Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: The world must change, but OWS is not the future, at least not the American version.

Posted 2 years ago on May 11, 2012, 2:53 a.m. EST by EuroBoy (4)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

There's no denying that we must find better ways to organize our societies throughout the planet. Poverty, injustice, ecological poisoning, etc... are all problems that seem insolvable with our current political systems.

However, I do not believe OWS (at least not the American version) can be used to point to a better future. The problem is that Americans are big fans of pseudosciences be it religious superstition, conspiracy theories, or simply junk science. Boldly stated, Americans are not thinkers.

There was a time when many great things came from America, but that time has passed. A quick look at this website is enough to confirm this. What was originally designed as a place for OWS anarchists to discuss real problems has become a hot bed for conspiracy theory nonsensical drivel.

Fans of Zeitgeist will find there home here with all the talk of the Federal Reserve, RBE, equal pay, and other such unscientific talk. Truthers will be comfortable on this website for they can attack he government with all their pseudoscientific brouhaha. Religious fanatics are more than welcome to invade half the threads with talk of their sky daddy.

If you're one of the rare intellectuals in America, it might be time to join European circles. Leave your American friends with their burgers and creationism, and discuss the future of our world with serious intellectuals. America is no longer on the map of serious thought.

151 Comments

151 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by brightonsage (4494) 2 years ago

My Momma said, "Stupid is as stupid does." Most of what you say is true about American's. But I have found in Europe the last couple of few years it has it's own set of blind spots. They are different, to be sure but they are there.

Much is made of the Anglo-American model of markets and finance, but the con artist isn't the only one to blame sometimes the victim, who is an adult bears some responsibility for the greed that gets them conned. Then you have your own rascals, Berlusconi would be one example among many. Then there are the people of Greece, Portugal, Spain, etc. who like Americans were focused on the good life while their government bought their silence by spending like drunken sailors and winking at tax cheaters. OK they weren't wasting their time abusing the civil rights of their citizens but they were doing it to immigrants.

So, the pot and the kettle are both black. Scrubbing them both should be our mutual focus and coordinated effort. I welcome the dialog and would look to you for forums that further that effort.

[-] 2 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

EuroBoy, everyone hates us. So be it. As they say in Japan- "get your house in order."

[-] 2 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 2 years ago

This post is nothing more than a pile of pseudo-intellectual tripe. If the future of OWS or of anything more than the contents of a septic tank rely on your pseudo-intellectualism or "scientific method," that future is in deep trouble. Enlighten us, oh deep thinker, what exactly is the proven scientific method for successful political change or revolution. I'm sure people around the world are waiting breathlessly for your reply.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

LOL - stated to - [-] -1 points by EuroBoy (0) 2 hours ago - no doubt. Sorry I had to clarify as your comment is obscured by the thread traffic.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

Hehehe! Priceless!

[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

This isn't all of OWS (not even remotely), this is a news outlet (to keep those truly interested in the movement connected with what's happening), but the discussion forum attracts all sorts of people (most of whom probably never attended an OWS demonstration).

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by markpaddles (143) from Denver, CO 2 years ago

"discuss the future of our world with serious intellectuals."

I'm particular interested in starting conversations with the organizers of the UK movement who must have spent time working with the UK police - which lead to the UK police joining the protests that occurred yesterday. That is serious progress...

Also your comment paints with too broad of a brush... yes, there are lots of nonsensical people, and lots of garbage thoughts floating around this country. The problem isn't that there isn't enough brilliant people in this country, with science-based thinking, and with plenty of great ideas that could help to constructively heal the world. The problem is that these people have been systematically pushed to the margins of society by a new form of concentrated power that the world has never seen. It's far too easy for this concentrated system of power to marginalize the brilliant thinkers and cast them off as pariahs.

This new form of power has been labeled in a few ways (corporativist and inverted totalitarianism are a few), but this corporate power is "driven by a dynamic (takeovers, mergers, buyouts) that aggressively promotes concentration of economic power - and of political power." It's the very power that Occupy (and you guys in Europe) are all up against. That sentence was quoted from one of the most brilliant political philosophers of our day, Prof. Sheldon Wolin. Unfortunately so few have heard of him....Why? His brilliant ideas are out there and can be found in his books and his teachings, but he is simply pushed to the margins of our society by the power he has so brilliantly analyzed.

So it's easy to sit there and say that "Americans are not thinkers" and "America is no longer on the map of serious thought" without providing any critique of how this came to be, or appears to be - by doing so you also appear to ignore the very power that has concentrated the ownership of a media and information centers into so few hands that it can simply produce a "near-homogeneity of culture and opinion." And, "the net effect of the concentration of media ownership is to enclose the civic mind within the equivalent of a hermetically sealed dome."

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

I don't buy it. You can't put the blame on the media for what Americans consume. The media is there to make money and if Americans don't watch they change their program. Like you said, the writings of American intellectuals are out there. And, we have satellite TV now and the Internet. It's easy to get your hands on the books, music, art, and movies you want to consume. You can't just blame the media as if you had no control. You're not living under a dictator who censors your material. If you want to watch a film by Fellini, listen to music by John Cage, read a novel by James Joyce, etc... it's easier than before. Americans choose to watch such junk science shows as MonsterQuest and that is their own fault. Jerry Springer would never have made it as a TV show anywhere but in America. Watchers gave it great ratings.

Take this site for example. The moderators could very well expunge such "contributors" like Reneye who only post conspiracy theory drivel. They choose to accept this nonsense and it hurts the movement. By accepting it, it means they also support it.

Anyone who cares about OWS would fight junk science, conspiracy theories, religious clap trap, etc... However, nobody does. That's because Americans don't care. If the discussion on this site was serious, then perhaps intellectuals like Mr. Graeber would come along and contribute. They don't because they don't have time to waste talking about the Manchurian, Illuminati, or the latest Bigfoot sightings. It's up to the moderators and the writers on this site to make it a serious place for discussion and not just another conspiracy theory website. There's no secret government agency or big company stopping you from doing that. Stop trying to blame others, you are shooting yourselves in the foot.

[-] 2 points by markpaddles (143) from Denver, CO 2 years ago

"You can't put the blame on the media for what Americans consume."

You might want to take a little bit of that medicine you are trying to tell everybody here to take. This sentence of yours is a straw man argument (you are misrepresenting what I wrote). I didn't blame the media directly, or the actors within it. In fact, I believe I wrote... "the very power that has concentrated the ownership of a media and information centers". And the "very power" I speak of is the "concentrated system of power" that "aggressively promotes concentration of economic power - and of political power." Call it the corporatocracy, corporate state, or whatever label you would like to attach to it. One would think that it is easy to discern that I was writing of the systemic issues... But I am willing to admit that my comment might not have been clear enough. Prof. Sheldon Wolin, Prof. Chomksy, Prof Graeber, etc. are also trying to expose the structures of power and how they actual work in the world... and they are easily pushed to the margins of society by this system of power.

Is it really easy for Americans to simply start reading them? In theory, yes. So why aren't more Americans simply doing that? Well, that is a complex issue, and one in which many anthropologists, political philosophers, economists, psychologists, and social and cultural critics have spent their lives trying to explain and understand. In fact, Chomsky and Herman highlighted one of the key issues as to why people in this country are not as informed as they should be in their book "Manufacturing Consent" - which has to do with the fact that the vast majority of the people in this country are preoccupied with economic survival. Check the book out for yourself...

"If the discussion on this site was serious, then perhaps intellectuals like Mr. Graeber would come along and contribute."

Prof Graeber (and the other brilliant thinkers in this country) probably don't contribute here much because the effect they can have on the world is much better served by being in the real world (on the streets and in face-to-face settings) Graeber is most likely sitting at a real General Assembly working face to face with others.

