The General Politics Thread

RelentlessOblivion · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 1:52 pm

you've been proven wrong, your repeated attempts to bend the definition of third-world to suit your purpose is pathetic and you are in no position to accurately comment on the state of play in the US, why do you think I try to refrain from making comments regarding the US? unless I'm comparing a certain aspect of their political system or government to that of Australia of course as evidenced by my comment pointing out that Australia has come out of the GFC in a much more stable economic position then the US, of course given the stupidity of our current government that economic stability is in some danger of being disrupted but that's another matter

now I have some advice for you my friend

it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool then to open one's mouth and remove all doubt

Karmakosmonaut · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:03 pm

Owned by a newbie. Awesome.

RelentlessOblivion · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:16 pm

it's funny I noticed on another thread that I have more posts then some people who have been here over a year, to me that indicates this place has a few regulars and a lot of sporadics which is much the same issue my other forum suffers from though there are far fewer regulars over there

Goat · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:23 pm

Cú Chulainn wrote:

That being said, the UK will soon meet these criteria as well. "Fuck the poor" isn't the best way of getting out of a financial crisis or creating social stability. A government that kills 10'600 disabled and sick people so it can shave off a sliver of its spending without having to touch the bonuses of its private school educated elite is NOT the government of a modern progressive nation.

Lolwhat. *How* many people did the coalition murder?

Might want to read the part of Leveson about your glorious leader, incidentally...

Karmakosmonaut · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:26 pm

Then again, every country in the world must look like a third world country in comparison to Switzerland, so perhaps that's why our resident Scottish nationalist *chortle* refuses to see the light.

RelentlessOblivion · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:46 pm

nah I think it's just that he's profoundly stupid

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 2:58 pm

Goat wrote:

Cú Chulainn wrote:

That being said, the UK will soon meet these criteria as well. "Fuck the poor" isn't the best way of getting out of a financial crisis or creating social stability. A government that kills 10'600 disabled and sick people so it can shave off a sliver of its spending without having to touch the bonuses of its private school educated elite is NOT the government of a modern progressive nation.

Lolwhat. *How* many people did the coalition murder?

Might want to read the part of Leveson about your glorious leader, incidentally...

Quote:

Writing of Mr Salmond's contacts with Rupert Murdoch, Lord Leveson wrote that the First Minister "cannot be criticised" for his offer to lobby the UK government on behalf of the news organisation. Lord Leveson concluded:

"I have absolutely no doubt that Mr Salmond was motivated by an anxiety to help Scottish employment and to benefit Scotland generally: that is entirely laudable and exactly what is the expectation and proper function of the First Minister. How far that should be taken, however, is another matter."

Lord Levenson's findings directly contradict the accusations of opposition parties within Scotland who have claimed that Alex Salmond had too close a relationship with Rupert Murdoch. Lord Levenson found the opposite to be the case with the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrats, whom Lord Levenson said "have not served the public interest".

What about it?

Yes, Zad, 10'600 people committed suicide or died from illness or hunger as a result of their disability benefits being reassessed and being branded "fit to work".

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 3:01 pm

RelentlessOblivion wrote:

you've been proven wrong, your repeated attempts to bend the definition of third-world to suit your purpose is pathetic and you are in no position to accurately comment on the state of play in the US, why do you think I try to refrain from making comments regarding the US? unless I'm comparing a certain aspect of their political system or government to that of Australia of course as evidenced by my comment pointing out that Australia has come out of the GFC in a much more stable economic position then the US, of course given the stupidity of our current government that economic stability is in some danger of being disrupted but that's another matter

now I have some advice for you my friend

it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool then to open one's mouth and remove all doubt

FYI I do have an American passport, my mother was born in New York and I regularly visit my grandparents in Arizona.

I'm better suited to comment on the state of the US and its filthy neoliberalism than most people are. Granted, the term "first world" wasn't the choicest, but as the wikipedia page V was so kind enough to link her says, the definition has at this point expanded to mean many different things.

Cú Chulainn · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 3:05 pm

Karmakosmonaut wrote:

Then again, every country in the world must look like a third world country in comparison to Switzerland, so perhaps that's why our resident Scottish nationalist *chortle* refuses to see the light.

I hear Liechtenstein is quite nice.

On the matter of social stability, the US is currently on par with France, Italy and the UK (which are all terrible just now), while Scandinavia, Switzerland, Austria, Ireland and Canada are all top-notch for stability.

http://www.fundforpeace.org/global/?q=fsi

Hmm, last time I checked, a few days ago, Germany was green as well. Interesting.

traptunderice · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 4:36 pm

Cú Chulainn wrote:

I hear Lichtenstein is quite nice.

I went to a whole exhibit on the guy here at the National Gallery. I was so tired of broad lines and bright comic book colors by the end of the two hours of it. I get it. You're doing fancy things with generic 2-D composition, but it all looks like mass marketed advertising and I just don't want that in my art.

cry of the banshee · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:13 pm

Cú Chulainn wrote:

RelentlessOblivion wrote:

you've been proven wrong, your repeated attempts to bend the definition of third-world to suit your purpose is pathetic and you are in no position to accurately comment on the state of play in the US, why do you think I try to refrain from making comments regarding the US? unless I'm comparing a certain aspect of their political system or government to that of Australia of course as evidenced by my comment pointing out that Australia has come out of the GFC in a much more stable economic position then the US, of course given the stupidity of our current government that economic stability is in some danger of being disrupted but that's another matter

now I have some advice for you my friend

it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool then to open one's mouth and remove all doubt

FYI I do have an American passport, my mother was born in New York and I regularly visit my grandparents in Arizona.

