Poll: Allah, Yahweh, atheist? Left wing, right wing, no wing?
Left wing
Right wing
No wing
[Show Results]
 
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-08-2014, 03:38 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2014 03:43 PM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(07-08-2014 02:37 PM)cjlr Wrote:  It's like you've never read a textbook in your life. Do you even know what money is?
I know what money is from multiple contexts and if I don't tell you the one which you want to hear (because it's the only one you know), you will think I don't know.

(07-08-2014 02:37 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Money is "printed" because new debts are incurred. New debt is incurred because the economy is expanding. A fixed money supply and a growing economy give you massive deflation. Are you under the delusion that that would be economically healthy?
Nope. Money are printed, because government has guns, money printers and says "yes we can", it has nothing to do with lending and debts. Government borrows money and then creates more fiat currency to pay the debts or to borrow even more.
On free market without governments, there is no overall new debt incurred, because the expanding economy and increasing value of money (deflation) pays off the debt and then some. Thus we all get richer.

The common way to create a debt bubble is to forcefully manipulate interest rates and thus lie to investors on mass scale that something is a more profitable investment than it actually is - i.e. the big housing bubble of 2008 thanks to which there are now 18 and half million vacant homes in USA alone. Lol conspiracy Dodgy

A fixed money supply in a growing non-govt economy will gain greater value and it will motivate labor and savings, because, hey, money are getting value instead of evaporating value in your hands!
That would be F from the exam.

A fixed money supply is not a problem, cents will gain value and people will pay mostly with dimes and quarters as they used to. Guess what, money are divisible!
And if in some miraculous case money supply was lacking, guess what, people may freely choose another currency, preferably gold or silver or Bitcoin based one. In a free society without government black magic, people hold onto good currency, they don't shave or melt the coins, it's reverse Gresham's law.

(07-08-2014 02:37 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Bitcoins are not currency. They're a highly volatile commodity. And hilariously prone to fraud.
Less than dollar, actually Laughat
[Image: 322c2837b533d469bfce054eee5d5501.jpg]
And by the way, the commodity theory of money is Marxist and Marxism is lol conspiracy Consider

(07-08-2014 02:37 PM)cjlr Wrote:  By what insane troll logic is someone else making more of something in any way equivalent to stealing from me?
By your insanity of asking me what money is, implying that you know, while you really don't. If you knew what money are, you would not ask this question.
You mean you didn't know how counterfeiting money works??? Facepalm A rose by any other name...

Money are NOT value. They are a representation of value for the purpose of economic calculation. By (immorally) making more money the government increases the share of money it has and relatively decreases the overall share savings you have. Thus your purchasing power gets lesser and lesser without even noticing.
Thus governments can wage wars and bribe the nation without visibly increasing taxes.
That's another F.

(07-08-2014 02:37 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Contrary to what frothing ideologues will tell you, there are in fact very good reasons why the world works as it does.

Those reasons are not "lol conspiracy".

Any introductory economics textbook would be more than enough to explain them to you.

Read a book.
Frothing ideologues? There are no such people! Lol conspiracy.

(07-08-2014 02:37 PM)cjlr Wrote:  No human institution has ever or will ever last forever.

So what?
Nothing, I just regret you probably won't be in USA when the economic bubble bursts Dodgy

(07-08-2014 02:37 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Ah! A prediction. Vague, and with no timeframe, but it's a start.

I can quite confidently predict a little prediction of my own: your aopcalyptic prophecies will prove to be exactly as true as the books of the prophets in another religious text you may have heard of.
[Image: fed-public-debt.png]

(07-08-2014 02:37 PM)cjlr Wrote:  This is empirically false.

Human behaviour is an immensely complicated field and a great deal of very fruitful research is ongoing. I mean, sure, that's what you might call "government-funded liberal nazi reptiloid conspiracy" science, but suffice to say no, you and your cult leader do not have the key to the entire human condition.