And if you don't want to buy what I'm writing here... then don't. I will simply continue to educate myself from the wise and brilliant thinkers in this country and the world, from the likes of Chomsky, Wolin, Graeber, etc... rather than from an anonymous poster. And I will simply try to help spread their ideas and solutions on random internet forums and within my community.

Take care

[-] -2 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

If straw man there was, it wasn't intended. I misunderstood you. I'm still wondering how these powers are pushing intellectuals into the margins? Many are professors who get grants from the government to do research or write books.

Is it really economical survival? This makes it seem like people just don't have time to read these intellectuals, watch nurturing movies, or listen to good music. However, some of the poorest Americans are those who watch TV the most. It would seem they do have time on their hands, (a lot of them are unemployed) and they could easily go to the public library and get a book for free instead of watching Jerry Springer re-runs. They don't. Still not sure exactly why. Perhaps they don't like to make the effort (not to go the the library, but to read intellectuals). It's far easier to watch the Family Guy than to read Poe.

As for your Graeber not being here hypothesis, I don't buy it. First, it's not because you post here that you can't also attend a GA. You can do both. Second, Graeber is a writer and not just a doer. A lot of his time is spent doing research, and writing. Third, he does contribute on some anarchist forums. I have had discussions with him on those boards. He also posts some of his newer articles from time to time. Nothing would stop him from coming here once in awhile, especially since this is an important OWS forum. At the very least, he could copy/paste his newest articles here. Truth is, he avoids this forum like the plague because it's just another conspiracy theory website. It's not really representative of OWS. It's a vehicle for those who want to talk about such fantasies as a world without money.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (6479) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

it could simply be hubris

[-] 2 points by notaneoliberal (2269) 2 years ago

Much of what you assert is hard to argue with. The "Sky Daddy" issue is a big one. It seems to be associated with a general lack of critical reasoning ability. It's hard to say which is the cause and which is the effect. I would like to point out, however, very often, the most absurd and crazy are the most vocal. I'm curious as to what your point(s) of contact with the US are. The press? The internet? Personal experience? One thing that I have found a bit ironic has been the wide spread acceptance of largely US inspired Neoliberalism throughout Europe within the last few decades. Seems to me, that requires a lot of "magical reasoning also. Any thoughts?

[-] 2 points by grapes (3552) 2 years ago

I understand your point well but unfortunately fixing America may well be necessary to fix the world. The U.S. was slow to be awakened in World War I and II but it played an important role in the showdowns. The U.S. no longer carries as much weight as before with the rise of the emerging powers but still the U.S. veering off on its own can drag the world to very undesirable neighborhoods. We have to fight our ignorance here in the U.S. the best that we can although intellectual liaisons are much desired because we can all learn from the same book of struggles but fight our own local battles.

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

I think fixing the world will end up fixing America. Sort of like same-sex marriage will be legal in all States of America some day, perhaps after it has become legal in many other countries and US looks like the odd one out. It was legal in Mexico city before NYC. That's something to think about. America is real slow these days when it comes to real progress in politics or human rights.

[-] 3 points by grapes (3552) 2 years ago

I unfortunately do NOT hold much hope with fixing the world without fixing the U.S. because it holds so much sway in international institutions. The U.S. can cause major troubles for real progress in politics or human rights just like China and Russia can in the U.N. I do not understand why for example few people around the world hold their leaders' feet to the fire with their promises of the Millennium Development Goals. The leaders wrote the checks and the people should cash in. Then there is the Islamic world that may stay a thousand-year bloc against real progress although there have been some lively signs in recent years. Fixing the Islamic world may be much harder than fixing the U.S. because the U.S. has at least widespread communication media, a federal government with the requisite jurisdiction, and the people here are accustomed to respond to real capitalistic signals such as prices.

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Well, progress like the legalization of same-sex marriage happened in Canada without having to wait for US. Islam is a problem, all religions are. American Christians are a real problem. The future lies in the hands of secular nations. Those are the nations we have to look at now. They hold the compass and know how to use it. Nations like Canada where religion is weak is where the future lies.

[-] 2 points by grapes (3552) 2 years ago

I agree that Canada was exemplary in its common sense, at least in the financial-trust meltdown that we are still living through. However, there is no escaping the fact that very significant number of people in our world are religious. There is even very little chance of weakening the hold of religions because the issue is informational and information is what is being withheld from people through censorships and dogmas. You may find the ignorance expressed in this forum by Americans exasperating but that IS part of what America IS and I prefer the U.S. to hang out its dirty laundries for all the world to see than to wrap our heads up with them.

What factors allowed Canada to become weak in religions? Can those be copied elsewhere?

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

In Europe, al Qaeda was cited by 56 percent of Britons and Italians, 63 percent of French and 64 percent of Germans. The U.S. government was to blame, according to 23 percent of Germans and 15 percent of Italians.

Respondents in the Middle East were especially likely to name a perpetrator other than al Qaeda, the poll found.

Israel was behind the attacks, said 43 percent of people in Egypt, 31 percent in Jordan and 19 percent in the Palestinian Territories. The U.S. government was blamed by 36 percent of Turks and 27 percent of Palestinians.

In Mexico, 30 percent cited the U.S. government and 33 percent named al Qaeda.

The only countries with overwhelming majorities blaming al Qaeda were Kenya with 77 percent and Nigeria with 71 percent.

Interviews were conducted in China, Indonesia, Nigeria, Russia, Egypt, France, Germany, Britain, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Mexico, the Palestinian Territories, South Korea, Taiwan, Turkey and Ukraine.

The poll, taken between July 15 and August 31, had a margin of error of plus or minus 3 to 4 percent.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/09/10/us-sept11-qaeda-poll-idUSN1035876620080910

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Point?

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The most hostile nations regarding "trutherism" Mr. thrash, are Kenya and Nigeria. Germany, in the heart of Europe is quite fertile ground so it seems for trutherism.

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

As expected, unfortunately, another use of logical fallacies to support a lame conspiracy theory. Only in America could this be encouraged as it is on this site.

Perhaps you should review your figures. It seems you conveniently forgot to mention how many Frenchmen and Germans support the trutherist doctrine. According to this page which cites the same polls you do (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polls_about_9/11_conspiracy_theories) only 8% of Frenchmen and 23% of Germans support the idea of the US government being behind the 911 attack.

More importantly, it does not matter what the general population think. This is a ad populum logical fallacy. Even if 99% of Frenchmen believed the US government orchestrated the 911 attacks it wouldn't make this true.

If you wish to find truth, you must use the scientific method, not logical fallacies.

Now, go back to your Larouche site.

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Personal attacks are not the way to win an argument, especially ridiculous attacks, Thrash. It isn't proof of the truth or falsity of an idea or a fact if one humdred percent believe it or no one at all. You are touting Europe as some sort of intellectual nirvana and give as evidence, (I suppose) the fact that "trutherism" is adhered to by a minority there. It's also a minority opinion here, but doubts are widespread. And where "trutherism" is weakest is in sub Saharan Africa. In the US it's strongest among the poor, minorities and rebellious people which is why it can't be effectively "eradicated" from this forum, try as some might and have.

[-] 2 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The French are so very clever. That's why they call a billionaire international banker who abuses subordinate females a "socialist." - And were about to give him the keys to the vault.

[-] -2 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Can't keep up with your own dubious poll argument, so now you throw a red herring? Typical conspiracy theorist dashing and bashing with logical fallacies.

[-] 2 points by frogmanofborneo (602) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Is that you Daddy?

[-] 0 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

Ok EuroBoy (cough...Thrasy), so far there's a bold statement that OWS nor Americans are intelligent enough to be a serious part of the solution.

You've offered, "looking to secular nations" and "watching european movies" so far. What else? What is the 'intellectual' plan you see as working? Clear steps please. Step 1, step 2, step 3......

