Message boards :
Cafe SETI :
Science, money, humans
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 7 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0 |
Just one question though, are you aware that some of your writings come forward as a tad right wing? Maybe, mostly because most here don't really understand them. They aren't right or left, they're libertarian. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious... |
thorin belvrog Send message Joined: 29 Sep 06 Posts: 6418 Credit: 8,893 RAC: 0 |
Just one question though, are you aware that some of your writings come forward as a tad right wing? From my point of view, they indeed are right-wing even though I understand them. It's just a matter of where you stand. Most libertarians are right-wing in my eyes. Account frozen... |
Demiurg Send message Joined: 2 Jul 02 Posts: 883 Credit: 28,286 RAC: 0 |
Just one question though, are you aware that some of your writings come forward as a tad right wing? I was more thinking about you saying that people are left-wing:-) On the other hand, I am from a country where our right-wing hawks would be considered left wing in the US, and our left-wingers aren't propagating hemp-growing and our homegrown religious fanatics are blowing up sausage-stands and our libertarians are advocating free sex and no clothes. So thusly I surmise that you do not want to wear clothes around sausage-blowers and hemp-growers, but that you wish to be fully clothed around hawks (feathered or not)? It is SEXY to DONATE! Skype = demiurg2 |
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0 |
From my point of view, they indeed are right-wing even though I understand them. It's just a matter of where you stand. Most libertarians are right-wing in my eyes. Libertarians aren't any more right than they are left. They would shut down corporate welfare just as fast as they would shut down individual welfare. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious... |
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0 |
I was more thinking about you saying that people are left-wing:-) I don't think I've said that. Maybe. So thusly I surmise that you do not want to wear clothes around sausage-blowers and hemp-growers, but that you wish to be fully clothed around hawks (feathered or not)? Ummmmm... Yes? 8^] Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious... |
Demiurg Send message Joined: 2 Jul 02 Posts: 883 Credit: 28,286 RAC: 0 |
From my point of view, they indeed are right-wing even though I understand them. It's just a matter of where you stand. Most libertarians are right-wing in my eyes. Is it liberty to stop people and corporations from doing welfare? I thought that was totaliarism. So your libertarianism is all about you being against everything else for the sake of it? And wanting to force everything to your view? I guess that you do like speed and moving pistons and rushing steem to? Read the futurist manifesto man. It is SEXY to DONATE! Skype = demiurg2 |
Demiurg Send message Joined: 2 Jul 02 Posts: 883 Credit: 28,286 RAC: 0 |
I was more thinking about you saying that people are left-wing:-) Thank you. It is SEXY to DONATE! Skype = demiurg2 |
Scary Capitalist Send message Joined: 21 May 01 Posts: 7404 Credit: 97,085 RAC: 0 |
But Kant has been thoroughly bashed on the front of Universal values a long time ago. What is universal is just culturally derived from common practice in the beforementioned culture. For instance it is okay for an american leader to be pro executions, but that is not okay for a european leader since in europe consensus is against the procedure. So for that there is no universal value. And I would be seriously surprised if you or anyone else could come up with something that is a universal value, because that would also have to be TRUE for ALL.Surprise: Truth, Righteousness, Reliability are three out of many universal values which are appreciated in every culture. I'd like more clarification on all of these points you are trying to raise here. Thanks. Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data! I did NOT authorize this belly writing! |
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0 |
Is it liberty to stop people and corporations from doing welfare? I thought that was totaliarism. Any person or any corporation can do whatever welfare they wish, to whatever extent that they wish. However, no one has the right to force them to do any of those things. If they choose to do them freely, more power to them. So your libertarianism is all about you being against everything else for the sake of it? And wanting to force everything to your view? No, it means that no person or entity has the right to initiate force against anyone else. Meaning that you can believe whatever you wish, as long as you don't seek to make me pay for it, or force me to do anything to support it. It doesn't matter what you believe, or I believe, as long as we both have to live as a result of our choices. I guess that you do like speed and moving pistons and rushing steem to? Read the futurist manifesto man. I have no idea what this means. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious... |
Scary Capitalist Send message Joined: 21 May 01 Posts: 7404 Credit: 97,085 RAC: 0 |
Try to stay 'Noodly' , Rush. Confusion of ability of action or efficacy with ability to impose force upon people is common with some. *sigh* Individualism? They've never encountered it. I've lived among similars, as have you. Making them understand the principle is almost impossible. Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data! I did NOT authorize this belly writing! |
thorin belvrog Send message Joined: 29 Sep 06 Posts: 6418 Credit: 8,893 RAC: 0 |
