and righteous, or like a pelican shit
>> in your gut?
>
>http://www.mcphee.com/shop/products/Angry-Mob-Play-Set.html
That site is SO being forwarded to everyone who can never figure
out what to get me for Xmas etc..
Now if I could find an alien facehugger blindfold I could get a
good night's sleep even with all the lights on.
Kirsten
>
>> http://www.mcphee.com/shop/products/Angry-Mob-Play-Set.html
>
> That site is SO being forwarded to everyone who can never figure
> out what to get me for Xmas etc..
>
> Now if I could find an alien facehugger blindfold I could get a
> good night's sleep even with all the lights on.
>
To quote the philosopher Ronnie James Dio, "If you listen to fools, the
mob rules". I like to think he'd have said, "and Tories get elected".
Best wishes
Kirsten
Kirsten
>
> Have we gone in the direction of the communists. Today it is not only
> a crime to hit someone but to hit some one and say �You gay bastard�
> requires extra punishment. Why is this so? If someone hits me because
> he hate me there is no extra punishment.
>
I think it should be an aggravating factor taken into account in sentencing.
If a guy attacks you because he hates you, that's one thing.
If he attacks somebody because they are black or gay, he is more likely
to find more victims and so there is a need to protect the public.
Best wishes
Kirsten
bonfils
49c1-40fd-856...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com:
> What I am about to say may upset some. Before I say it, I need to
> express that I have many gay friends and I support them I also raised
> a black son and suffered much discrimination in the process.
>
> Have we gone in the direction of the communists. Today it is not only
> a crime to hit someone but to hit some one and say �You gay bastard�
> requires extra punishment. Why is this so? If someone hits me because
> he hate me there is no extra punishment.
>
> I also have a problem with this idea of punishing anyone who hates.
> Is it right to deny a person his job because he hates Jews, black or
> gay? Karl Jung said that we we suppress our feeling it is going to
> come out is an terrible way. Are we making the possible of a Nazi type
> revolutions by suppressing there feelings? When I look at what the
> communists did to someone of opposing views I wonder if we are not
> going in that direction.
>
>
> This is just for thought. I reiterate that I love gays, Jews and
> blacks. I, however, feel that our attempt to silence bigots is going
> to backfire.
Good points.
I recently saw a sticker urging me to "hate the haters".
I can't help wondering whether that's just as illogical as "killing the
killers".
So I'm not really sure where I stand in the whole "hate speak" debate.
(In Denmark it's actually illegal to incite illegal actions - so in the
following I'm just dealing with expression of *views*)
Obviously, when a minority is systematically abused by an entire
government, that's able to seriously impair their life.
On the other hand, when it's one solitary person doing the abuse, it
shouldn't matter at all.
So where in between those two extremes do we draw the line? Should we
accept a political party that has anti-gay views?
We all know the downside of outlawing these kinds of organizations. They
feel (and rightly so) that their freedom of speech is being infringed.
And consequently they (and their followers) will make themselves out as
martyrs.
And they definitely don't deserve to be martyrs.
--
bonfils
http://kim.bonfils.com
bonfils
news:ed2$4af88b09$4038ecbe$31...@PRIMUS.CA:
> There's zero doubt that an environment of expressed intolerance
> leads to the actual habit of intolerance. If it's okay for
> us to insult gays or veterans without limit then pretty soon
> it will be okay to beat them up, steal from them and kill them.
Yup. However, one fuckwit yelling insults does not an environment of
expressed intolerance make.
> Hate speech is a form of incitement. The problem, it seems to
> me, is that some control-happy fuckwits are always just looking
> to do some enforcement and to prove what big dicks they are.
Another problem is a clear definition of "hate speech".
I hate a lot of people (day-traders, the entire advertising industry),
and I express those hatreds freely. Is that hate speech? It's certainly
not meant to incite violence - at all. But of course you could imagine a
"Fisher King" scenario, where some idiot would hear me speak and
consequently go on a killing spree in Wall Sreet.
> So in conclusion I think we need laws against control-freak
> fuckwitism.
>
> Naturally I will be the arbiter of the standards.
And naturally, the living will envy the dead.
--
bonfils
http://kim.bonfils.com
Wilson
Hear hear! I say we all get us some baseball bats (or hockey sticks, or
cricket bats, depending on your geographical location) and find some
control-freaks to beat up!
>
> Naturally I will be the arbiter of the standards.
Intolerance of intolerance. Is that a vice?
--
Wilson
Wally Chapman
For me, hatred includes the insane desire to destroy whoever it is I
hate. I have worked hard to eliminate hatred in my life. For instance,
I used to hate child molestors. I still don't like them, but I have
come to understand that each of them is an individual, and some of them
have the potential for redemption.
I don't repress my feelings - I fully experience them and examine them,
but I don't act on them. Feelings are not facts. The excuse that "I
killed him because I hate <insert cultural subset here>" is just that -
an excuse for an irrational action, not a reason.
Wally
Love
kir...@dontspamplz.com says...
>
>Stavros of Pureshitland wrote:
>
>>
>> Have we gone in the direction of the communists. Today it is not only
>> requires extra punishment. Why is this so? If someone hits me because
>> he hate me there is no extra punishment.
>>
>
>I think it should be an aggravating factor taken into account in sentencing.
>
>If a guy attacks you because he hates you, that's one thing.
>
>If he attacks somebody because they are black or gay, he is more likely
>to find more victims and so there is a need to protect the public.
Punishment for future possible offences just doesn't sit
right with me somehow. I say punish him extra for being
a dipshit and leave it at that.
--
Love
Love
>
>no....@from.you.bub (Love) wrote in
>news:ed2$4af88b09$4038ecbe$31...@PRIMUS.CA:
>
>> There's zero doubt that an environment of expressed intolerance
>> leads to the actual habit of intolerance. If it's okay for
>> us to insult gays or veterans without limit then pretty soon
>> it will be okay to beat them up, steal from them and kill them.
>
>Yup. However, one fuckwit yelling insults does not an environment of
>expressed intolerance make.
>
>> Hate speech is a form of incitement. The problem, it seems to
>> me, is that some control-happy fuckwits are always just looking
>> to do some enforcement and to prove what big dicks they are.
>
>Another problem is a clear definition of "hate speech".
>I hate a lot of people (day-traders, the entire advertising industry),
>and I express those hatreds freely. Is that hate speech? It's certainly
>not meant to incite violence - at all. But of course you could imagine a
>"Fisher King" scenario, where some idiot would hear me speak and
>consequently go on a killing spree in Wall Sreet.