Incidentally, Canada is far from what it used to be. Its suffering many of the calamities that the US is suffering from. Many of the same stupid laws that encroach on freedoms are in Canada as well.

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago
  1. Consider learning about the scientific method.
  2. Consider using the scientific method.
  3. Stop propagating pseudo-science like conspiracy theories including Trutherism, Illuminati, Zeitgeist crap, NWO crap, reptilian crap, Manchurian crap, and all that other crap.
  4. Stop propagating religious fairy-tales.
  5. Use the scientific method, always (not just considering it anymore)
[-] 0 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

YES...Ok...we've heard this from you for months now Thrasy! The SCIENTIFIC method.

Your post says "the world must change". That's a massive undertaking, but not necessarily as huge as one would think depending on perspective. Lets play hypothetical for a minute....

Lets say, for the moment, that you were leader (ugh!), and that you had every imaginable scientific resource at your disposal. How do you propose using the scientific method to change the world.

What would you recommend. Where does Thrasy see the world 1 year, 2 years, 5 years from now, under your rule and oversight? What would be your first order of the day? Now keep in mind of course, that your rule starts from the world under its current condition, and that time is of the essence.

What would it look like? Is the answer sovereignty? Globalization? Localization? How would you get rid of human trafficking, government crimes, etc?

Ok Thrasy...you're Mr. Fix It....Lets hear it.

[-] 1 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

ECHO...Echo...echo. Just like I thought. Not one recommendation.

[-] 1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Using the scientific method instead of pseudoscience is a big recommendation. And, that's the first step. Make it illegal for people to publish pseudoscience unless there is a clear WARNING. All OWS websites should throw out conspiracy theorists such as yourself.

Next, money must be removed from politics. To do this, we must first analyze all the current laws in place to understand where all the problems are. Lawyers do this. Then, once the intricate web of laws is fully understood, the appropriate changes are carefully determined. After this, we must protest for these changes to take place. With money out of politics, many other problems get resolved. This is the first step and the ONLY thing OWS should be concerned with at this time. Only this. It's not easy, takes careful planning and time.

Conspiracy theorists and religious nitwits should be kept out of the discussion. That means you, out.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

You jump from "protest" to "with money out of politics many other problems get resolved." You don't demonstrate how "protest" actually gets money out of politics. You're full of it.

[-] 1 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

Wow Thrasy...that's profound. What intellect!

Ok. No conspiracy watchers and money out of politics. I got it. Now..."get money out of politics" is quite the blanket statement.

That's it? That's all we get from the intellect who started a thread with "the world must change" and given carte blanche to anything he wants as a leader of this new direction?

OWS should ONLY be concerned about the scientific method and money out of politics, you say, yet on this thread alone, you speak of gay rights, marriage, religion, media, European movies, how stupid Americans are, and on and on.

So, as ruler of a world currently gone mad, you've decided to analyze the money problems, the web of laws, determining necessary changes, then protesting for them. Sounds like a process of many years. I don't think we have that kind of time, do you?

Curious. In your intellectual capacity, how do we remove money out of politics when the laws are stacked against us? What lawyers would take on the US government. Also, how should we protest? By your own admission, you don't like the way OWS protests.

What of the other questions I had? Surely if "the world must change", as a ruler, you would recognize the need to look at more than just getting money out of politics?!

How should we as a society operate? Big or small government? Self government? How would you delegate the responsibility of say overcoming starvation of the world's citizens in places like Somalia, the allocation of natural resources, energy, etc?

I have to say Thrasy, ye of all knowing wisdom, your leadership skills are a little sparse. But you like good literature and good art....that much we know.

I dare say, Thrasy, provided we don't get blown to pieces before this is over, most of the world citizens on OWS, will spring to action and have accomplished a lot, while you're sitting there analyzing problems.

The problems are very evident, and getting money out of politics will solve several problems, but not all. Not even close.

[-] 1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

You use logical fallacies left and right. You do realized you changed the subject (red herring) and that it does not matter one bit whether or not I have a complete and perfect plan to save America in terms of me being right that conspiracy theories are hurting Occupy. Those are two very different subjects. The fact is, mentally ill conspiracy theory idiots such as yourself are hurting OWS so much. You make it look like a circus instead of a true platform for intelligent change.

I'm not a ruler and never said I was. I believe to a certain degree in the anarchic principles of OWS. I think it's good that this protest does not have a leader.

The problem is money in politics. To way to resolve that is to analyze in detail what are the problems and draw a plan to rectify them (problems in law). Once the necessary changes are known then we must protest to implement them. We can make a movie explaining the problems and the way to fix it. Protesting alone is not enough, real solutions to real problems must be presented and this is where conspiracy theorists such as yourself hamper OWS. You come up with fantasy made up problems like the Illuminati instead of talking about the really important stuff.

[-] 0 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

Oh Thrasy! This, I have to hear from the million moniker man?! Here we go again...you've got one good point, the rest is bullshit.

I've not changed the subject, and conspiracy 'watchers' are not hurting occupy. Now, you using any number of usernames (without telling anyone) to choreograph a supposed discussion to your liking, IS conspiring. YOU are a conspirator.

Are you saying that governments and the elite don't conspire?! You can't be that naive Thrasy.

Do you know how many good, decent people have been killed because they tried to tell us, and even jerks like you, what is happening? Whistleblowers don't tell us what they know because they think they're going to have a one way ticket to stardom and money. They lose just about everything. They risk their lives, and families and careers to try and save humanity. Do you know how many of them are rotting in prisons right now, because they tried to do the right thing?

Here's just a few. Bryce Taylor, Bill Cooper, Cathy O'Brien, Andy Pero, Chip Tatum. Have you looked at ANY of them? What about the countless of military, veterans, former cops, etc. that have and still are trying to warn us....just be be harassed, hurt or jailed? Anything? For the ones who are still alive, life is very difficult. And you write these all off as conspiracy theory? Are they ALL insane Thrasy? Huh !! Conspiracy watchers are people who have a healthy skepticism that aren't afraid to pull away from the pack, and that should be applauded in this world, not belittled. I understand, as should you, that the elite and government conspirators have worked very hard on their endeavors and have much to lose if found out, hence the need to beat the word "conspiracy" into the heads of the masses as being an ugly word not to be associated with thinking people. The f*cking criminal snobs. And you're right there with them. You're either one of them, someone hired to do their bidding, or cold as Spock. How about the media? They're not conspiring against us...are they? See..that's a conspiracy. People, groups, foundations, governments and elites conspire at any given moment of EVERY day. Its part of the human make-up. When you were 5 years old and daddy wouldn't give you the lollipop you wanted, you turned to mommy and layed on the guilt so daddy would get that look from mommy to give you the lollipop. You conspired. Now, you add obscene amounts of money to that, with elite people with megalomaniac personalities, and you have quite the witch's brew.

The Illuminati/New World Order/Global Elite/Rothschild Zionists...whatever you want to call them ARE real. Far too many well known people with credibility have attested to that. This IS coming out more and more.

A movie you say. Hmmm, that is actually a very good idea. I've seen a few...there are many good ones, including the one below contributed by 'regimechange'. However, I think the time for revolution is coming very soon, and there may not be enough time. But, don't let that stop you, it could be something very worthwhile and I doubt you would sabotage it the way you do with this forum. When you write a thread with "the world must change" in it, be prepared to offer a little more of what that plan might look like, instead of just hoping to drag people in in hopes of "keeping them occupied" with subterfuge.

[-] -1 points by regimechange (15) 2 years ago

You mean a movie like this one?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njSV5LtVmR4

[-] 0 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

Great contribution! I hadn't seen this one yet. It really shows how well "they" have used soft mind control to 'conspire' against us for their own purposes. Truly well done! Thanks.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Good for you Reneye. And I'm not one of your fans.

[-] 0 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

Hahaha ! Thanks, I think !!