This does, however, illustrate quite well the presuppositional basis of your reasoning. The universe has no obligation make sense to you. What you believe or refuse to believe has no bearing on reality. Your subjective personal experience is not privileged and not compelling. Do not pass go, do not collect $200.
Again, more condescending blah blah.
Can you show me any major piece of this research? Do you even know without looking it up what Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo experiments were about? I'd bet you have never heard about these, that's what I think about your education in anything but mathematics, which I am unable to verify, but someone probably should Dodgy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2014, 03:42 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(07-08-2014 02:12 PM)PKJoe Wrote:  If parents didn't spank their kids than we would all have the same morals and values. At least that's human nature according to Luminon.
That's not what I say: I say thanks to hitting and yelling at children we all have the same "morals" and "values": Violence is "normal" and might makes right.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2014, 03:43 PM
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(07-08-2014 02:09 PM)Luminon Wrote:  Yeah, I see this movie is available. I've read a review and it says the point of the movie is clear in the first 10 minutes.

Anyone who says you can know the entire film in the first 10 minutes may not have watched the last 10 minutes, which were the most interesting in my opinion.

(07-08-2014 02:09 PM)Luminon Wrote:  What I expect to see is Indonesia full of badly parented men who are in an imaginary and unfulfilled pathological bond to unavailable parents and later to anyone who acts powerful and sure of himself, enough to kill for him. By which I mean exactly the kind of people that democracies and Communism produces in schools and needs for public security forces.

Interesting. Your reaction to even the idea of the film is similar to your pontifications on reality: superficial and overly simplistic.

One big reason I don't find your arguments compelling is that you rarely demonstrate a familiarity with the world of humans you inhabit. I keep thinking I see anti-social tendencies in your posts. But, then, I could say the same about many Libertarians.

It's still interesting to read your posts....on occasion and with moderation. I feel I'm learning a lot, but likely not what you had hoped I would.

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Cardinal Smurf's post
07-08-2014, 04:17 PM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Either way, Mr Lumi, I think we can throw out the title of your thread. There's absolutely nothing in your political stance to corroborate the idea that it's a "lack of political stance" in the same way that atheism is a lack of religion (well, agnostic atheism anyway).

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
07-08-2014, 04:40 PM (This post was last modified: 07-08-2014 04:50 PM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(07-08-2014 04:17 PM)morondog Wrote:  Either way, Mr Lumi, I think we can throw out the title of your thread. There's absolutely nothing in your political stance to corroborate the idea that it's a "lack of political stance" in the same way that atheism is a lack of religion (well, agnostic atheism anyway).
Throw out the title, because of what? Nothing compared to what? My practice of Kundalini Yoga did not make me telepathic yet, I can't read your mind to see what do you mean.
You need to make an argument, not an assertion Wink


(07-08-2014 03:43 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  Interesting. Your reaction to even the idea of the film is similar to your pontifications on reality: superficial and overly simplistic.

One big reason I don't find your arguments compelling is that you rarely demonstrate a familiarity with the world of humans you inhabit. I keep thinking I see anti-social tendencies in your posts. But, then, I could say the same about many Libertarians.

It's still interesting to read your posts....on occasion and with moderation. I feel I'm learning a lot, but likely not what you had hoped I would.
I can look at this film, but please give me some time. I rarely watch movies, because they're too slow. I'll give it a try, but since I started to study sociology, history, philosophy and a few other things, I am rarely surprised and often disappointed by other people's shiny goodies. History is the same shit every time, just with different actors and costumes.
Man, I am an amateur philosopher (and qualitatively inclined student of sociology). My calling is to pinpoint through induction the general principle without bothering with instances. Instances are for scientists, principles are for philosophers.