Well, the laws tend to be specific and about things that
people don't simply choose, like skin colour, ethnicity,
sexual orientation, religion and so forth. And I'd suggest
that your hatred of day traders isn't accompanied by a
culturally engrained habit of marginalising them and
periodically burning their huts and raping their spouses.
But you're right, clear definition is a problem. Clear
*enough* is probably all we can accomplish. That's true
with anything of course but this is a particularly fuzzy
area because it skirts so close to competing interests.
That only makes it more important to continue to promote
liberal values like respect for the individual and freedom
of expression.
--
Love
Love
says...
Gasp, you've become so, so.....international!
>> Naturally I will be the arbiter of the standards.
>
>Intolerance of intolerance. Is that a vice?
Yes but it diminishes with each recursion until it reaches
zero, at which time it ceases to exist.
--
Love
indiosd...@yahoo.canada
Yo, Stavros, we love you too!
I'm adding "our attempt to silence bigots is going to backfire" to my list
of reasons I hate hate-crime legislation (alongside abhorrence of
government attempts at thought control, belief in the importance of
equality before the law, its unconstitutionality in the USA, and fear that
it will take us to a world where violence only occurs for liberal-approved
(TM) reasons and is therefore not such a bad thing--essentially like
Obama's wars).
Bigotry will only be eradicated through education and persuasion.
Luke
Ned Ludd
"Love" <pho...@address.for.spam> wrote in message
news:998e1$4af8fac5$4038ecbe$70...@PRIMUS.CA...
Oh dream on. Racism is as natural as a heart-beat. That's where
your argument blows up. Suppressing it will result in the same types
of pathologies that the Victorian suppression of sexuality created.
They are very similar, and they both result in violence and insanity.
> If one acts as if one doesn't feel hate one will eventually
> not feel hate in fact. We are creatures of habit.
>
It didn't work with suppressing sexual urges, it won't work
with suppressing xenophobia.
Ned
Love
I leave sevaral persuaders within easy reach at all times.
One could also call them educators without much of a stretch.
You mean like that?
--
Love
Love
ned...@ix.netcom.com says...
Racism may be enabled by xenophobia (which is natural)
but it is not mostly that. It is mostly cultural. If
it weren't mostly cultural there wouldn't be all the
shades of colours of babies appearing now that we've
largely discredited it.
Xenophobia is relatively weak in comparison to the
sexual urge. And it makes perfect evolutionary sense
for it to be so -- your argument from nature goes up
in a post-coital smoke.
--
Love
Keynes
I may not agee with what you say, but I reserve
the right to punch you right in the face.
Keynes
Obama's wars? He was against them.
But now he's in charge, and getting out of the
quicksand is no longer theoretical, but practical.
Getting out is much harder than getting in. On top
of that there is a major political faction that demands
we keep on keeping on forever and ever. Halliburton
and blackwater, the MI complex, and arm chair generals
of the backwoods who probably never even served. Political
and military danger threatens any action Obama may take.
Can't possibly please everybody.
Kitty P
I wonder why we don't see more self help books on developing the power of
hate? :)
I agree with you that hate was probably part of our evolutionary makeup and
at one time may have been needed to protect territory. I will concede that
maybe war or the acceptance of war comes from a biological predisposition.
But I do think people are more special than an elk when it comes to
overcoming our biology. I'm pretty certain that 40,000 years ago, Cro-Magnon
male humanoids took whatever female they might find on the path for example.
But because of the necessity of banding together with other people, customs
and...well.. bans were created, and those actions began to change if not the
impulse. Unlike elk, we aren't victims of our natural impulses and biology.
Maybe human evolution includes continuing to develop the part of the brain
that can deflect the impulse to harm others. You know - go ahead and hate
and enjoy its accompanying self-righteous jollys (martyrdom also has those
kinds of feel good qualities), but not harm others with the emotions. It may
even be possible that people who still react vigorously on their hate and
xenophobia might not have as well developed frontal lobes. Evolution is
still going on after all. Pressure to alter hate language could just be
evolution in action.
Kitty
"There are only three sins - causing pain, causing fear, and causing
anguish. The rest is window dressing." - Roger Caras
Ned Ludd
"Love" <no....@from.you.bub> wrote in message
news:229df$4af9817e$4038ecbe$10...@PRIMUS.CA...
Racism is the EXPRESSION of xenophobia (which is natural).
The rainbow babies come from the one (and only, that I know
of) exception to the natural xenophobia of humans - women
will tend to pick as mates those men whose immune systems
are most DIFFERENT than theirs. The plight of these children
on virtually all of the earth even today (western urban liberal
hotbeds of enforced tolerance excluded) is a testament to the
primacy of xenophobia in the human psyche.
> Xenophobia is relatively weak in comparison to the
> sexual urge. And it makes perfect evolutionary sense
> for it to be so -- your argument from nature goes up
> in a post-coital smoke.
>
Xenophobia results in holocausts and genocide. Very, VERY
much alive and active today. Not weak at all. But definitely
suppressed by edict and fiat, being driven deeper and deeper,
festering, boiling, growing harder and hotter...
Ned
Ned Ludd
Greatest self-help book of all time - The Prince.
>I agree with you that hate was probably part of our evolutionary makeup and
>at one time may have been needed to protect territory. I will concede that
>maybe war or the acceptance of war comes from a biological predisposition.
>But I do think people are more special than an elk when it comes to over-
>coming our biology. I'm pretty certain that 40,000 years ago, Cro-Magnon
>male humanoids took whatever female they might find on the path for
>example.
>But because of the necessity of banding together with other people, customs
>and...well.. bans were created, and those actions began to change if not
>the
>impulse. Unlike elk, we aren't victims of our natural impulses and
>biology.
>
Except there NEVER were 'free' females to be found 'on the path'. As
soon as the first humanoid got a notion of OWNING things (his rock, his
spear, his pile of bananas), he put his women and children in that
category and killed anyone who attempted to take his chattel.
> Maybe human evolution includes continuing to develop the part of the brain
> that can deflect the impulse to harm others. You know - go ahead and hate
> and enjoy its accompanying self-righteous jollys (martyrdom also has those
> kinds of feel good qualities), but not harm others with the emotions. It
> may even be possible that people who still react vigorously on their hate
> and xenophobia might not have as well developed frontal lobes. Evolution
> is still going on after all. Pressure to alter hate language could just be
> evolution in action.