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Lovely - lovely comment. Thank you.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

My pleasure. Truly!

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

I believe you - the truth is in your comment. {:-])

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

I assume you believe Reneye when she tells use that OWS is run by the 1% and that the "elite" use mind-control via chips to control us "slaves". Are you a Manchurian, an Illuminati, or part of the New World Order?

[-] 0 points by Reneye (118) 2 years ago

Nice try Thrasy. I have never said that the average every day people have been chipped.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Eore U can ass -u-me anything you want.

But people who are aware do not take things blindly - like you blind marchers do from your masters.

Having an open mind does not necessitate accepting whatever comes along - instead it allows you to examine with out prejudice.

[-] -2 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

You don't care about OWS, if you did you wouldn't be plastering your nonsensical conspiracy theories all over this site.

[-] 1 points by JPMcMahon (18) 2 years ago

EuroBoy, Where can we compare European and American people doing the same thing in the same place together outside of the Olympics? How about with the NATO forces in Afghanistan: http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2011/10/23/french-soldier-views-american-military-in-afghanistan/ Everyone that has followed the war in Afghanistan knows that the US forces are better equipped, trained, disciplined, and more lethal to the Taliban than any of the European NATO allies, who rely heavily on US airlift and logistical assistance to maintain their presence in that benighted country.
And by the way, America is still the land of great things. Where was the internet, Facebook, Youtube, etc. invented my friend? The US still has the world's leading film and entertainment industry by a long shot, and thus is still the world cultural leader. Do we still have our share of unsophisticated, provincial rubes and urban hoodrats? We sure do, but we don't hide them or pretend that they don't exist like Europeans do with their underclass, particularly their immigrants of different colors and cultures. Actually, Europeans acknowledge those people...when they riot. You see Euroboy, in the US of A we don't formally start sorting people by class like ya'all do. We haven't had the same kind of practice that you people have.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

I agree with the OP but where's the beef? This is just a website. You sound like Rupert Murdoch talking about Twitter.

[-] 1 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

Intellectual? What is so intellectual about lazy generalizations insulting 300 million people and the best European ally of the last 100 years? That famous European tolerance has in this case been displaced by bigotry and xenophobia.

[-] 1 points by jph (2652) 2 years ago

no thinkers here? how about apple, facebook, and google,. guess those folks don't think as much as they do en europa.

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

I should have specified in the areas of OWS interest and that there are some American thinkers but they are far in-between. Take a look at the postings on this website. 95% are shear garbage hypothesis-based pseudoscience which helps in no way whatsoever. Americans love that stuff. They love conspiracy theories. They vote to take out same-sex marriage from law by making it unconstitutional. They're swimming backwards. Real change will happen in a country like Sweden, Finland, or France. Not in the land of Jerry Springer watchers, I'll tell you that!

[-] -1 points by Pequod (17) 2 years ago

Europe is dead, stone dead. It has no vitality, it is an aging pot of pensioners and welfare deadbeats. Europe has so little soul or energy, it refuses to have children. It produces nothing the world wants, all Europeans care about is fashion and tanning.

In a few short years, Europe will be majority Muslim, as Germans, Italians, French hate children. European movies are horrible, music save England is pathetic, in Europe people strive to be government employees, not entrepeneurs or visionaries.

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

European movies are horrible? There's the problem, you think like an American. You prefer Transformers 3 to a intelligent European movie. People who will save the world are not Nemo watchers.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

20,000 leagues under the sea? That was very much aimed at corporate/capitalistic abuse and ruination of the world.

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Like I said, Europe is where it's at. In this case, Jules Verne. Read the book, it's profound. Nemo is a washed down Americanized version. Lame in comparison.

[-] 0 points by Pequod (17) 2 years ago

Ok. Lets change direction a bit. How come all games are created by Asia and America? Computer games are now larger than cinema and Europe is virtually nowhere to be found. Gamers are usually young, free thinkers and dynamic, but since Europe hates children, one of the most creative outlets there is has only Asians and Americans.

Europe spends most its time trying to fugure different ways to use denim. Haha.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

PC games are obvious - in their creation they are clever - they engage the imagination of those who play - they therefore are popular and due to the realities of the world are also unfortunately a haven for the world weary. Worst thing to ever happen to those who have a hard time dealing with reality - not so bad of a short mental vacation for those who live in reality and try to make their lives and their neighbors lives and the world a better place.

Moderation in all things.

[-] 0 points by XenuLives (1645) from Charlotte, NC 2 years ago

Ubisoft?

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

You say, and I paraphrase - Europeans hate children so there is no market for the young free-thinking and dynamic gamers in Europe, they are all in America and Asia. Well, we have a different idea of what a free thinker is. I don't consider children as free thinkers.

[-] 0 points by Pequod (17) 2 years ago

Like I said, Europe hates children. A static, calcifying society of fossil like narcissists.

Why anyone wants to duplicate that hateful racist collection of losers is beyond me.

[-] 1 points by iomicrab (0) from Rennes, Bretagne 2 years ago

hello !

i'm european too, i'm french.

i also understand, read and write english, and i know greek is a strong logical root of our intellectual system.

the anglo-saxon way of thought is, i think, more rooted in latin (look at the five big universities moto).

now, we MUST talk each other :: a greek++ logical thinking AND/OR a latin++ numerical precision is what the world(s) need(s) now !!

because #words make #world(s), a single word is common to all real solutions :: #peace : #paix : #pax : #ειρήνη.

because we need a real solution we must address a real issue like #Fukushima before trying to decyfer who is mr. $€£¥...

thankYouMerci !

[-] 1 points by grapes (3552) 2 years ago

What do you see as the real issue there at #Fukushima? Is it regarding the growing volume of the nuclear wastes? Japan as a society was hierarchical so it took Japan a long while to summon international help after the earthquake and tsunami. Japan got a nuclear-waste decommissioning ship (for decommissioning nuclear submarines) from the Russians that was to treat the radioactive water. Perhaps Japan never used it because it was cheaper to dump the water into the ocean. Maybe Japan's corporate sector is thinking about using the same "fix" again.

[-] 0 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

Arrogant people are everywhere, especially amongst so called intellectuals.

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Arrogance is not too bothersome, but logical fallacies are. They lead to pseudosciences. Do you know the logical fallacy of ad hominem? Instead of attacking the premise, you attack the proposer by saying something like he's arrogant. In any case, you illustrate my point. Americans are all about logical fallacies these days.

[-] 1 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 2 years ago

You start ad hominem, saying that "The problem is that Americans are big fans of pseudosciences be it religious superstition, conspiracy theories, or simply junk science. Boldly stated, Americans are not thinkers."

Such arrogance leads nowhere. I come from Europe too, and indeed I think it is a better place to live in than the US, but the Americans must decide for themselves. I am going right at it as I do not intend to waste too much time on your arrogance:

Religions, supernatural phenomena, unusual coincidences and scientific findings all indicate that we live in a non-material virtual reality:

http://www.naturalmoney.org/coincidents.html

The Duck Test is sometimes used to counter arguments that something is not what it appears to be, but the Duck Test also can be used to show that nothing is what it appears to be. According to the Duck Test:

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

If it looks like a virtual reality, and behaves like a virtual reality, then it probably is a virtual reality. Many scientists tend to ignore phenomena that cannot be explained. This is partially because scientific knowledge can only be achieved using a scientific method, which often fails to proof the existence of supernatural phenomena. Another handicap of scientists is that most of them hold a materialist world view and look for material explanations. Consequently many scientists tend to search for psychological explanations for supernatural experiences.

The existence of God can be proven beyond reasonable doubt as it is unlikely that by pure chance a religion of a small and often dispersed people survives for more than 1,500 years and then becomes the basis for three major world religions, while it has been foretold to Abraham that all the peoples will be blessed in him (Gen. 18:17-18). No other deity made such a promise, and no other deity presented himself or herself, while in the past thousands of gods and goddesses have been worshipped. Technology like the Holodeck appears to feasible less a century from now. It is therefore likely Holodeck technology has been invented long ago and that this world is a holographic one.