I don't watch TV for 8 years or so - too slow, too much ballast, no choice of content...
I am a self-taught weirdo, I just don't know how weird I am, because most authorities on knowledge are liars and try to mislead me. Especially university docents of social sciences who are secretly Christians.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-08-2014, 05:03 PM
No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(07-08-2014 04:40 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(07-08-2014 04:17 PM)morondog Wrote:  Either way, Mr Lumi, I think we can throw out the title of your thread. There's absolutely nothing in your political stance to corroborate the idea that it's a "lack of political stance" in the same way that atheism is a lack of religion (well, agnostic atheism anyway).
Throw out the title, because of what? Nothing compared to what? My practice of Kundalini Yoga did not make me telepathic yet, I can't read your mind to see what do you mean.
You need to make an argument, not an assertion Wink


(07-08-2014 03:43 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  Interesting. Your reaction to even the idea of the film is similar to your pontifications on reality: superficial and overly simplistic.

One big reason I don't find your arguments compelling is that you rarely demonstrate a familiarity with the world of humans you inhabit. I keep thinking I see anti-social tendencies in your posts. But, then, I could say the same about many Libertarians.

It's still interesting to read your posts....on occasion and with moderation. I feel I'm learning a lot, but likely not what you had hoped I would.
I can look at this film, but please give me some time. I rarely watch movies, because they're too slow. I'll give it a try, but since I started to study sociology, history, philosophy and a few other things, I am rarely surprised and often disappointed by other people's shiny goodies. History is the same shit every time, just with different actors and costumes.
Man, I am an amateur philosopher (and qualitatively inclined student of sociology). My calling is to pinpoint through induction the general principle without bothering with instances. Instances are for scientists, principles are for philosophers.

I don't watch TV for 8 years or so - too slow, too much ballast, no choice of content...
I am a self-taught weirdo, I just don't know how weird I am, because most authorities on knowledge are liars and try to mislead me. Especially university docents of social sciences who are secretly Christians.

Is it difficult to form a clear picture of what's really happening in the world from Czech Republic (or is it ok to keep calling it Česko?)? How much of your opinions are based on Internet sources?

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2014, 12:16 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(07-08-2014 04:40 PM)Luminon Wrote:  
(07-08-2014 04:17 PM)morondog Wrote:  Either way, Mr Lumi, I think we can throw out the title of your thread. There's absolutely nothing in your political stance to corroborate the idea that it's a "lack of political stance" in the same way that atheism is a lack of religion (well, agnostic atheism anyway).
Throw out the title, because of what? Nothing compared to what? My practice of Kundalini Yoga did not make me telepathic yet, I can't read your mind to see what do you mean.
You need to make an argument, not an assertion Wink

Your title claims that your political position is some kind of "null" position in the same way that atheism is a "null" position.

It seems clear that you have specific ideas about how society should function, and furthermore those ideas are not obvious or, despite your claims, scientifically grounded. It is not a logical position. In fact if we're making analogies with religion your stance seems far closer to "fringe cult" than to rationally based.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like morondog's post
08-08-2014, 05:44 AM (This post was last modified: 08-08-2014 06:05 AM by Luminon.)
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(08-08-2014 12:16 AM)morondog Wrote:  Your title claims that your political position is some kind of "null" position in the same way that atheism is a "null" position.

It seems clear that you have specific ideas about how society should function, and furthermore those ideas are not obvious or, despite your claims, scientifically grounded. It is not a logical position. In fact if we're making analogies with religion your stance seems far closer to "fringe cult" than to rationally based.
I think I can see an argument in there, but I need to spell it out. And when I do that, you probably won't like that.

So this argument that I see goes as follows:
Christians have one holy book and they claim to take all their morality from the holy book. Atheists don't have a single holy book, so they have no possible source of morality, atheism is nihilistic and asocial or downright antisocial.

Similarly, statists have party programs, elections and voting in which they have and present and apply their ideas about society.
Anarchists have no party, elections or voting, which means they have no right to having any ideas about society, no way to get them across to people and no right to apply them, unless going through the official channel, which is politics.

You see that is a complete non sequitur and maybe a bit of special pleading, but this is the argument I think you make. I still say that the null position of society is just people making deals, buying and selling stuff (incl. security, justice, healthcare and retirement funds) and that there is no evidence that government is anything else but a social parasite like the Church.