> Kitty
> "There are only three sins - causing pain, causing fear, and causing
> anguish. The rest is window dressing." - Roger Caras
>
It's possible. For the first time ever in history, we can have a
civilization be 'aggressive' without any individual in it being
aggressive, and we can have a civilization be 'sexual' (ie. able to
reproduce its people) without any individual in it being sexual.
But before we break out the party hats, please consider examples
where xenophobia, hated, racism, etc. have created a stronger and
longer-lasting civilization. If these forces are still at work, then
you will not 'breed out' those traits. They will dominate, and they
will prevail.
Ned
bonfils
> I wonder why we don't see more self help books on developing the power
> of hate? :)
>
> I agree with you that hate was probably part of our evolutionary
> makeup and at one time may have been needed to protect territory. I
> will concede that maybe war or the acceptance of war comes from a
> biological predisposition. But I do think people are more special than
> an elk when it comes to overcoming our biology. I'm pretty certain
> that 40,000 years ago, Cro-Magnon male humanoids took whatever female
> they might find on the path for example. But because of the necessity
> of banding together with other people, customs and...well.. bans were
> created, and those actions began to change if not the impulse. Unlike
> elk, we aren't victims of our natural impulses and biology.
>
> Maybe human evolution includes continuing to develop the part of the
> brain that can deflect the impulse to harm others. You know - go ahead
> and hate and enjoy its accompanying self-righteous jollys (martyrdom
> also has those kinds of feel good qualities), but not harm others with
> the emotions. It may even be possible that people who still react
> vigorously on their hate and xenophobia might not have as well
> developed frontal lobes. Evolution is still going on after all.
> Pressure to alter hate language could just be evolution in action.
>
> Kitty
> "There are only three sins - causing pain, causing fear, and causing
> anguish. The rest is window dressing." - Roger Caras
Unfortunately, our biological evolution goes so much slower than the
cultural one. Hence our brains are lagging behind.
As a friend of mine once remarked - we're not biologically engineered to
walk down a crowded street or standing on a crowded subway train: "We're
not supposed to get this close to other people, except to fight or
fuck."
And while I'm not saying we should just give up and give in to our
primitive urges, I am saying that we ignore them at our peril.
--
bonfils
http://kim.bonfils.com
Love
ned...@ix.netcom.com says...
No, it's a testimony to tribalism, another expression of
xenophobia that requires a huge cultural component to
get very big and nasty. Virtually ANY difference can be
made a big deal by cultural means, including completely
invisible ones like religion. Even "cool" vs. "not-cool"
will lead to murder.
Sorry Ned, but the women in your neighbourhood having
babies with men of different skin colours aren't just
responding to "enforced tolerance". They are responding
to a natural urge in the absence of a cultural barrier
to doing so.
>> Xenophobia is relatively weak in comparison to the
>> sexual urge. And it makes perfect evolutionary sense
>> for it to be so -- your argument from nature goes up
>> in a post-coital smoke.
>>
>
> Xenophobia results in holocausts and genocide.
Not without ideas...not without tribalism and other cultural
bullshit.
Time to watch "Quest For Fire" again.
> Very, VERY
>much alive and active today. Not weak at all. But definitely
>suppressed by edict and fiat, being driven deeper and deeper,
>festering, boiling, growing harder and hotter...
Lance that boil. It's just pus inside.
--
Love
Love
Which is why we should set aside some time every day to tend
to our primitive urges.
--
Love
Love
Human evolution even includes the ability to sympathise with
kittens and puppies. Where's our powerful xenophobia then?
Of course in some cultures dogs are unclean and people react
to puppies differently. Maybe natural xenophobia has been
repressed by edict and fiat everywhere else.
--
Love
Kitty P
"Love" <pho...@address.for.spam> wrote in message
> In article <r00Km.14581$ET3....@newsfe17.iad>, pain...@charter.net
> says...
>>
>>
>>"Stavros of Pureshitland" <bac.an...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:daff1f56-49c1-40fd...@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>>As we celebrate the downfall of the Berlin Wall I am finding myself
>>with mixed feelings. It's about the word "Freedom" that has been used
>>in the press. There is no question that the communists really lost
>>something in their ideology. They forced submission by sending to
>>gulags many who simply expressed their ideas. Often is was just a
>>better way to run communism.
>>
>>What I am about to say may upset some. Before I say it, I need to
>>express that I have many gay friends and I support them I also raised
>>a black son and suffered much discrimination in the process.
>>
>>Have we gone in the direction of the communists. Today it is not only
>>a crime to hit someone but to hit some one and say "You gay bastard"
>>requires extra punishment. Why is this so? If someone hits me because
>>he hate me there is no extra punishment.
>>
>>I also have a problem with this idea of punishing anyone who hates.
>>Is it right to deny a person his job because he hates Jews, black or
>>gay? Karl Jung said that we we suppress our feeling it is going to
>>come out is an terrible way. Are we making the possible of a Nazi type
>>revolutions by suppressing there feelings? When I look at what the
>>communists did to someone of opposing views I wonder if we are not
>>going in that direction.
>>
>>
>>This is just for thought. I reiterate that I love gays, Jews and
>>blacks. I, however, feel that our attempt to silence bigots is going
>>to backfire.
>>
>>You're right in that political correctness seems to have forced bigotry
>>into
>>something that now lurks beneath the surface. It doesn't fool the people
>>who
>>are the focus though as you will find asking anyone who is being
>>discriminated against. When it's beneath the surface, people know
>>something
>>is wrong, but there are no ways to fix it or make it right.
>>
>>But the alternative of not having some kind of intervention is worse. Our
>>history shows when that kind of hate is left unchecked, a young gay boy
>>can
>>be killed and strung up on barbed wire in the desert, a black man hung in
>>a
>>tree in Alabama, or a Hitler. So maybe the first baby step is what we have
>>now, bigotry underneath the surface, with the next steps leading to less
>>actual feelings of hate towards anyone who is different than the hater. It
>>has to start somewhere, maybe this is what it looks like to at least
>>start?
>>
>>and can never change...
>
> rape and murder ARE part of our makeup and they can probably
> not be expunged, but that doesn't mean that we have to give
> up on ourselves. We don't have to be permissive about the
> ugly parts even if we acknowledge that we can't (and probably
> shouldn't) try to get rid of them. We just need to decide
> what level of control is reasonable to try to achieve. I'd
> suggest that adding a hate crime on top of an ordinary
> assault just because someone hurled a racial slur in the
> heat of the moment is not a useful way to proceed. I'd also
> suggest that ignoring slurs until they lead to violence is
> not useful either. We're always just feeling our way around
> as much as we like the illusion of mechanical certainty we
> can get with laws and principles. I think you're right that
> this is what it looks like to at least start. We're not
> going to get good at it until we've made a lot of mistakes,
> and at the rate we're going we're going to be VERY good at
> it someday.