When confronted with this argument many atheists are not able to see their deficient interpretation of the laws of probability. There is an argument for atheism because our existence can reasonably be explained as a result of chance. Many religious people ignore scientific evidence when it contradicts their religious views. To counter the evidence for the evolution theory the theory of intelligent design was introduced. This theory is nonsense by any reasonable standard. Even The Bible contradicts it by explaining that we are created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27). This implies that we are copies and not designs.

[-] 0 points by field (2) 2 years ago

"Americans are not thinkers"? try reading the U.S constitution.

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Learn to read. "are not", not "were not". On top of that, I clearly state in my OP that America is no longer what it once was.

[-] -3 points by field (2) 2 years ago

the usa is hobbled by the current administraion , epa. you must have missed reading about Steve Jobs or zuckerberg or gates.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

then the EPA needs to be transparent in their actions

[-] -2 points by field (2) 2 years ago

the epa is quite transparent. their goal is to gut the US energy ( oil, coal, natural gas)industry.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

http://www.epa.gov/

it does look useful

[-] -2 points by field (2) 2 years ago

useful to who? the so called "green energy" companies that are bankrolled with taxpayer money?

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Useful to everyone who enjoys breathing clean air and drinking clean water. Useful to protecting the planet for future generations. Useful to everyone except the CEOs of oil and coal companies.

Computers and the internet were initially developed and paid for by the government with taxpayer money, too. Are they useless? What about the EKG machine and hundreds of other medical devices and drugs? What about the interstate highway system and rural electrification? What about the National Weather Service? The list goes on and on and on.

The government has always invested taxpayer money in infrastructure, energy, medical innovations, etc. So far, for every 1 taxpayer dollar it has spent, the return to the economy as a whole has been anywhere from 3 dollars to 10 dollars. That's a hell of a return on investment, and is unmatched by the private sector as a whole. The government has not only a right, but an obligation to invest in what is clearly needed R&D and industrial development in new forms of energy that are sustainable from ecological, economical, public health, and national security standpoints. That will benefit everyone.

[-] -2 points by field (2) 2 years ago

growth in the gdp comes from private industry. you suffer from bigger is better govt syndrome.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Growth in GDP comes from growth in the economy and that in turn comes from consumer demand, regardless of the source of investment. And with infrastructure development, growth happens more quickly and easily.

You suffer from Labertardianism, a particular dwarfism of the brain.

[-] -1 points by field (2) 2 years ago

by "investment" you mean govt.spending.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

I mean either government OR private spending. The source of spending doesn't effect the economy. The amount of spending does, regardless of the source.

[-] 0 points by field (2) 2 years ago

the source of spending DOES effect the economy. govt spenda taxppayer dollars. private industry does not. if the govt spends more than it takes in there are problems which effect the citizens , higher taxes. if a private company mishandles their funds , they do not raise your taxes.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Reply to your post below:

You're joking, right? If the job is coming from the government, it is still a job. The spending it permits the worker to do still spurs the economy. The fact that the salary is being paid for by the government is economically neutral. I might raise the debt, but has no immediate effect on the economy except the effect of a job.

As people get more money because they have jobs, demand grows. Inventory is lowered. Private industry hires more people. People leave the government created temp jobs and get better paying ones from the private sector. The tax base expands. Whatever debt was incurred by the temporary government job creation is paid for by the broader tax base resulting from full employment. That's how the cycle works.

What's more, government spends in areas the private sector won't. The private sector did not build the interstate highway system. THere was no direct return on such an investment, no way to make a profit. But that system created a faster and cheaper transportation system for products to be shipped throughout the country. It brought the prices for consumer goods down as a result, increased profits fro manufacturers, and spurred the economy immeasurably. So while it looks like incurring debt on the books, the project created a tremendous net gain in GDP as well as tax revenue. In that case, it does matter where the money comes from: private businesses can't make those investments. They invest for themselves alone , not for ALL businesses to do better.

When private industry - say the banks - mishandles its funds, it crashes the whole f*cking economy, remember?

[-] -1 points by field (2) 2 years ago

growing the govt is NOT growing the economy. the govt jobs are paid for by the taxpayer. over 4000 IRS workers have been hired to implement obama care. "jobs " paid for by the taxpayers. private industry growth creates a robust economy . if bussiness do well they create more jobs that are not paid for on the backs of the taxpayers.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Reply to your post below:

Again, you have it wrong. What you are describing is the deep recession I mentioned, not the depression. Recessions are defined as contraction of GDP for two quarters or more. Depressions are defined as recession greater than 3 years in length. GDP, not employment, is the measure of both of those economic conditions.

In 1939-40, the GDP of the USA was back up to the level of 1229 before the crash. The depression was over. GDP had been expanding. The ONE time it shrank again, was when government CUT BACK on spending and job creation, (1937-38) the very thing you advocate now.

Ys, WWII did help put America over the final hump, but that was government spending, too, now wasn't it? If nothing else, it also demonstrates how temporary government jobs (in this case the military) Helps in times of economic distress. It bolsters my case (the standard Keynesian Macroeconomic theory) and undermines yours.

[-] -1 points by field (2) 2 years ago

yes the govt spent money on WWII. planes , tanks and ships dont build themselves. now bathhouse barry is asking for more stimulus money, 500 bil. to help himelf get re--elected.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Reply yo your fact-challenged myths below. THe Great Drepression was essentially over by 1937, before the war started. That year, the government decided to cut programs for the sake of "fiscal responsibility" and plunged the country into another deep recession in 1938. By 1939, that recession, too was over, and GDP had grown back to the level it was prior to 1929.

Facts matter.

There are plenty of sources for the numbers about government jobs Obama has eliminated. Here are just a few:

http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/07/08/263588/the-conservative-recovery-continues-2/

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/06/under-obama-a-record-decline-in-government-jobs/

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/business/2012/05/what-employment-rates-might-look-if-government-hadnt-cut-jobs/52189/

http://www.ironmountaindailynews.com/page/blogs.detail/display/688/Fewer-public-jobs-since-Obama-took-office.html

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/03/09/441327/public-sector-2011-gop-candidates/

As I said, facts matter.

[-] 0 points by field (2) 2 years ago

in 1938 the gdp fell over 4% , the unemployment rate was at 19%. in 1939 it was 17.2 % What saved the USA was WWII.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

It is really clear you don't know basic economics. Nor do you know the basic facts about the numbers of government workers the Obama administration has laid off. Since Obama took office, he has laid off over 500,000 federal workers. That's half a million fewer federal government workers than during the Bush Administration.

The WPA created temporary government jobs by the millions. It got the economy going again and helped end the Great Depression.

Of COURSE private sector jobs are what sustain the economy IN THE LONG RUN. But government-created jobs kick start consumer demand and shrink inventories enough that the private sector starts producing again and hiring workers. Where do those workers come from? Those that are not making enough in TEMPORARY government jobs.

No one is saying jobs created by the government during a depression are supposed to be permanent; they are supposed to act as a spark for spending so private businesses have demand to fill and begin the cycle of hiring new workers or rehiring laid off ones. As full employment is approached, the tax BASE gets larger and the revenue generated from that increased tax base pays down the debt incurred during government funded transitional jobs. I have explained this twice already, not including now, and you simply refuse, through nothing other than obstinacy, to let that in.

[-] -1 points by field (2) 2 years ago

the wpa did NOT help end the depression, WWII did. govt jobs do nothing but grow govt , all at the taxpayers expense.when will you ever learn that? where did you get your stat about 500,000?

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

everyone in a utilitarian sense

the material looks well organized where people can find material they are interested in

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 2 years ago

America got hobbled by WallStreet.