I think any person (also the poor ones) do have the right to have a place to live, to get educated, to get medical treatment, to get enough food, - all in all to have the same opportunities as every other person in the entire country. And I believe that any society which allows poverty among their citizens has to care that these basic rights are granted to everybody. Security means are second priority to this. But the arguments of the both of you, R/B and Rush, sound similar to some ideas I've read about: of Ben Tucker and Murray Rothbarth - ideas I absolutely cannot agree with. Also the "Objectism" ideas of Ayn Rand are contrary to my convictions. These three philosophers' ideas I only can call egocentric. In my opinion, social acts like welfare or others are absolutely necessary in a country which allows poverty. I think each society needs the opposite of being egocentric: to help those in need, to strengthen the the week, to live together instead of coincidentally side by side. Account frozen... |
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0 |
I think any person (also the poor ones) do have the right to have a place to live, to get educated, to get medical treatment, to get enough food, - all in all to have the same opportunities as every other person in the entire country. How? Define "right?" What grants them that right? And even if such a right is granted, how is it provided for? And I believe that any society which allows poverty among their citizens has to care that these basic rights are granted to everybody. Security means are second priority. To you maybe, but that's really never been the case. But the arguments of the both of you, R/B and Rush, sound similar to some ideas I've read about: of Ben Tucker and Murray Rothbarth - ideas I absolutely cannot agree with. Also the "Objectism" ideas of Ayn Rand are contrary to my convictions. These three philosophers' ideas I only can call egocentric. Egoists, maybe. It's very simple: they believe that you do not have the right to stick a gun in my face (use gov't force) to make me pay for that "right to have a place to live," anymore than I have the right to stick a gun in your face (use gov't force) to make you pay for nuclear weapons, corporate welfare, or anything else that I may want. In my opinion, social acts like welfare or others are absolutely necessary in a country which allows poverty. I think each society needs the opposite of being egocentric: to help those in need, to strengthen the the week, to live together instead of coincidentally side by side. Do it. No one is stopping you. Go nuts. Have at it. No laws prevent you from doing this. No country would stop you from doing this. But this isn't what you are suggesting--you have to stick a gun in my face (use gov't force) to make me do that for two reasons. 1) You, and those that think like you, won't put enough time, effort, and money into it to accomplish your goals on your own. 2) Since you can't be bothered, you need to force me to do help you out, because I won't adhere to your program voluntarily. Ever. Never have, never will. If it's OK for you to use force to make me pay for your silly education programs, you can understand why it's OK for others to make you pay for the WHISC and the CIA and War in Iraq. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious... |
Scary Capitalist Send message Joined: 21 May 01 Posts: 7404 Credit: 97,085 RAC: 0 |
Usually I just sort of scratch my chin and grin when reading people's comments. I make a joke or three in response and then move along. This kind of answer from him is truly shocking... Once I consider it again in a greater context of history it makes more sense. Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data! I did NOT authorize this belly writing! |
thorin belvrog Send message Joined: 29 Sep 06 Posts: 6418 Credit: 8,893 RAC: 0 |
No I cannot understand that. The WHISC, or former SOA, has not been called "School of Assassins" without reason. It is the most fascistoid facility since the Napola in the "Third Reich". Each cent the US government is spending for them is one cent too much. SOA graduates include former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega, El Salvador death squad leader Roberto D'Aubuisson, and former dictators of Argentina, Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia. SOA graduates were also responsible for the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero, the El Mozote massacre, the Uraba massacre, and the assassination of six Jesuit priests, their housekeeper and her daughter. Vladimiro Montesinos, another graduate of the SOA and right- hand man of Peruvian President Alberto Fujimori, has been implicated as the leader of the Grupo Colina death squad responsible for numerous massacres in Peru. And for such an institution the US government is spending Millions of Dollars? Incredible. It's a shame! Both, the WHISC and the Klan - but also the ideologically similar NSDAP(AO) belong banned and forbidden. To let them do their anti-human things, even to let them publish and congregate, is a perversion of the constitutional rights. About CIA and Wars - that's another thing, and I think we had discussed about them earlier. Account frozen... |
Scary Capitalist Send message Joined: 21 May 01 Posts: 7404 Credit: 97,085 RAC: 0 |
What on earth are you talking about? I'm probably speaking for a couple of others when I ask this...your comments coming from a german, after you earlier made a sort of eugenics claim on people with illnessess, that you lack a certain credibility here. There was one excuse you gave about not having a facility with english that may have been the culprit but since then you have clearly shown skills in the english language that rival most college graduates in our country. You clearly know what you're saying. Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data! I did NOT authorize this belly writing! |