> Love
> May Shai-Hulud clear the path before you.
I so agree. I don't know if deterrents work when emotions and the idjit
factor is involved. So the hate crime thing is probably not useful. Maybe
peer pressure and ridicule works a lot better?
Kitty P
"Wally Chapman" <shel...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:H9mdncz9ra5J-GTX...@bright.net...
...you have a lovely frontal lobe.....
Ned Ludd
"Love" <no....@from.you.bub> wrote in message
>
>>>> It didn't work with suppressing sexual urges, it won't work
>>>> with suppressing xenophobia.
>>>
>>> Racism may be enabled by xenophobia (which is natural)
>>> but it is not mostly that. It is mostly cultural. If
>>> it weren't mostly cultural there wouldn't be all the
>>> shades of colours of babies appearing now that we've
>>> largely discredited it.
>>
>> Racism is the EXPRESSION of xenophobia (which is natural).
>> The rainbow babies come from the one (and only, that I know
>> of) exception to the natural xenophobia of humans - women
>> will tend to pick as mates those men whose immune systems
>> are most DIFFERENT than theirs. The plight of these children
>> on virtually all of the earth even today (western urban liberal
>> hotbeds of enforced tolerance excluded) is a testament to the
>> primacy of xenophobia in the human psyche.
>
> No, it's a testimony to tribalism, another expression of
> xenophobia that requires a huge cultural component to
> get very big and nasty. Virtually ANY difference can be
> made a big deal by cultural means, including completely
> invisible ones like religion. Even "cool" vs. "not-cool"
> will lead to murder.
>
Mountain apes commit genocide. This was thoroughly documented
by Jane Goodall decades ago. Splinter groups from an established
group were completely annihilated by males from the parent group.
They were not living in the same immediate area. The genocidal
males had to travel some distance in order to find and kill them.
> Sorry Ned, but the women in your neighbourhood having
> babies with men of different skin colours aren't just
> responding to "enforced tolerance". They are responding
> to a natural urge in the absence of a cultural barrier
> to doing so.
>
They are responding to their noses. 'Enforced tolerance'
has nothing to do with it. Modern urban life, with its
multiculti, multiracial m�lange has a great deal to do
with it.
>>> Xenophobia is relatively weak in comparison to the
>>> sexual urge. And it makes perfect evolutionary sense
>>> for it to be so -- your argument from nature goes up
>>> in a post-coital smoke.
>
>> Xenophobia results in holocausts and genocide.
>
> Not without ideas...not without tribalism and other cultural
> bullshit.
>
See Jane Goodall's genocidal mountain apes. No 'ideas',
but still the extermination.
> Time to watch "Quest For Fire" again.
>
After Desmond Morris failed me on hymens, I just can't
trust any more conceptualizations by him.
>> Very, VERY
>> much alive and active today. Not weak at all. But definitely
>> suppressed by edict and fiat, being driven deeper and deeper,
>> festering, boiling, growing harder and hotter...
>
> Lance that boil. It's just pus inside.
>
Yeah, just like the human body.
Ned
Kitty P
True - but also consider that those traits can either eliminate the
potential for an expanded gene pool if people hate anyone other than people
who look like themselves and which often has long term evolutionary benefits
just like any animal breeding - or destroy the earth's ability for
ecological balance through nuclear weapons or other wmd.
Kitty
Kitty P
"Love" <no....@from.you.bub> wrote in message
Even a dog will nurse a kitten or piglet. Most mammals are suckers for the
young and vulnerable. Hamsters et. al. excluded.
Kitty
Kitty P
What are the alternatives?
Kitty P
"Love" <no....@from.you.bub> wrote in message
hear hear. Today I'm going to hate Miley Cyrus for 10 minutes.
Kitty
Ned Ludd
>
>> Human evolution even includes the ability to sympathise with
>> kittens and puppies. Where's our powerful xenophobia then?
>> Of course in some cultures dogs are unclean and people react
>> to puppies differently. Maybe natural xenophobia has been
>> repressed by edict and fiat everywhere else.
>> Love
>
> Even a dog will nurse a kitten or piglet. Most mammals are suckers for the
> young and vulnerable. Hamsters et. al. excluded.
> Kitty
Hamster-hater!
Ned
Kitty P
"bonfils" <k...@bonfils.my.underwear.com> wrote in message
news:hdc3q1$ehi$1...@aioe.org...
> bonfils
> http://kim.bonfils.com
I sublimate mine by reading novels about serial killers, and secretely
listening to Hell Awaits when no one is around.
Kitty
Wally Chapman
Thanks. Yours is pretty, too.
Wally
Hidden Draggin
>
> As a friend of mine once remarked - we're not biologically engineered
> to walk down a crowded street or standing on a crowded subway train:
> "We're not supposed to get this close to other people, except to
> fight or fuck."
Here...here! I am not much for fighting these days, but I am
looking forward to fucking!!
--
Hidden Draggin - Gilbert Hansford
Don't join dangerous cults, practice safe sects!
http://twitter.com/hiddendraggin
http://hiddendraggin.posterous.com/
Hidden Draggin
>
> hear hear. Today I'm going to hate Miley Cyrus for 10 minutes.
>
> Kitty
In response to Bonfils' fight or fuck proximity observation,
I will gladly fuck her.
Benjamin
> bonfils wrote:
>
>>As a friend of mine once remarked - we're not biologically engineered
>>to walk down a crowded street or standing on a crowded subway train:
>>"We're not supposed to get this close to other people, except to
>>fight or fuck."
>
>
> Here...here! I am not much for fighting these days, but I am
> looking forward to fucking!!
>
Especially on crowded trains. Definitely helps pass the time.
Ben
Hidden Draggin
Thus the term: "Pull a train."
Julian
> Kitty P wrote:
>
>> hear hear. Today I'm going to hate Miley Cyrus for 10 minutes.
>>
>> Kitty
>
> In response to Bonfils' fight or fuck proximity observation,
> I will gladly fuck her.
You'd better not do her in Florida.
Love
And rewards of approval for more creative slurs.
"why you son of a pelican shit..."