Money for nothing and their perks for free.

[-] -1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

EuroBoy

No Profile Information Private Messages

Information

Joined May 11, 2012

[-] 3 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Troll alert? Surprising how Euroboy, a new poster already knows all about Occupy's posts. Beware all new posters, at least half of them are the same person.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Speaking of which.

Here is an object lesson:

[-] 0 points by sannhet (0) 2 minutes ago

Your irritatingly incessant use of the word "troll" is almost as revealing as it is tiresome, Demopublican plant:

ForumSpeak: The True Meanings of "Spam", "Troll" and "Karma":

spam : Any forum posting that (a) conflicts with either the forum moderators' agenda or groupthink consensus; or (b) any other forum member disagrees with, doesn't like, fears or otherwise does not wish to see posted.

troll : Any forum member who posts "spam" as defined above.

karma : A numerical measure of forum groupthink contribution, conformity and compliance that says nothing about the virtues of the poster or the veracity of their postings. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle reply permalink


They also love to try to use a forum site rule to their advantage rather than leave the fact of the matter up to the forum moderators.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Sounds like euroboy or whoever he is this minute. It's wasting our time to engage him. His replies are mainly ad hominem.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Easier to do that then to actually come up with original thought. I like to ditto it back at them from time to time and then watch em froth at the mouth as to how that is not a valid argument.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

He replied both as saanhet and euroboy. He even upvotes all of his replies. The more he is exposed, the angrier he becomes.

The proper way to handle him is to have a stock response informing other posters of what he's up to and to not engage him.

[-] 0 points by April (3196) 2 years ago

Actually I twinkled all those replies. : )

[-] 0 points by adevar (1) 2 years ago

And the more false conclusions you draw, the dumber you look...

"saanhet" and "euroboy" are not only not the same people, but they have never met. If you think otherwise, Grasshopper...

Put Up, or Shut Up.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Oh - but I like to slap and or juggle trolls it can be so fun to watch as they pop their little brains. Besides while they are getting all worked up thinking that they are distracting you from getting something accomplished - you get to carry on on other threads and posts while they bruise their brain trying to come up with more spewage. This also cuts down on their abusive time spent on other contributors while they try to pick on me.

[Removed]

[-] -3 points by sannhet (-4) 2 years ago

You tell'em, Cartman,

Respect My Authoritayyy!!!

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Ad hominem in what way? Show evidence for your claims.

And, you don't have to engage me. I have had interesting discussions on this page with some posters who have posted interesting ideas and arguments. All you can post is logical fallacies and ad hominem attacks. Lame. Are you trying to act as the self imposed guardian of this forum. What do you guard against. Ideas? Is that what scares you, that I have posted ideas and criticism of certain things dear to your heart?

[-] 0 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

Rebels are for Occupy and Truth. Get used to it.

"Ad hominem in what way? Show evidence for your claims." You accuse people of associations with all sorts of strange notions, like reptilians, and Zietgeist. You call people names like "conspiracy theorist" when you cannot respond and demolish their arguments or questions. Truth is the official 9/11 theory is the most absurd conspiracy theory of all. Even Truther baiter Noam Chomsky has inched towards truth by reminding himself after eleven years that there is no evidence against Bin Laden and that the Taliban twice offered to turn Bin Laden over but their offers were rejected by the US of A.

Oh check out prominent Occupy supporter Immortal Technique.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=ggzSzl2oDHI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=3u3JSEqNtlg

Immortal Technique: A Truther and someone to whom OWS looks for support.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=immortal+technique+may+day&oq=immortal+technique+may+day&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=youtube-reduced.12...81901.91305.0.96995.26.13.0.13.13.0.240.1190.11j0j2.13.0...0.0.MKxejWATTt0

[-] -2 points by sannhet (-4) 2 years ago

As are most of yours.

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Thanks for re-posting those definitions. They are wise and should be posted as often as possible. They help the scientific method by being clear and precise definitions.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Here is a repeat that you are sure to appreciate then Eurotroll - SHIT HEAD.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

aus·ter·i·ty/ôˈsteritē/ Noun:

Sternness or severity of manner or attitude.
Extreme plainness and simplicity of style or appearance.

what does this have to do with pulling the money supply on the government ?

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by sannhet (-4) 2 years ago

"They also love to try to use a forum site rule to their advantage rather than leave the fact of the matter up to the forum moderators."

OH MY GOD, DKATODAY!

Are you saying that OWS and this forum have been invaded by people who question authority and cannot be defeated because they refuse to play by rigged rules?

LORD HELP US! OH LORD, HELP US!

(LMFAO^2)

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Shit Head. I guess we will be unfortunately seeing you in a new username as this one of your looks like it will get booted fairly quickly. Please do us all a favor and just add to your old - banned label - so we can pick-up where we left off when your ass went sailing through the door.

[-] -2 points by sannhet (-4) 2 years ago

RESPECT MY AUTHORITAYYY!!!

I bet you were a hall monitor in grade school, weren't you DKAtoday?

C'mon now... Are you from Coon Rapids, or South Park?

Is your real name Cartman?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Still here? Oh - well - the " things " one must put up with when confronting evil. Could always be worse I guess - I mean you might have come armed with a brain.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Truth. Not every new person is a troll but when they come in and just start pissing on every thing they are hard to mistake.

[-] -2 points by sannhet (-4) 2 years ago

Your irritatingly incessant use of the word "troll" is almost as revealing as it is tiresome, Demopublican plant:

ForumSpeak: The True Meanings of "Spam", "Troll" and "Karma":

spam : Any forum posting that (a) conflicts with either the forum moderators' agenda or groupthink consensus; or (b) any other forum member disagrees with, doesn't like, fears or otherwise does not wish to see posted.

troll : Any forum member who posts "spam" as defined above.

karma : A numerical measure of forum groupthink contribution, conformity and compliance that says nothing about the virtues of the poster or the veracity of their postings.

[-] -3 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

And this bothers because? Fight the arguments, not the proposer. Don't dabble in logical fallacies, learn about the scientific method.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

We're not fighting the arguments, but the motive behind them. What is your motive for being here?

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

That's a logical fallacy - appeal to motive

It matters not who I am and why I post. Only the arguments matter. And, that is why I am here. The point is that a new better word cannot be created upon the shoulders of logical fallacies and junk science. I am here to guide OWS into a more scientific vein. So, next time you read a post read the arguments, and, if you do not agree, fight those arguments with counter arguments of worth. Stay away from logical fallacies like appeal to motive.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

An appeal to motive only applies in response to an argument.

I welcome honest debate, but not with someone who uses deceit (multiple login names) to enter in to it.

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

I only use one name in this debate. I have posted arguments, you have replied with logical fallacies. My arguments are that the contributors on this site use logical fallacies and junk science 95% of the time and you have shown this to be the case.

[Removed]

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

You prefer to attack my user's creation date than to post a strong intelligent rebuttal to my claims. I wonder why you prefer the use of ad hominem, of logical fallacy, over that of proper argumentation? Could it be that you are an American lover of pseudosciences like I mentioned above?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

You so far fit in a cookie cutter pattern - troll. So why bother? Prove you are not a divisive spewer of shit. You might get some respect.

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Another ad hominem? Is that all you do, call people names instead of counter arguing properly? How am I being divisive? Unlike you, what I say is based on fact. I can support my claims with evidence. Look at the forum's homepage. Most of the threads are conspiracy theory or other types of pseudoscience mumbo jumbo. I'm not making this up. This website is a hotbed for junk science. They are all here and in great numbers, the Venus Project, Truthers, Zeitgeist, New Word Order followers, etc...

Your two answers in this posting are logical fallacies. They say a lot and help me prove my point. Even silence is better than logical fallacies.

My teacher used to say - "When you can't provide a proper argument, when you can't provide evidence with the scientific method, you better just keep quiet and play marbles."

FYI - Calling others trolls just because they don't agree with you is the only divisive tactic on this page.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Present something positive and I may reconsider my position - not likely as so far you fit the pattern of all of your other bought and paid for identities. The Kochs and their kind - besides being blind and greedy also spend their money poorly when they spend it that is - I mean look at the wasted money they pay idiots like you.

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Your position is to serve as an example that I am right. Your are incapable of logical argumentation, so you use ad hominem and other logical fallacies ad nauseam. You are the pseudo-scientific type I am referring to.

You want positivism. Well, I offer truth. Truth sometimes hurts. It's not always wrapped up in roses and flowery essences. This ain't no Care-Bear Special so if you want good feelings you should probably ask your girlfriend for a hug.

You believe the conspiracy theory that some right wingers are paid to post here. Do you have proof? Why would they, there's only a handful of regular posters and you guys do a great job at making the site look bad all by yourselves. Look at the board, it's full of nonsensical conspiracy theories and other junk science just like I said. Do a search for posts by people such as Reneye or arturo. Have they been banned for their "contributions". No, they have not. Perhaps they are the paid right wingers you speak of?

It's hard to digest, but if you want to be taken seriously you need to start being a bit more scientific. That's not easy as it will demand some discipline on your part. You should stop the name calling and other ad hominem and start using proper argumentation.

OWS is important, but it won't work like this. I believe a better world is possible, a world in which human rights are cherished and which is much more social than now. Nobody should be hungry, the planet needs to be taken care of, etc... But, by golly, you Americans can't even pass same-sex marriage in your country. Sorry, but that's bad. Now, go hug your girlfriend for some good positive feelings.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

The movement for rights for gay people was launched in this country in 1969. Many progressive struggles, like women's equality, rights for the disabled not to mention against white racism were born here. Tharshy how is your plan to send people to Vancouver going?

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Yes, America used to be great for human rights back in the day. Amazing stuff for women rights and African-Americans. Nobody can deny that. But, like you said, the movement for gay rights was launched way back in 1969 and you still haven't made much headway in terms of same-sex marriage. It actually looks like you are moving backwards at times. In this century, America is no longer the place to look at for human rights. That was 50 years ago. Time to get over it and look at other countries for examples.

Please, Americans, stay in America. Don't come to Vancouver! There's already enough of you Jerry Springer fans here!

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

You've got a point Thrash, things started for the toilet bi time with the massive coup, you know, the assassinations of JFK, Malcolm X, ML

You have a point. Things really headed for the toilet with the coup. You know the assassinations of JFK, Malcolm, MLK, the Tonkin Gulf fraud, the assassination of RFK and the character assassination of Ted Kennedy. The PTB still felt stymied by the Vietnam Syndrome. A bunch of smart guys over at PNAC suggested a new Pearl Harbor and whaddaya know! Things went from bad to worse, two big wars, Patriot Act, multiple little wars some of which are actually secrets. You know the rest....

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Your just another verb-acious troll. Only this time instead of just trying to be generally divisive you are trying to target any out of the USA support of the movements against greed corruption and crime. How ambitious of you trolls to now go on an international attack.

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Internatinal attack?! Please, don't start another lame conspiracy theory. There are already enough on here.

Be my guess if you want to stay here. Grass roots movements are important in US, I'm only saying the real intellectuals should learn from Europeans and Canadians. Afterwards, they can return to the junk science infested America.

You're against same-sex marriage I suppose?

[-] 2 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

you make no sense.. you rail against religion.. then you pine for a 'marriage' a religious construct. make up your mind an intellectual would grasp the fact that 'marriage' is nothing more than a paper contract. i think DKA is right about you

[-] 0 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

Marriage is more than a paper contract, it gives you many rights in society. And marriage is not about religion, you don't have to get married in church. Your argument is flawed.

I guess you must be a conservative who doesn't care about gay rights. Well, news to you, a new better world would include equal rights for gays.

You should be able to make up your own mind about me. Read my arguments and my logic and decide for yourself. You don't need a high five from other users to vindicate your position. It shouldn't matter to you what DKA thinks of me, just like it doesn't matter to me what DKA thinks of you. I read your arguments, nothing more.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

marriage is a construct of religion. you are obviously not intellectual enough to figure that out. you can create your own contract that equals the legal rights of a 'marriage' at will. marriage gives you no extra legal rights except to the other parties money, assets which you can do with a contract just the same. with out biologically being a parent.. not to thier kids , unless , again,, a paper contract of some sort. it certainly will not change your gayness if that is what you are being discriminated against being marred and gay will make very little difference. you will pay more taxes though. its not an issue relevant enough to matter in the face of the actual problems happening all around us. certainly not anything the federal government should need to address.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Marriage is historically a construct of property law, not religion. And legal marriage licenses are state backed enforceable contracts that bestow certain rights and obligations to the contracted parties that aren't covered otherwise. That state recognized contract gives one all sorts of rights that go beyond assets one can claim otherwise, and also obligates to state to abide by certain obligations as well.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

i dont think the hebrews had any land yet when marriage was goin on, and women had no rights to property before well i dont even know when it was maybe not til after sufferage!

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

If you're going to bring up the time of the Old Testament, the bible has far more phrases like "And he lie down with her and knew her" then "and they got married". Some women did indeed have property rights (it was rare, but they did.) The Hebrews did indeed have land, (they grew wheat crops, had orchards, vineyards, etc) and they also had flocks of livestock, especially goats and sheep. They also owned all sorts of things, such as gold and silk. While the Women might not inherit any of it, their SONS or daughters would. (And the Women had Dowaries.) In the (rare) case of formal marriage, generally reserved for princes and Kings, marriage meant inheritance was assured to the heirs of the people who owned flocks and land and gold, etc. It was about succession and inheritance of property and/or title.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

i think you make my point.. during all those times you mention, the church was in control of society. hence marriage. im just pointing out. marriage is basically meaningless except for gaining rights over the property of another, doesnt seem like anything worth fighting about when you can do the same thing with a contract. or power of attorney.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

No, you miss two points points. First:There was no "church" in Judaism. That is a later invention. Most people did NOT get married, but were considered common law, even the patriarchs and matriarchs of the religion.

Second, the modern state backed contract of marriage is NOT matched by a long shot with regular contracts. Regular contracts do not permit one non-spouse to get on another's insurance plan. It does NOT allow a non-spouse to collect social security death benefits from a deceased non spouse. It does NOT trump blood relatives wishes in terms of who get buried next to whom, nor do regular contracts guarantee the rights afforded by next of kin in making medical decisions (not even power of attorney) in case of medical emergency. Adopting a child is another issue that legally single people with contracts alone can't enjoy. There are SO MANY rights not guaranteed by normal contracts I can hardly list them all.

What's more, hiring a lawyer to get even the minimal (by comparison) rights costs a good deal of money, money straight people don't have to spend. That alone is discrimination. But the main issue is one of rights that only marriage affords.

I used to work side by side with the man who initiated the first lawsuit in Hawaii demanding the right for Gays to marry. His stories were heartbreaking. He was beaten so badly by a gang of yahoos it put him in the hospital for 6 months, and the entire time there he endured daily death threats. He eventually had to flee the sate, a pauper. He initiated the lawsuit after his non-legal husband of 15 years suddenly dropped dead of a heart attack. The deceased's estranged family came to Hawaii and took his body back to the mainland, despite a will, despite a paid-for grave for the couple. All the property in his lovers name was confiscated by the family, despite the fact that they bought their home together, along with almost everything in it. My friend was not even allowed to attend the funeral of the person he shared his life with. No contract would have allowed him to attend over the family's objection.