I'm better suited to comment on the state of the US and its filthy neoliberalism than most people are. Granted, the term "first world" wasn't the choicest, but as the wikipedia page V was so kind enough to link her says, the definition has at this point expanded to mean many different things.

All of those things that have "expanded the definition" have coincided with the fact that the US is a First World nation, though, that's the point.

You've visited your grandparents in Arizona (a state that has a HUGE illegal immigration probem, I'll let you figure out how that creates a resource burden) and you are an expert on Life In These United States? The State of Arizona alone is probably about the same as the whole of Scotland. Sorry but you can't base your opinion on something as large and diverse as the US on an occasional visit to a single area.

It would be like me making a broad statement on Euope (I know Europe is a continent) by an occasional visit to my granparents in Greece.
It's absurd.

Anyway, the whole notion that there is a "one size fits all" approach to socioeconmic matters seems to me very naive.

Anyway, I think thats about all I have to say on the matter, it's becoming pointlessly monotonous.

Goat · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 6:16 pm

Cú Chulainn wrote:

Yes, Zad, 10'600 people committed suicide or died from illness or hunger as a result of their disability benefits being reassessed and being branded "fit to work".

Nonsense. Proof, especially that these people died as a direct result of this?

MetalStorm · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:29 pm

RelentlessOblivion wrote:

nah I think it's just that he's profoundly stupid

You're going to fit in here just fine :lol:

Karmakosmonaut · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:46 pm

traptunderice wrote:

Cú Chulainn wrote:

I hear Lichtenstein is quite nice.

I went to a whole exhibit on the guy here at the National Gallery. I was so tired of broad lines and bright comic book colors by the end of the two hours of it. I get it. You're doing fancy things with generic 2-D composition, but it all looks like mass marketed advertising and I just don't want that in my art.

Umm, I think the Swiss was talking about the nation of Liechtenstein.

cry of the banshee · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 7:51 pm

traptunderice · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:02 pm

Karmakosmonaut wrote:

traptunderice wrote:

Cú Chulainn wrote:

I hear Lichtenstein is quite nice.

I went to a whole exhibit on the guy here at the National Gallery. I was so tired of broad lines and bright comic book colors by the end of the two hours of it. I get it. You're doing fancy things with generic 2-D composition, but it all looks like mass marketed advertising and I just don't want that in my art.

Umm, I think the Swiss was talking about the nation of Liechtenstein.

That was the joke. Note that I deleted the 'e' in the original quote. A FINE FAWKING JOKE RUINED BY YOU ASSHOLES. Or not.

cry of the banshee · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 8:14 pm

North From Here · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 9:59 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/report-finds-u-birth-rate-dropped-lowest-level-155900057.html

US birth rate now at its lowest level since 1920, when recording supposedly become reliable. Any evidence of a similar downturn throughout other parts of the First World?

SilkCrimsonMoon · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 10:26 pm

Cú Chulainn wrote:

Define Infinity wrote:

cry of the banshee wrote:

traptunderice wrote:

@V: I don't think you're pointing to the same anti-science issue that Frig is. The anti-science he is point to is anti-evolution and the whole intelligent design debate. That shit is rather active albeit not widespread. It might be being trumped up in the media perhaps in some leftist conspiracy, but ultimately the fact that it even exists at all is atrocious. Anecdotal yes, but on Thanksgiving my cousin whose family is a bunch of fucking idiots anyways mentioned how in her science class when she took a test, she wrote god for all the answers on the evolution questions, but then wrote it what they wanted her to say underneath. She mentioned questions like how did the universe form and other stuff of that nature. I looked at her coldly and said 'so the answer they wanted you to write was the big bang, right? How does the existence of god contradict that? Couldn't god have caused the big bang?' She just responded back God made everything. It was fucking ignorant.

On religion; any man that claims to KNOW whether or not a higher cosmic power exists, by whatever name, or how "it all came to be" is fooling himself.
Most thinking people are smart enough to realize that the mysteries of life, death and the cosmic are beyond his realm of our comprehension. We can theorize until the moon turns red, but that is all we can really do... as for evolution: ecolution does not necessarilly negate the idea of god.

Absolutely. The school of epistemology, or theory of knowledge, states the same thing.

Nah, that's what a relativist or a sceptic might say, but don't attribute this view to the entirety of epistemology. Positivism, for example, would directly contradict this.

Relativism can be poison. Skepticism on strong fundamental basis always has a place in any sort of order in knowledge. Positivism is merely a perspective as oppose to skepticism that strays from any sort of ultimate certainty for a better grasp of what truth merely might be, as oppose to positivism where it does ultimately take a position and regards a "notion" as the truth of the matter, disregarding other points of views. Perspectivism, on the other hand, is the somewhat the solution and ultimately epistemology is the strongest and most fundamental school of thought taking under question the totality of all schools taken into account in this paragraph.

cry of the banshee · **Posted:** Fri Nov 30, 2012 10:32 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/margin-u-n-defeat ... 28508.html

Metal Reviews

The General Politics Thread

Who is online