Like that. :)
--
Love
Ned Ludd
>
>> But before we break out the party hats, please consider examples
>> where xenophobia, hated, racism, etc. have created a stronger and
>> longer-lasting civilization. If these forces are still at work, then
>> you will not 'breed out' those traits. They will dominate, and they
>> will prevail.
>> Ned
>
> True - but also consider that those traits can either eliminate the
> potential for an expanded gene pool if people hate anyone other than
> people who look like themselves and which often has long term evolutionary
> benefits just like any animal breeding - or destroy the earth's ability
> for ecological balance through nuclear weapons or other wmd.
> Kitty
It's very much not an either/or question. Take two prime
examples of "xenophobia creating a stronger and longer-lasting
civilization": China and Japan. China is MONUMENTALLY
xenophobic. Japan, if I will be permitted the opinion, is
a monumentally racist nation. Both have created strong, long-
lasting civilizations - China since forever, and Japan since
it was settled by Chinese beginning a few centuries BC.
I think we have less chance of being nuked by China (or Japan)
than by three or four much more likely contenders. So extreme
xenophobia does not necessarily imply a greater tendency to use
nukes or WMD.
Yes, inbreeding is generally bad. Do you think it has hurt
China and Japan?
Ned
Ned Ludd
>
>>> Xenophobia is relatively weak in comparison to the
>>> sexual urge. And it makes perfect evolutionary sense
>>> for it to be so -- your argument from nature goes up
>>> in a post-coital smoke.
>>
>> Xenophobia results in holocausts and genocide. Very, VERY
>> much alive and active today. Not weak at all. But definitely
>> suppressed by edict and fiat, being driven deeper and deeper,
>> festering, boiling, growing harder and hotter...
>> Ned
>
> What are the alternatives?
I'm not suggesting that we tolerate it as acceptable behavior.
I agree with other posters who have said the only effective way
to combat it is with individual action and attitude. But special
'hate-crime' laws and public humiliations and firings of people
who make un-PC comments is just going to aggravate it and make
people more resentful of being hassled for their thoughts and
words.
But the biggest mistake that I feel is being made is the
assumption by put-upon minorities that they can, with the
collusion of the media, ram limitless amounts of PC propaganda
down the throats of the general population without getting
some form of back-lash. It WILL happen, and it will be violent,
bloody, and blinding fast when it does.
Ned
Benjamin
It's going to happen anyway though. We're seeing it now, and it doesn't
make a damn difference what minorities do or say.
And we've heard all these rationals before to maintain slavery,
subjugate women, and keep gays out of the military. Heaven forbid we
upset the violent zenophobes. We'll just make it worse.
It's bullshit. These people need to be aggravated. They need to be
shaken up, and they need to learn to deal with their resentment. PC for
the sake of being PC is retarded, but sometimes the general public needs
something rammed down their throats. And I assure you that minorities
know perfectly well how the morons will respond and what the backlash
will be like. It hasn't changed all that much in the last hundred years.
Besides,we already rate ciminal activity based on how fucked up we think
it is. If you beat someone up because they're gay, then you are in fact
more of an asshole. Just like we think robbing someone is worse than
stepping on their lawn.
Ben
Kitty P
China and Japan are high context cultures - which is just fancy dancy talk
for the fact that the majority are more homogeneous in their belief systems
and customs. So it is much easier to get everyone moving in the same
directions. They don't spend months and months arguing over things like
whether or not the government should pay for an abortion if a woman is on
welfare and gets raped like we do in the U.S. I think the only thing those
countries would be upset by would be intimating that they have broken incest
taboos (if you forget about early endogamy). Isn't China an example of a
country that remained rich in culture, yet extremely behind other
industrialized nations until it opened up trade and contact with the rest of
the world? I'm going to venture a racist remark in that they seem a whole
hell of a lot brighter than westerners when you look at how they picked up
on how to financially cream the rest of the world in a very short amount of
time. Maybe their present strength is actually because of their overcoming
xenophobia.
Kitty
Kitty P
The biggest mistake I ever made was giving my eight year old niece two
hamsters that were 'supposed' to both be males. when the babies were born
they were promptly eaten in front of said niece. Very naughty those
Hamsters.
Kitty
Kitty P
"Love" <no....@from.you.bub> wrote in message
It could replace gang war and spelling bees!
Kitty
Wilson
> "Kitty P" :
>
>> Maybe human evolution includes continuing to develop the part of the
>> brain that can deflect the impulse to harm others. You know - go
>> ahead and hate and enjoy its accompanying self-righteous jollys
>> (martyrdom also has those kinds of feel good qualities), but not
>> harm others with the emotions. It may even be possible that people
>> who still react vigorously on their hate and xenophobia might not
>> have as well developed frontal lobes. Evolution is still going on
>> after all. Pressure to alter hate language could just be evolution
>> in action. Kitty
>> "There are only three sins - causing pain, causing fear, and causing
>> anguish. The rest is window dressing." - Roger Caras
>>
>
> civilization be 'aggressive' without any individual in it being
> aggressive, and we can have a civilization be 'sexual' (ie. able to
> reproduce its people) without any individual in it being sexual.
>
> where xenophobia, hated, racism, etc. have created a stronger and
> longer-lasting civilization. If these forces are still at work, then
> you will not 'breed out' those traits. They will dominate, and they
> will prevail.
>
> Ned
Consider though that North Korea is the current poster child for
xenophobia, hatred and racism in a nation-state. Would you say that
this is looking like it's going to be an evolutionary plus for them in
the long run?
--
Wilson
Déjà Flu
> "D�j� Flu" <cha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:POednUR5R9rMT2XX...@posted.toastnet...>>> news:HM6dnSiKRIYLAmXX...@earthlink.com...>>>> news:r00Km.14581$ET3....@newsfe17.iad...
>>>>> "Stavros of Pureshitland" <bac.an...@gmail.com> wrote in message ...
>>>>>> I also have a problem with this idea of punishing anyone who hates.
>>>>>> Is it right to deny a person his job because he hates Jews, black or
>>>>>> gay? Karl Jung said that we we suppress our feeling it is going to
>>>>>> come out is an terrible way. Are we making the possible of a Nazi type
>>>>>> revolutions by suppressing there feelings? When I look at what the
>>>>>> communists did to someone of opposing views I wonder if we are not
>>>>>> going in that direction.