Also, you still haven't looked at the Bomb in the Brain video, which is full of well-researched scientific facts. I wouldn't be proud of myself if I behaved like that.

(07-08-2014 05:03 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  Is it difficult to form a clear picture of what's really happening in the world from Czech Republic (or is it ok to keep calling it Česko?)? How much of your opinions are based on Internet sources?
(07-08-2014 05:03 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  Is it difficult to form a clear picture of what's really happening in the world from Czech Republic (or is it ok to keep calling it Česko?)? How much of your opinions are based on Internet sources?
You can say Česko, although it will sound a little weird, because English doesn't use inflection. But it's a nice gesture from you Smile
It is not difficult to form a clear picture, but it is more difficult to believe it once you do. It could be said that 85 % of Czechs are potential anarchists (think government is shit and a band of thieves). But they have no self-esteem after 25 years of supposedly democratic regime, they're scared out of their mind of each other, of slave on slave violence and longing for someone to sell them a feeling of security.

As you see with Res Publica, this lack of self-esteem and economic education demands everything up front, finished watertight solutions and quick fixes from someone else, before they'd be willing to move on from the present regime. Which is of course unreal, nobody can give us that kind of guarantees, least of all politicians. Our civilization just isn't on that level yet, due to huge welfare-warfare resource wasting for political promises of quick fixes that restrict our freedom.

I do have some ideas on how a foolproof and socially watertight yet free society would work, but first things first. People an money need to be free.

So the things I talk about here, that's university material I learned at a private college, which is more of a think tank with students. It's a very small college, but it makes conferences with some famous names from all around the world. I learned the pertinent stuff especially from this professor, also found here (please run it through Google Translate, the encryption messes it up). He's a great man, great teacher and I think I was very receptive to his ideas because I never liked the status quo anyway and had a backup plan. But the Austrian economics means huge improvement in a very short time, without any major changes, a very quick solution of problems which are not natural, they're artificial, caused by government interventions.

I also value very much my philosophy 101 lessons from this man, he's a docent and a Christian (the third one I know, do you see any pattern already??? Laugh out load ), but a great teacher too.

Molyneux is exactly on the same page with professor when it comes to economics and philosophy, I check him back against what I learned in the college. He's not any different in that respect. He has three employees now who research sources and facts for him, but it's still along the same lines. The general principle of global problems is clear, now it's just the details.

Picture unrelated, but cool:
[Image: 33d64a3457bfd5e386384458f852f85d.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-08-2014, 05:49 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
Huh? Sorry, I couldn't hear you over how much of an idiot you are, please repeat.

[Image: oscar.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
08-08-2014, 05:57 AM
RE: No wing: political equivalent to atheism?
(08-08-2014 05:44 AM)Luminon Wrote:  I think I can see an argument in there, but I need to spell it out. And when I do that, you probably won't like that.

So this argument that I see goes as follows:
Christians have one holy book and they claim to take all their morality from the holy book. Atheists don't have a single holy book, so they have no possible source of morality, atheism is nihilistic and asocial or downright antisocial.

Similarly, statists have party programs, elections and voting in which they have and present and apply their ideas about society.
Anarchists have no party, elections or voting, which means they have no right to having any ideas about society, no way to get them across to people and no right to apply them, unless going through the official channel, which is politics.

You see that is a complete non sequitur and maybe a bit of special pleading, but this is the argument I think you make. I still say that the null position of society is just people making deals, buying and selling stuff (incl. security, justice, healthcare and retirement funds) and that there is no evidence that government is anything else but a social parasite like the Church.

My friend, anarchism is a political position whether you like it or not. You are advocating ideas about how society should be. That is politics. Regardless whether you want a government or not, you are advocating social revolution. That is politics. Get it through your skull. You are taking a position on politics and it is not by any means a default position.

I see that you're still keen to put words in my mouth about how atheism is anti-social and so forth. Drinking Beverage

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: