[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

COVID-19 - kurtster - Dec 5, 2021 - 9:38pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Manbird - Dec 5, 2021 - 8:56pm
 
What Did You Have For Breakfast? - islander - Dec 5, 2021 - 7:22pm
 
Republican Party - BlueHeronDruid - Dec 5, 2021 - 6:33pm
 
Buddy's Haven - KurtfromLaQuinta - Dec 5, 2021 - 6:10pm
 
Joe Biden - KurtfromLaQuinta - Dec 5, 2021 - 6:07pm
 
short track after short jingle - KurtfromLaQuinta - Dec 5, 2021 - 6:04pm
 
Music documentaries - Manbird - Dec 5, 2021 - 5:07pm
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - islander - Dec 5, 2021 - 4:40pm
 
Trump - R_P - Dec 5, 2021 - 11:06am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - islander - Dec 5, 2021 - 9:21am
 
Fix my dogma - Coaxial - Dec 5, 2021 - 8:28am
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Dec 5, 2021 - 8:20am
 
What is the meaning of this? - oldviolin - Dec 5, 2021 - 8:13am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - Red_Dragon - Dec 4, 2021 - 5:07pm
 
Things You Thought Today - haresfur - Dec 4, 2021 - 1:15pm
 
TV shows you watch - Ohmsen - Dec 4, 2021 - 1:10pm
 
Fox Spews - R_P - Dec 4, 2021 - 1:03pm
 
World Music - Ohmsen - Dec 4, 2021 - 11:41am
 
Breaking News - westslope - Dec 4, 2021 - 11:24am
 
Mens Health - miamizsun - Dec 4, 2021 - 10:51am
 
RP Tapes! - miamizsun - Dec 4, 2021 - 10:36am
 
What did you have for dinner? - miamizsun - Dec 4, 2021 - 9:50am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - oldviolin - Dec 4, 2021 - 8:26am
 
Nice set Bill.... - miamizsun - Dec 4, 2021 - 6:44am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Dec 4, 2021 - 6:11am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Dec 3, 2021 - 8:11pm
 
The All-Things Beatles Forum - KurtfromLaQuinta - Dec 3, 2021 - 7:58pm
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - Manbird - Dec 3, 2021 - 3:59pm
 
Back to the 60's - R_P - Dec 3, 2021 - 2:33pm
 
Automotive Lust - R_P - Dec 3, 2021 - 1:20pm
 
• • • Things Magicians Exclaim • • •  - Manbird - Dec 3, 2021 - 12:30pm
 
Poetry Forum - Manbird - Dec 3, 2021 - 12:13pm
 
This Film is not yet Rated - Proclivities - Dec 3, 2021 - 12:02pm
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - Dec 3, 2021 - 10:55am
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - GeneP59 - Dec 3, 2021 - 9:32am
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - Dec 3, 2021 - 9:11am
 
Play the Blues - rhahl - Dec 3, 2021 - 6:41am
 
2020 Elections - Red_Dragon - Dec 3, 2021 - 5:53am
 
RightWingNutZ - Manbird - Dec 2, 2021 - 9:02pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - oldviolin - Dec 2, 2021 - 3:06pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - black321 - Dec 2, 2021 - 2:45pm
 
Race in America - R_P - Dec 2, 2021 - 11:19am
 
New Music - black321 - Dec 2, 2021 - 10:48am
 
The RANT Forum - Red_Dragon - Dec 2, 2021 - 6:05am
 
Things that are just WRONG - Manbird - Dec 1, 2021 - 6:13pm
 
This Wonderfully Weird World - Red_Dragon - Dec 1, 2021 - 4:01pm
 
Damn Dinosaurs! - R_P - Dec 1, 2021 - 9:42am
 
Happy Thanksgiving! - GeneP59 - Dec 1, 2021 - 8:46am
 
Bear! - Ohmsen - Dec 1, 2021 - 6:50am
 
Environment - Red_Dragon - Dec 1, 2021 - 6:27am
 
That's good advice - Proclivities - Dec 1, 2021 - 6:24am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Nov 30, 2021 - 9:20pm
 
Sunrise, Sunset - Coaxial - Nov 30, 2021 - 7:30pm
 
What Puts You In the Christmas Mood? - BlueHeronDruid - Nov 30, 2021 - 6:05pm
 
The Daily complaint forum, Please complain or be Happy - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 30, 2021 - 3:59pm
 
Acoustic Guitar - Ohmsen - Nov 30, 2021 - 9:45am
 
Jazz - Ohmsen - Nov 30, 2021 - 9:38am
 
Tech & Science - Red_Dragon - Nov 30, 2021 - 7:56am
 
Bad Poetry - oldviolin - Nov 30, 2021 - 7:47am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Nov 30, 2021 - 6:59am
 
Ways to convert list of liked songs into playlist for You... - Aoxomoxoa - Nov 30, 2021 - 3:13am
 
• • • Clownstock • • •  - Manbird - Nov 29, 2021 - 7:11pm
 
Things I want to learn from RadioParadise - Coaxial - Nov 29, 2021 - 6:07pm
 
Robots - Manbird - Nov 29, 2021 - 5:29pm
 
Arlo Guthrie's Alice's Restaurant Massacree - KurtfromLaQuinta - Nov 29, 2021 - 4:38pm
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 29, 2021 - 11:16am
 
Two questions. That's it. I promise. - Manbird - Nov 28, 2021 - 9:11pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Nov 28, 2021 - 5:41pm
 
Shuttle, ISS and other Real Space Ships - miamizsun - Nov 28, 2021 - 4:37pm
 
Outstanding Covers - oldviolin - Nov 28, 2021 - 7:38am
 
Graphic designers, ho's! - Proclivities - Nov 28, 2021 - 4:48am
 
Funny Videos - KurtfromLaQuinta - Nov 27, 2021 - 9:27pm
 
Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore - KurtfromLaQuinta - Nov 27, 2021 - 7:54pm
 
Mr. & Mrs Levigne's rejected baby name list... - ScottFromWyoming - Nov 27, 2021 - 7:49pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » The War On You Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 74, 75, 76  Next
Post to this Topic
Ohmsen

Ohmsen Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 19, 2021 - 4:57am

NATO now deploying cognitive warfare. If the report is too long for you, you will find a concise summary here.

Western governments in the NATO military alliance are developing tactics of “cognitive warfare,” using the supposed threats of China and Russia to justify waging a “battle for your brain” in the “human domain,” to “make everyone a weapon.” ...

In a chilling disclosure, the report said explicitly that “the objective of Cognitive Warfare is to harm societies and not only the military.”


Ohmsen

Ohmsen Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 12, 2021 - 9:41am

 black321 wrote:

Funny how this s#$t been going on throughout history, but only recently making headlines...and of course, everyone is lining up to pick a side (because they've been brainwashed?)



In spite of Gleichschaltung of internet (and all other) media, it must be the web, me thunketh.
black321

black321 Avatar

Location: An earth without maps
Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 12, 2021 - 9:18am

 Ohmsen wrote:


Funny how this s#$t been going on throughout history, but only recently making headlines...and of course, everyone is lining up to pick a side (because they've been brainwashed?)

Ohmsen

Ohmsen Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 12, 2021 - 8:52am


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 12, 2021 - 4:50am

haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 2, 2021 - 9:20pm

 sirdroseph wrote:
It is a shame this American hero is still not allowed in the US
{#Sad}
  

Yeah, I thought that Sweden should have given Snowdon refugee status, just to piss off Assange

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 2, 2021 - 4:53am

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Oct 2, 2021 - 4:49am

It is a shame this American hero is still not allowed in the US{#Sad}
 
 
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 3:43am

It will be even easier for them to do this now that the undesirables are being weeded out of our healthcare and military institutions replaced by the compliant who will just follow orders.  It is always for our own good, for public safety:{#Sad}
 
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Sep 28, 2021 - 3:24am

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 27, 2021 - 5:26am

sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 26, 2021 - 5:37am

Now that Ron Paul has been at least legitimized to the point to where at least some of his opinions matter, here is another one:
 

Vaccine Mandates and the 'Great Reset'

 
 
In the covid-19 crisis, politicians have systematically amplified fear and hysteria. This was no accident and is unsurprising, for the state builds its raison d'être on the argument that it protects the population from internal and external dangers. The state is built upon fear. The narrative is that without the help of the state, the citizen would be defenseless against hunger, poverty, accidents, war, terrorism, disease, natural disasters, and pandemics. It is, therefore, in the state's interest to instill fear of possible dangers, which it then pretends to resolve, expanding its power in the process. A relatively recent example is the restriction of civil liberties in the US in response to the threat of terrorism after the 9-11 attacks and the second Iraq war. Similarly, it was in the interest of governments to purposefully instill fear and portray covid-19 as a unique killer virus in order to expand state power to an extent unknown in peacetime at the expense of citizens' fundamental rights.
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 18, 2021 - 10:46pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

That hammering—the arguing over what we are entitled to from each other—is the central problem of moral philosophy, and implementing it ought to be the central problem of governance, so we may not be as far apart as you seem to think. Just pondering how any of this translates to abolishing government.
 
Morning (a cold grey day here for mid-summer  - got my hiking boots out of the cellar for a four-day jaunt in the alps.. can't wait).

Ok, I'm happy to cede the point that I overstated your position and that "pare back government" is not the same as "abolish government".

My point was more that we all (the universal collective we) tend to concentrate too much on the structure of government and overlook the cultural factors that make a government (of whatever form) "good" or not.

Our discussion was in the context of my line, "the government you deserve" (the collective plural) and you stating you got the government that "panicked mobs deem minimally acceptable".
My point is that, even if you were to pare government back to mere protection of its citizens rights, you would still have those panicked mobs defining those rights to mean something like "freedom from immigrants streaming across the southern border and the right not to get vaccinated and the right not to wear a mask in the middle of a deadly pandemic so I can spit in your face".

Consequently, we need to reach out to these mobs (your point at the outset) and hammer out what rights and duties we actually have and why they don't need to be so damn afraid about everything.

So yeah, I guess we are perhaps not too far removed from each other in our line of reasoning, at least at this point. 


 
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 18, 2021 - 1:30pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
uff... we are back to this again. You cannot keep returning to the "rights of the governed" as though they were etched in stone and there were unanimous agreement on what they were. Regardless of what you or I personally believe, the fact of the matter is that there is no consensus on what these rights are. Not even among a group of boringly homogenous racially profiled proud boys from some godforsaken citadel of inbred humanity... Not even they will agree on what their rights are. Ergo you can't credibly argue for limiting government to merely protecting the rights of the governed, for that tacitly implies only your understanding of rights. Conversely, if we open up the concept of "rights of the governed" to some more general consensus of what those rights might be, we end up pretty well with what we have now, a bit of a mess. But it works, sometimes.

Edit:
In other words, your reasoning is circular. You already posit a defined set of rights as though we all agree on them - which we don't - before stating you want to pare government back to merely protecting that particular set of rights you have set your mind on. Yet government is nothing but the hammering out of some sort of agreement on what kinds of rights we want to enforce, when and why. It is actually a very fluid thing and all the better for it.


That hammering—the arguing over what we are entitled to from each other—is the central problem of moral philosophy, and implementing it ought to be the central problem of governance, so we may not be as far apart as you seem to think.

Just pondering how any of this translates to abolishing government.
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 17, 2021 - 3:04pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

You can continue to argue this line but you aren't arguing with me. My position is not  for removing government and creating a power vacuum, I'm arguing for restraining government to a role limited to protecting the rights of the governed. As for your last point...no, that's not what I'm arguing. I don't know how to make it any plainer. That not only isn't my position, it isn't a question I find particularly interesting.

uff... we are back to this again. You cannot keep returning to the "rights of the governed" as though they were etched in stone and there were unanimous agreement on what they were. Regardless of what you or I personally believe, the fact of the matter is that there is no consensus on what these rights are. Not even among a group of boringly homogenous racially profiled proud boys from some godforsaken citadel of inbred humanity... Not even they will agree on what their rights are. Ergo you can't credibly argue for limiting government to merely protecting the rights of the governed, for that tacitly implies only your understanding of rights. Conversely, if we open up the concept of "rights of the governed" to some more general consensus of what those rights might be, we end up pretty well with what we have now, a bit of a mess. But it works, sometimes.

Edit:
In other words, your reasoning is circular. You already posit a defined set of rights as though we all agree on them - which we don't - before stating you want to pare government back to merely protecting that particular set of rights you have set your mind on. Yet government is nothing but the hammering out of some sort of agreement on what kinds of rights we want to enforce, when and why. It is actually a very fluid thing and all the better for it.
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 17, 2021 - 2:13pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
No, it is not a strawman argument at all. (unless you are merely referring to the "live on island thing" which is not material to the argument).

History has shown that almost invariably when you remove the established power base (in this case "The Government" of whatever form), it will be filled by opportunists moving into the power vacuum. Your only argument against this is to rely on having enlightened neighbours who realise we might all be better off if none of us do that. (This is the cultural factor I was referring to).
Pardon me if I am wrong, but I think history is on my side on this one. I wish it were different, I really do.

In effect you are blaming the institution of government for the cultural failings of a society and I am blaming the cultural failings of society for the institution of government.

You can continue to argue this line but you aren't arguing with me. My position is not  for removing government and creating a power vacuum, I'm arguing for restraining government to a role limited to protecting the rights of the governed.

As for your last point...no, that's not what I'm arguing. I don't know how to make it any plainer. That not only isn't my position, it isn't a question I find particularly interesting.
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 17, 2021 - 1:44pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

All-powerful totalitarian dictatorships will inevitably lead to widespread oppression to control the inevitable dissent, which will paralyze society with crippling strikes and passive resistence.

What's the alternative? Slaughtering the populace with nukes?

See how annoying that is? This is called a strawman argument, and I've seen you do better than this. If I ever argue for getting rid of government you are welcome to trot out this trope; in the mean time kindly respond to the position before you, not the one it would have been more convenient to argue with.


No, it is not a strawman argument at all. (unless you are merely referring to the "live on island thing" which is not material to the argument).

History has shown that almost invariably when you remove the established power base (in this case "The Government" of whatever form), it will be filled by opportunists moving into the power vacuum. Your only argument against this is to rely on having enlightened neighbours who realise we might all be better off if none of us do that. (This is the cultural factor I was referring to).
Pardon me if I am wrong, but I think history is on my side on this one. I wish it were different, I really do.

In effect you are blaming the institution of government for the cultural failings of a society and I am blaming the cultural failings of society for the institution of government.

Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 17, 2021 - 8:46am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
Those panicked mobs happen to be your neighbours that you are going to have to deal with some way or another. Get rid of government and you might find those same panicked mobs now less panicked, more emboldened and armed with pitchforks. What is the alternative? Living on an island?

All-powerful totalitarian dictatorships will inevitably lead to widespread oppression to control the inevitable dissent, which will paralyze society with crippling strikes and passive resistence.

What's the alternative? Slaughtering the populace with nukes?

See how annoying that is? This is called a strawman argument, and I've seen you do better than this. If I ever argue for getting rid of government you are welcome to trot out this trope; in the mean time kindly respond to the position before you, not the one it would have been more convenient to argue with.

Again, this is not a question of structure but a question of culture. A government composed of people who understand they are there to serve the public (of which they are a partI and not to enrich their family or use their position to their own ends, etc.) doesn't need limiting. But granted, this is a more utopian vision.

When you achieve this utopian vision limiting the scope and power of government won't be an obstacle. It is an obstacle to oppression; having a roof on your house isn't a problem when it isn't raining but damned useful when it is.

The checks and balances are there for a reason. Nevertheless, IMO fostering an inclusive, socially responsible and open society will be more cost effective than merely limiting the scope of government powers. But I understand, this will be where we always differ.

We don't differ on this, I just don't want to enact cultural change via coercive means. I also think an inclusive, socially responsible and open society happens to thrive better when it has maximum freedom to operate.
NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 16, 2021 - 11:36pm

 Lazy8 wrote:

I do not get the government I deserve, I get the government that a long list of historical accidents and nefarious skullduggery have left available to choose from. I get the government that panicked mobs deem minimally acceptable. I get the government that panders to the basest instincts most effectively.
 
understood, though I was using the collective "you", not just you specifically. Those panicked mobs happen to be your neighbours that you are going to have to deal with some way or another. Get rid of government and you might find those same panicked mobs now less panicked, more emboldened and armed with pitchforks. What is the alternative? Living on an island?

Putin is a handy scapegoat but his reach is tiny compared to the damage we do ourselves.
 
Agreed, but he is a handy example of the damage that someone with more than a few resources at his disposal and a clear target can do to public opinion. I'd like to be a fly on the wall when he tries to explain the resilience of western democracies. 

 Lazy8 wrote:
Limiting the power and scope that governments have does not make them trustworthy, it just limits the damage they can do.
 
Again, this is not a question of structure but a question of culture. A government composed of people who understand they are there to serve the public (of which they are a partI and not to enrich their family or use their position to their own ends, etc.) doesn't need limiting. But granted, this is a more utopian vision. The checks and balances are there for a reason. Nevertheless, IMO fostering an inclusive, socially responsible and open society will be more cost effective than merely limiting the scope of government powers. But I understand, this will be where we always differ.

(I do note that you want to foster that same sense of social responsibility and were we to have it, we wouldn't need the heavy hand of government. I think we pursue roughly the same ends, just different means).
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 16, 2021 - 3:09pm

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
And it has become abundantly clear over the past decade that there are various forces out there actively playing public opinion to further their own agenda (nothing new in itself, but the scale and form has changed). There are those sowing distrust in government. Those inciting racist tension. Those fostering animosity towards refugees and immigrants. None of this is new nor is it a left-wing / right-wing thing. Putin has aimed considerable resources at misinformation for what seem to be purely geopolitical reasons. What's amazing is how effective he's been. But there are many others. Powerful lobbies and global industries who would like to break down local regulations to tap into new markets, for example. The list goes on. Getting any kind of clarity amidst all these smoke screens is getting harder by the day.

But removing government and regulation is not going to resolve this. It will only make it worse as the signal to noise ratio continues to wane. Then people will be even more lost and disoriented and scared about who to trust and therefore even more vulnerable to snake oil salesmen.

You and I will probably disagree to our dying day on the reasons for poor government. You see it as structural: government as a monopoly, with the lack of accountability fostering poor decisions or downright nepotism. I see it more as a cultural/historical contingency. The quality of government rises and falls like the tide. Things may change, governments come and go, but in the end, you get the government you deserve.

I do not get the government I deserve, I get the government that a long list of historical accidents and nefarious skullduggery have left available to choose from. I get the government that panicked mobs deem minimally acceptable. I get the government that panders to the basest instincts most effectively.

Putin is a handy scapegoat but his reach is tiny compared to the damage we do ourselves.

Limiting the power and scope that governments have does not make them trustworthy, it just limits the damage they can do.
Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 74, 75, 76  Next