thorin belvrog Send message Joined: 29 Sep 06 Posts: 6418 Credit: 8,893 RAC: 0 |
What on earth are you talking about? I'm probably speaking for a couple of others when I ask this...your comments coming from a german, after you earlier made a sort of eugenics claim on people with illnessess, that you lack a certain credibility here. I never ever said anything to make a eugenics claim. Please do me the favor to link to the post or to copy/paste the sentences you mean, to show where I said something like that... But I'm absolutely sure that I never said something about eugenics. There was one excuse you gave about not having a facility with english that may have been the culprit but since then you have clearly shown skills in the english language that rival most college graduates in our country. You clearly know what you're saying. And I have also installed a little program recently, called "Ding" (originally a Linux program, but I found it as a Windows version in a Computer magazine), which gives me the right translation of the word I'm missing just one click away. Before I found this, I had to stand up from the desk when I missed a word, and go to the book-shelf to take the big dictionary (it's really big: 7.5 kg; I bought it as a part of a 30-volume encyclopedia in the early 90's) and look up the missing word. Mostly I simply was to lazy for that (or to tired) and just tried to express myself without using this dictionary. Account frozen... |
Jeffrey Send message Joined: 21 Nov 03 Posts: 4793 Credit: 26,029 RAC: 0 |
Had you said this right from the beginning, I never would have commented. And yet the argument still rages on... ;) It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . . |
Scary Capitalist Send message Joined: 21 May 01 Posts: 7404 Credit: 97,085 RAC: 0 |
Your earlier comments about people having 'diseases inside of themselves' don't need further references. Founder of BOINC team Objectivists. Oh the humanity! Rational people crunching data! I did NOT authorize this belly writing! |
thorin belvrog Send message Joined: 29 Sep 06 Posts: 6418 Credit: 8,893 RAC: 0 |
Your earlier comments about people having 'diseases inside of themselves' don't need further references. Okay. I understand. Well - I know, only a few vocabular problems, just expression problems. I hope this time it sounds not too confuse. But what I wrote (I have re-read the post you meant), at least what I meant while I wrote them, has nothing to do with eugenics. Do not connect my comments with this insane, evil "Race hygienic" stuff. But it does have to do with genetics. Because, I learned in Biology that some diseases, and also the - like I said: affinity - for other diseases are given by parents to their children via genes. Some of them are dominant, these are given directly from the parents to the kids - and some are recessive, they may lack a few generations. So that - say my great-grandfather can have suffered from a cancer (so the affinity to get it is in the genes), and not my grandfather after him was suffering from a cancer, neither my father after, it was "carried" hidden, recessively, to my brother. My Grandfather, and my father had the disease in their bodies, but it didn't come out in them, they were healthy - they just "carried" it. Similar but worse like when you "carry" flu viruses from one sick person to "give" them to another without getting the flu yourself. So my thought was, that people can't know whether they got the "bad" genes or just "carry" them to the next generation. So, if there is any substance triggering something of your genetic heritage, you can become sick, and your brother not, though he had the same substances around. You (becoming sick) had that gene, he (remaining healthy) didn't have it or is just "carrying" it maybe to one of his children or grandchildren. It's like with the blood groups: When parents have A, and the other B, they can - depending on their recessive Genotype - give birth to children with A, B, AB, and 0. That's why the blood test is sometimes complicated. Account frozen... |
Fuzzy Hollynoodles Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 9659 Credit: 251,998 RAC: 0 |
Your earlier comments about people having 'diseases inside of themselves' don't need further references. I'm sorry, Robert, but I didn't read Thorin's comment like that. I can partly agree with him, that some people are more predisposed to get illnesses, and certain cancer forms are hereditary, like a certain form of breast cancer, where women, who have relatives, mothers and sisters, who had breast cancer, have chosen to have preventive mastectomies done as the probability of themselves getting it is very high. It's a common perception mostly in the New Age circles that we cause our illnesses ourselves through negative ways of thinking, and that you also can cure yourself through positive thinking. But this is actually a problem for people who suffer from some very aggressive lethal illnesses, such as certain forms of cancer, and it can create a lot of guilt feelings in the patients, that they themselves are responsible for their condition, that they themselves have brought them into their situation. And some of them are taking measures in trying to heal themselves through alternative healing, some very painful and always extremely expensive. So, besides fighting a serious illness, they also have to fight those feelings of being alone, of having caused their own situation. And that is inhuman in my opinion. "I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.