>>>>> Our history shows when that kind of hate is left unchecked, a young gay
>>>>> boy can be killed and strung up on barbed wire in the desert, a black
>>>>> man hung in a tree in Alabama, or a Hitler. So maybe the first baby
>>>>> step is what we have now, bigotry underneath the surface, with the next
>>>>> steps leading to less actual feelings of hate towards anyone who is
>>>>> different than the hater. It has to start somewhere, maybe this is what
>>>>> it looks like to at least start?
>>>>>
>>>> feelings is going to come out in some other terrible way. (Which I
>>>> think
>>>> is closer to how things work than hoping that forcing bigotry
>>>> "underneath
>>>> the surface" will lead to less bigotry.)
>>>>
>>>>> makeup and can never change...
>>>> Why is it wrong to think that hatred is part of our human makeup?
>>>>
>>>> Ned
>>> If thinking along biological survival lines, hatred and accompanying
>>> violence was more than very likely a part of human evolution. But it just
>>> causes no end of pretty stupid consequences at this stage of evolution.
>>> It's becomes the justification for one group of people to kill another
>>> group of people for things like religion, oil, or ethnic cleansing. The
>>> response is more hate through retaliation. Hate is just an emotions and
>>> emotions are neither right or wrong. As always, it's what people do with
>>> them. Out of curiosity, when you've felt hatred towards someone (probably
>>> me at the end of this post heh), does it feel good and righteous, or like
>>> a pelican shit in your gut?
>> http://www.mcphee.com/shop/products/Angry-Mob-Play-Set.html
>> --
>> Ubi dubium ibi libertas
>
> I especially like the part about teaching children the concept of mob rule.
So do my neighbors.
When their spawn are let out (for two 10-min intervals every day),
they practice for the Holy Wars. They have swords and shields and
spears and fight each other the whole tims. I'm not kidding.
--
Ubi dubium ibi libertas
Wilson
Are you willing to apply all of that to radical Muslims?
--
Wilson
Kitty P
What cute little tykes.
Start really worrying if they started playing Inquisition with the
neighborhood cats.
Kitty
Déjà Flu
Europe is arguably the most xenophobic environment in the world
today. Consider its exclusion of America and its *inclusion* of the
third-world, welcoming their cultures to the exclusion of America.
The USA is the only child of Europe who is not permitted to freely
travel, work, and live there without restriction. The former British
colonies of India, Africa, HK, Canada, all the rest, are "citizens of
Europe" via the UK. But the US is not. To virtually all the rest of
the world, the USA is an alien in spite of having given our lives
and fortunes to salvage their sovereignty.
Don't even consider NK in the same light. It's not even close to
what Europe has done to America. We are aliens amidst our friends,
shunned by those whose freedom we fought for and now that history
is being rewritten, we have no right to that freedom. Europe has
isolated us as some kind of necessary outsider - a resource, but
not family - not a "member" of the club. And we, stupidly, try
to stand up to the world as though the "good old days" - England's
colonial times - were still around. We have the same arrogance.
Of course, this will never be resolved. We cannot afford to spend
any more on foolish wars. England realized that and withdrew, but
we probably will not. We will bankrupt ourselves. In the meantime,
our relationship with our family - Europe - is worse than ever.
We are the aliens and it's no wonder - we caused it by being
xenophobic ourselves.
So, it seems I've gone from blaming Europe to blaming us. But
there's no single place for blame - it's always on both sides.
It's still grounded in xenophobia - economic, political,
anthropomorphic, cultural, whatever. The tribes still can't trust
one another. And thus it will proceed.
Déjà Flu
Yeah. When I visit, they sit on me and cuddle like I was
some kinda big teddy bear. I think their daddy's a bit jealous.
The littlest one wouldn't let go the other day.
> Start really worrying if they started playing Inquisition with the
> neighborhood cats.
np there - Eye See All... (you thought those eyeballs on top
of the pyramid on dollar bills were what?) d00d, they're RFID
cameras!
teh feral kittehs have settled here. Helped catch mommy and
daughter (the local vet spays and inoculates them for free)
wish I could post pics of them playing with the tarp on the deck.
mommycat was prolly a house cat - she likes to sit on the
porch rail and peers into the window. but kitteh is more skitteh.
she's gone whenever a human appears. the EVIL HORDE will never
catch them (thank the Lord Shiva) - they're 'way too fast.
Think I'll name her "Tangette"...
Love
So Europe includes everyone but Americans? That sounds less
like xenophobia and more like discrimination.
July, 1776. Y'all made your choice. And something other than
xenophobia might be at work...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-British_personnel_in_the_RAF_during_the_Battle_of_Britain
--
Love
ned...@ix.netcom.com says...
>
>
>"Kitty P" <pain...@charter.net> wrote in message
>news:mAhKm.14338$de6....@newsfe21.iad...
>>
>>> But before we break out the party hats, please consider examples
>>> where xenophobia, hated, racism, etc. have created a stronger and
>>> longer-lasting civilization. If these forces are still at work, then
>>> you will not 'breed out' those traits. They will dominate, and they
>>> will prevail.
>>> Ned
>>
>> True - but also consider that those traits can either eliminate the
>> potential for an expanded gene pool if people hate anyone other than
>> people who look like themselves and which often has long term evolutionary
>> benefits just like any animal breeding - or destroy the earth's ability
>> for ecological balance through nuclear weapons or other wmd.
>> Kitty
>
> It's very much not an either/or question. Take two prime
>examples of "xenophobia creating a stronger and longer-lasting
>civilization": China and Japan. China is MONUMENTALLY
>xenophobic. Japan, if I will be permitted the opinion, is
>a monumentally racist nation. Both have created strong, long-
>lasting civilizations - China since forever, and Japan since
>it was settled by Chinese beginning a few centuries BC.
I know several Americans and one Canadian who lived in Japan
while studying and they all report racism. But what's odd
about Japan is that it's also a sponge for things foreign.
Syncretism alongside racism. Very odd.
Hidden Draggin
"you bubbling blob of moldy lung mucous!"
bonfils
ydnfREobquXGTXn...@earthlink.com:
> But the biggest mistake that I feel is being made is the
> assumption by put-upon minorities that they can, with the
> collusion of the media, ram limitless amounts of PC propaganda
> down the throats of the general population without getting
> some form of back-lash. It WILL happen, and it will be violent,
> bloody, and blinding fast when it does.
And when it does, we'll all be fucking *smoking*!
--
bonfils
http://kim.bonfils.com
To send me a massage, please remove your.underwear
bonfils
$4038ecbe$47...@PRIMUS.CA:
> Besides,we already rate ciminal activity based on how fucked up we think
> it is. If you beat someone up because they're gay, then you are in fact
> more of an asshole.