Finally, no contract is a substitute for the emotion that getting married creates for some people. That feeling of "we are married" is as real to gay people as it is to straight ones. What contract can provide that feeling, a feeling that is in no way insignificant? Most straight people want to get married fro that feeling alone, rights or no rights. Why should anyone be denied that?

[-] 0 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

Do you think that a license from the state should be required for an intimate decision like marriage? What about other personal choices? Dating? Skiing? Having a child?

Why give Government so much power over our lives?

[-] 4 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Although I agree with the sentiment, it is not one's own SS payments that are cut. It is the death benefits of the spouse. If there is no spouse there are no benefits.

What North Carolina did last week was not the government's doing, it was the people's. Only the Supreme Court can now overturn the will of the majority. The only hope for equal rights rests in government. And it likely won't, given the conservative makeup of that court. Prop 8 in California last year sought to do the same thing. The PEOPLE, not the government, decided to withhold the rights of legal marriage from a select group, and the government via the courts overturned the results of the referendum.

So you can't blame government for this discrimination. Blame bible-thumping conservatives.

[-] 1 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

The death benefit belongs to my spouse; not the only to the spouse that the Gov approves.

[-] -1 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

In NC an tiny % of the people used the Gov to impose their will on others. We are all to blame for this crime because we lazily yield this power to the Gov.

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Reply to post below:

"We should not allow the state any say in decisions like marriage. They should have no authority in deciding who is allowed and not allowed to marry."

Completely agreed. All consenting adults, whatever gender, should have the same rights and obligations. (Despite what the people of North Carolina decided last week.)

"The state effectively steals from people that refuse to recognize their authority over our lives (taxes, SS, etc.)."

Completely full of shit.

[-] -1 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

The state says to us we don't like the person you want to marry so we punish you by taking the the SS that you earned and tax you at a higher rate. You must marry the person that we approve.

Outrageous in the land of the free. What are we thinking?!

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Reply to your post below.

Man you really are about as far gone as they come.

This was a REFERENDUM. The PEOPLE voted, not some Big Bad Gub'mint. If only 37% of the people voted, 63% of the people abstained, effectively voting for the majority. Nobody kept them home. No one forced them to vote or not vote.

The people, ALL of the electorate, voting AND abstaining (same thing) amended the Constitution of their state. BY LAW, the government has no power to do anything about it. They MUST follow the will of THE PEOPLE, even if those people are bigoted assholes. Those bigoted asshole exercised their power of democracy. In fact, it was direct democracy they wielded against their Gay and Lesbian brothers and sisters.

And unless you are suggesting that the government simply do whatever the fuck it pleases, it must abide by the law. Or do you only demand the government follow the law when it is one that suits you? This is still a nation of law. Despite occasion shameful acts like the PEOPLE of North Carolina just committed, I am still glad for that. The only alternative is the Wild West.

The government is not the villain in this case. The people so bigoted that they would deny rights to gay people, and those too fucking lazy to do anything but abstain are at fault here, 100%. It is NOT the government gay people are being denied their rights by. It is the people of North carolina who have stripped them of those rights.

[-] 1 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

Of the 10 million people in NC only 6 million are eligible to vote. 40 % have no say in losing their rights at all. A human right, of which marriage is one, may not be taken by any vote of the majority, let alone 12 % of the population.

The Gov that will execute this law is the same Gov that enforced slavery, again at the will of a tiny minority. "Just following orders" is no excuse for executing an unjust law, that is the concentration camp guard defense.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Moral of story don't opt out or you have no right to bitch when shit happens that you don't like.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

Wow. What a complete Non sequitur.

Marriage is a voluntary contract. The state ensures that both parties are held accountable to that contract. That contract is with the state as well, conferring on the couple special tax status, inheritance rights, rights to social security benefits and so on.

You don't wants those benefits, don't enter into the voluntary contract.

[-] -1 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

We should not allow the state any say in decisions like marriage. They should have no authority in deciding who is allowed and not allowed to marry. The state effectively steals from people that refuse to recognize their authority over our lives (taxes, SS, etc.).

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

reply to your post below.

In fact, the NC voter turnout was among the heaviest in their history. And those who abstain cast a vote for the majority. The Government is bound to comply with this referendum. It must do the will of the people. You cannot lay the blame on the government. The blame lies with the electorate, the people. They are not YIELDING power to the government, they are COMMANDING the government to act.

[-] -1 points by 1sealyon (434) 2 years ago

Only 37% of eligible NC voters turned out for the election. The ballot passed by 20 %.

That means that 12 % ( a tiny fraction) of the people in NC used the Gov to impose their will on the rest of the state. If we did not allow the Gov to regulate our lives this tiny fraction of the population would have no power to steal our rights.

Why do you glibly give up your rights to the Gov? Do you want to require Gov permission for other rights like bearing children, swimming, skating, walking, running, dating, eating, the list is endless?

Gov is the problem. The Gov facilitates the tyranny of the minority.

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

It does not matter if marriage came from religion thousands of years ago, it is now part of our societies and is no longer specifically tied to religions in that you can get married by the state (civil wedding) and a marriage gives you rights that are recognized by the state.

Even if we were to say that it is specifically tied to marriage (it is not), there is no reason why a religion should not be allowed to marry same-sex couples if they wished to. America is not a theocracy and does not favor a particular religion or denomination. In Canada for example, there are denominations of the Christian church which marry same-sex couples.

As for rights that come with marriage, there are many. Visa applications for example. Visitation rights in hospitals. For example, I know a gay person who was not permitted to visit his 20 year partner on his deathbed because the sister of that partner refused. She was a Christian and did not accept their homosexuality. Had they been married, he would have been the one deciding who was allowed in the room. Heritage is another factor. There are many many other rights. You should inform yourself.

You might think this is not an important issue for OWS, but I beg to differ. It is a crucial issue. The better world that OWS wants to create must be founded upon equal rights. It cannot be founded upon the old fairy tales of religious dogma.

The federal government must get involved in this crucial debate because being married give you rights in federal and state laws. If everyone is to be equal in US, then this is crucial. US should lead the way in this like it did for women rights. It should not be trailing far behind many other nations like it is now.

For your information, I am not gay.

[-] 1 points by gestopomillyy (1695) 2 years ago

i dont disagree with gay marriage.. i think it does wonders for keeping the crazy religious freaks from taking over, i just dont think it rates as being an issue in face of the destruction of the economy, the war machine, and corruption in politics and corporations.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 2 years ago

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

Martin Luther King, Jr.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

so areligious people can get married

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23978) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

No I am not against Same sex marriage. It is not my concern how other people express their love.

As long as it is not hurtful - say like a terrorist attack ( suicide bomber ) but then again - that is not love - that is hate.

It is not a conspiracy theory that the greedy corrupt criminals are real ( they are ) - it is also not a theory that they feel they are under attack ( they are ) it is also not a theory that they spend money on misinformation and outright lies ( they do ) look at Fossil fuel ads.

You trolls just like to trow out that conspiracy stuff because you think it makes all arguments look silly ( so sorry it does not ). Facts are the conspiracy/collusion in causing the meltdown is real.

[-] -1 points by EuroBoy (4) 2 years ago

It is not a conspiracy theory that the greedy corrupt criminals are real ( they are ) - it is also not a theory that they feel they are under attack ( they are ) it is also not a theory that they spend money on misinformation and outright lies ( they do ) look at Fossil fuel ads.

So, the logic goes, because greed corrupt criminals have been known to spend money on misinformation it automatically means that there are paid trolls here spewing garbage amongst the garbage already being spewed by the regular users and that I am one of those paid trolls. Sorry buddy, real and good logic doesn't work this way. This is a logical fallacy - false equivalence.

I'm sad OWS has been infiltrated and diminished by your lowly type. It seems the promising future we were hoping for is further than ever before. Where are the thinking anarchists when you need them? Graeber? Jart? Anyone but conspiracy theorists?