Hm. Maybe it's just me. But when someone beats me up I don't really care
why. I just wish they'd stop.
bonfils
news:ed2$4af88b09$4038ecbe$31...@PRIMUS.CA:
> Naturally I will be the arbiter of the standards.
Btw, it's interesting that you want to become an arbiter.
Personally, I always wanted to be a harbinger.
bonfils
Kitty P
I wish they had a program like that here for feral kittehs. With the cats
and those kids there is the potential for an epic play. jpgs would be great.
Beerlet Dhiblang
> Déjà Flu <cha...@gmail.com> wrote innews:mcudnTMnCJiijGfX...@posted.toastnet:
Why do you hate America so?
/l
Beerlet Dhiblang
> no.s...@from.you.bub (Love) wrote innews:ed2$4af88b09$4038ecbe$31...@PRIMUS.CA:
>
> > Naturally I will be the arbiter of the standards.
>
> Btw, it's interesting that you want to become an arbiter.
>
> Personally, I always wanted to be a harbinger.
I think that's a strong drink, a Wally Harbinger... ?
/l
Beerlet Dhiblang
> In article <eoadncmvou9QImTXnZ2dnUVZ_jGdn...@earthlink.com>,
> nedl...@ix.netcom.com says...
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Kitty P" <paino2...@charter.net> wrote in message
It comes down to the way they sing the alphabet song.
/l
Beerlet Dhiblang
You've been drinking the magic koolaid again....
/l
Beerlet Dhiblang
Depends on the nuisance factor.
There won't be a backlash. There'll be annoyance, and bitching and
lots of mediacre noise on cabal news but life will go on b/c most
people have better things to do than to get all pissed off.
/l
Beerlet Dhiblang
NK is like the Khmer Rouge w/out the total genocide. There'll be a
change of guard. One of crazy Kim's skinny generals will take over &
slowly start to turn things around.
Human nature is such that I'd guess a fair number of people are
already burned out on the daily hates.
/l
Hidden Draggin
> Benjamin <eggplan...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in news:e0de0$4af9d086
> $4038ecbe$47...@PRIMUS.CA:
>
>> Besides,we already rate ciminal activity based on how fucked up we
>> think it is. If you beat someone up because they're gay, then you
>> are in fact more of an asshole.
>
> Hm. Maybe it's just me. But when someone beats me up I don't really
> care why. I just wish they'd stop.
I cannot even conceive of someone beating you up oh "King
of Coolness." Well maybe Birgitte.
Beerlet Dhiblang
> This is just for thought. I reiterate that I love gays, Jews and
> blacks. I, however, feel that our attempt to silence bigots is going
> to backfire.
It's all been a long time coming. We've got a black POTUS.
I'd want to read the hate crimes legislation before I predict this'll
lead to a bigot uprising. If it's as likely to be enforced as the RICO
statute then I don't see any serious shit coming out of this.
That is, unless Rush Limbaugh and his ilk manage to whip a mass of
dunces into doing something portentous.
/l
/l
Beerlet Dhiblang
> bonfils wrote:
> > Benjamin <eggplantonto...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in news:e0de0$4af9d086
> > $4038ecbe$4...@PRIMUS.CA:
>
> >> Besides,we already rate ciminal activity based on how fucked up we
> >> think it is. If you beat someone up because they're gay, then you
> >> are in fact more of an asshole.
>
> > Hm. Maybe it's just me. But when someone beats me up I don't really
> > care why. I just wish they'd stop.
>
> I cannot even conceive of someone beating you up oh "King
> of Coolness." Well maybe Birgitte.
Define "beating up" then.
/l
Love
Our first H1N1 epithet!
--
Love
k...@bonfils.your.underwear.com says...
>
>no....@from.you.bub (Love) wrote in
>news:ed2$4af88b09$4038ecbe$31...@PRIMUS.CA:
>
>> Naturally I will be the arbiter of the standards.
>
>Btw, it's interesting that you want to become an arbiter.
You want a job done right, do it yourself. Yeah.
>Personally, I always wanted to be a harbinger.
Heh, there's a job with little risk and a lot of
satisfaction.
Love
>
>bonfils wrote:
>> Benjamin <eggplan...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in news:e0de0$4af9d086
>> $4038ecbe$47...@PRIMUS.CA:
>>
>>> Besides,we already rate ciminal activity based on how fucked up we
>>> think it is. If you beat someone up because they're gay, then you
>>> are in fact more of an asshole.
>>
>> Hm. Maybe it's just me. But when someone beats me up I don't really
>> care why. I just wish they'd stop.
>
>I cannot even conceive of someone beating you up oh "King
>of Coolness." Well maybe Birgitte.
If he begs for it.
Lee Rudolph
>"D�j� Flu" <cha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:bOSdnXB618y6hmfX...@posted.toastnet...
...
>> teh feral kittehs have settled here. Helped catch mommy and
>> daughter (the local vet spays and inoculates them for free)
...
>I wish they had a program like that here for feral kittehs.
I wish they had a program like that for Fu's neighbors.
Lee Rudolph
Lee Rudolph
>It comes down to the way they sing the alphabet song.
Ad, Bed, Said, Dead, Ed, Fed, Ged, ... ?
Lee Rudolph
Brian Drummond
>Isn't China an example of a
>country that remained rich in culture, yet extremely behind other
>industrialized nations until it opened up trade and contact with the rest of
>the world? I'm going to venture a racist remark in that they seem a whole
>hell of a lot brighter than westerners when you look at how they picked up
>on how to financially cream the rest of the world in a very short amount of
>time. Maybe their present strength is actually because of their overcoming
>xenophobia.
Well, China's had a bit of practice in creaming Western economies.
Last time, we fixed it with opium. But I don't expect they'll fall for that a
second time.
- Brian
Lee Rudolph
bonfils
september.org:
> Hidden Draggin wrote:
>> Kitty P wrote:
>>
>>> hear hear. Today I'm going to hate Miley Cyrus for 10 minutes.
>>>
>>> Kitty
>>
>> In response to Bonfils' fight or fuck proximity observation,
>> I will gladly fuck her.
>
> You'd better not do her in Florida.
Yeah, Sanford. Who do you think you are? Roman Polanski?
--
bonfils
http://kim.bonfils.com
Kitty P
"Brian Drummond" <brian_d...@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:fe6lf5d04un1raluq...@4ax.com...
Well that and Mao?
Keynes
wrote:
Cars, traffic jams, obscene wealth next to poverty,
conspicuous consumption, competition rather than
cooperation, greed, envy, injustice, hard-heartedness,
living beyond their means -- china has been effectively corrupted.
Benjamin
> Benjamin wrote:
>
>> Ned Ludd wrote:
>>
>>>
>> think it is. If you beat someone up because they're gay, then you
>> is worse than stepping on their lawn.
>>
>> Ben
>
>
> Are you willing to apply all of that to radical Muslims?
>
That they need to be aggravated, shaken up, and learn to deal with their
resentment? Oh sure.
Keynes
The traveling menagerie is already pretentious,
and preposterous. They will continue until some
kind soul rounds them up and puts them in a home.
Ned Ludd
"Benjamin" <eggplan...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:e0de0$4af9d086$4038ecbe$47...@PRIMUS.CA...
>
>> But the biggest mistake that I feel is being made is the
>> assumption by put-upon minorities that they can, with the
>> collusion of the media, ram limitless amounts of PC propaganda
>> down the throats of the general population without getting
>> some form of back-lash. It WILL happen, and it will be violent,
>> Ned
>
> It's going to happen anyway though. We're seeing it now, and it doesn't
> make a damn difference what minorities do or say.
> And we've heard all these rationals before to maintain slavery, subjugate
> women, and keep gays out of the military. Heaven forbid we upset the
> violent zenophobes. We'll just make it worse.
> It's bullshit. These people need to be aggravated. They need to be
> shaken up, and they need to learn to deal with their resentment. PC for
> the sake of being PC is retarded, but sometimes the general public needs
> something rammed down their throats. And I assure you that minorities know
> perfectly well how the morons will respond and what the backlash will be
> like. It hasn't changed all that much in the last hundred years.
> Besides,we already rate ciminal activity based on how fucked up we think
> it is. If you beat someone up because they're gay, then you are in fact
> more of an asshole. Just like we think robbing someone is worse than
> stepping on their lawn.
> Ben
>
As long as you're prepared for the consequences. We had bad
race riots in '67 and '43. I remember the '67 riot here in Milwaukee.
They closed down the city (at night). A friend of mine had a hot
date with the hottest girl in the school and chanced it. (And
survived both the cops and the rioters.)
But the jerk-offs shoveling the propaganda that causes the
blow-up are all going to be standing around with surprised looks
on their faces, claiming they had no idea that this was going to
happen, and then point to the mess and say, "See all the racism
that is still present!" - when they themselves caused it!
Ned
Benjamin
It's true. If there were no black people there would be no racists! It
would be so much easier if the gays were still in the closet and the
homophobes could be less violent. And if women didn't want to vote, we
wouldn't have to worry about all this abortion bullshit.
Ok, it's obviously move complicated than that, but you get the point. I
think we have to be cautious about attributing cuase and or blame.
We all knew that electing a black president would bring the loonies to
the foreground and it has. I mean look at Glenn Beck. But that doesn't
mean we shouldn't have done it.
Ben
Ned Ludd
I generally agree. Looking back on the whole civil rights movement
at least during my lifetime, for all its warts and problems (quotas,
bussing, reverse discrimination, etc.) it probably has had a net
positive effect. There is still an enormous amount of racism, and
I suspect it will continue to exist for a long time.
When that agenda gets pushed too far it will blow up in our face.
Which is how all revolution/evolution works.
Ned
Wilson
> In article <Xns9CC04BB2...@94.75.244.51>,
> k...@bonfils.your.underwear.com says...
>>
>> no....@from.you.bub (Love) wrote in
>> news:ed2$4af88b09$4038ecbe$31...@PRIMUS.CA:
>>
>>> Naturally I will be the arbiter of the standards.
>>
>> Btw, it's interesting that you want to become an arbiter.
>
> You want a job done right, do it yourself. Yeah.
>
>
>> Personally, I always wanted to be a harbinger.
>
> Heh, there's a job with little risk and a lot of
> satisfaction.
You guys can be whoever you want to be, just as long as I get my
handmaiden.
--
Wilson
Wilson
"But she said she was 18!"
--
Wilson
Kitty P
"Ned Ludd" <ned...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:c_SdnS_YmZIGbGfX...@earthlink.com...
I was thinking the exact same thing. Something that seems too horrible to
contemplate is often the door to change. Civil rights, gay rights, and
women's rights were all started with either real or symbolic violence (take
'that' you damn bra). Violence upsets the system, and when it rights itself
there is a huge potential for change. The question always becomes whether
someone thinks it's positive. For example you believe there was a net
positive effect from the civil rights movement...whereas there are racists
who see the same effects as negative.
A more important question (IMO) is why can't a civilization (not just the
U.S.) that has the intelligence for space travel, transplanting vital
organs, or even developing a Hadron Collider figure out that bigotry serves
no clear positive purpose?
Kitty
Wilson
Not an uncommon attitude amongst the American hardcore left. "Lock 'em
up! Get rid of the obstructionist bigots, hatemongers, retrogressives,
Republicans and other extremists!"
Remember when the whackjobs were saying that the neocons had special
detainment camps activated and ready to lock up dissidents? Can you say
"projection"?
--
Wilson
Benjamin
Yeah, but our wackjobs don't have prime time TV spots or the support of
our party heads and leaders.
Just saying...
Wilson
> Wilson wrote:
>
>> Keynes wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'd want to read the hate crimes legislation before I predict
>>>> this'll lead to a bigot uprising. If it's as likely to be enforced
>>>> as the RICO statute then I don't see any serious shit coming out
>>>> of this. That is, unless Rush Limbaugh and his ilk manage to whip a
>>>> mass of dunces into doing something portentous.
>>>>
>>>> /l
>>>
>>>
>>> The traveling menagerie is already pretentious,
>>> and preposterous. They will continue until some
>>> kind soul rounds them up and puts them in a home.
>>
>>
>>
>> Not an uncommon attitude amongst the American hardcore left. "Lock
>> 'em up! Get rid of the obstructionist bigots, hatemongers,
>> retrogressives, Republicans and other extremists!"
>>
>> Remember when the whackjobs were saying that the neocons had special
>> detainment camps activated and ready to lock up dissidents? Can you
>> say "projection"?
>>
>
> Yeah, but our wackjobs don't have prime time TV spots or the support
> of our party heads and leaders.
They have MSNBC, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, a boatload of Obama Czars ...
>
> Just saying...
(And a blog on The Atlantic magazine too ... http://tinyurl.com/6yj54k )
--
Wilson