PDA

View Full Version : teen wolf and boarzfag have an essay contest (hilarity ensues)


Dumb & Dumber
06-14-2010, 08:45 PM
Snitchin' ass hypocrite, FBI collaborator breaks bread with the same babylon that killed ODB, Tupac and even Malcolm X, whose speech he used in a song of his.

While GFK has failed to "Stay True" to any of his principles and has been destroying Wu from the inside, the government is relentlessly trying to kill DMX' name before they eventually get to killing him. X dares to be different, he refuses servility and subordination (especially to the industry) and keeps it street.

LNV9R4W-sfM
JDrSbbcu0gI
sB2_MmtMoIc

Eleven minute webisode, "Destroying DMX": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OakMK4NMpBE (a bit heavy on the illuminati fetishism, but their opinions aside, a good set of videos)

Anyway, is there an election or a non-confidence vote for this kinda thing?

Discuss

Taskmaster2112
06-14-2010, 08:57 PM
ha.

Mumm Ra
06-14-2010, 09:00 PM
while associating with the FBI aint cool
GFK is one of the few wu members left who can rap so i say keep him lol

Dr. Simon Hurt
06-14-2010, 09:01 PM
uh.....

Crackhead Bob
06-14-2010, 09:03 PM
I always thought the Wu needed more barking and growling on their tracks.

THE W
06-14-2010, 09:07 PM
so is this TSA's secondary?

Dumb & Dumber
06-14-2010, 09:16 PM
so is this TSA's secondary?
Are you stupid?

That dumbass couldn't spit legit politic like this (http://www.wutang-corp.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1913298&postcount=6).

Dumb & Dumber
06-14-2010, 09:24 PM
Why the mods move this? It was legit WuTang Chamber discussion.

11th Chamber
06-14-2010, 09:52 PM
Much love to DMX, but I dont think Wu needs another self-destructive crack addict on the roster

BLACK BART SIMPSON
06-14-2010, 09:56 PM
lol mumm ra self ethers all da time..h should have said "nah fukouttachea ghost aint a snitch".... instead he agreed he was a snitch nd said he should stay on the roster because he can raap (bitchassness present indeed) LOL






NIGGA WAT YA LIFE LIKE?

Mumm Ra
06-14-2010, 10:13 PM
still mad killbot?
quote me where i said GFK was a snitch

didn't i just tell you to not talk to me until you graduate?
i wasn't kidding son...learn how to read
and stop skipping gym class

EAGLE EYE
06-14-2010, 10:17 PM
Why the mods move this? It was legit WuTang Chamber discussion.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2784/4155878679_d88e7a3898_b.jpg

Dumb & Dumber
06-14-2010, 10:49 PM
Shaving eyebrows is just wrong, you don't want that shit to grow like your beard does.

Get out the tweezers.

Sky Blue Danny Kid
06-14-2010, 10:50 PM
wu-tang is capitalist movement in every fucking sense. They hate communists. And so do i, because theyre all pussehs

dret.izm
06-14-2010, 11:12 PM
you should replace your head with a bullet

Dumb & Dumber
06-14-2010, 11:16 PM
wu-tang is capitalist movement in every fucking sense. They hate communists. And so do i, because theyre all pussehs
There isn't anything inherently capitalist about getting your bank up.

Wu-Tang doesn't own any large-scale means of production, and that's what the capitalist class does.

GFK on the other hand, reps Malcolm who is a vehement anti-capitalist ("You show me a capitalist, I'll show you a bloodsucker") and his actions are hypocritical to the prinicples he thinks he upholds.

Hypocritical snitch, this guy.

EAGLE EYE
06-14-2010, 11:59 PM
Wu-Tang doesn't own any large-scale means of production, and that's what the capitalist class does.



Instead they take advantage of that good ol' Chinese sweatshop labor.

Nothing inherently wrong with getting your bank up when you can get an 8 year old kid to do it... right?

sickdog
06-15-2010, 12:59 AM
DMX? r u fuckin serious ? lol

DMX is gay looser, fuck him and fuck his gay music, gay voice, GAY beats and gay albums.

and fuck comunists to, fuckin fucks.

issues
06-15-2010, 02:55 AM
yes..

they should also replace GZA with Young Jeezy, RZA with Rick Ross, INS with Tyga.. etc. etc.

..

Ayatollah
06-15-2010, 03:30 AM
DMX? r u fuckin serious ? lol

DMX is gay looser, fuck him and fuck his gay music, gay voice, GAY beats and gay albums.

and fuck comunists to, fuckin fucks.

ur a fuckin homo

x is in the top 10 all time

Ayatollah
06-15-2010, 03:32 AM
yes..

they should also replace GZA with Young Jeezy, RZA with Rick Ross, INS with Tyga.. etc. etc.

..

y u grouping him with those new guys? his first album was in 98

issues
06-15-2010, 04:05 AM
y u grouping him with those new guys? his first album was in 98

because they're the truth son..

..

hectis
06-15-2010, 04:31 AM
no

MaskedAvenger
06-15-2010, 04:32 AM
I haven't read any post, just the topic and... HAhahaHAHAAHHAHAAHhaha

sickdog
06-15-2010, 05:15 AM
ur a fuckin homo

x is in the top 10 all time

u r fuckin idiot with no taste. fuck u.

5hundred&one
06-15-2010, 05:37 AM
sadly, the OP isn't even the worst post in this thread

smh

Urban_Journalz
06-15-2010, 10:50 AM
dumbass.

BLACK BART SIMPSON
06-15-2010, 11:00 AM
while associating with the FBI aint cool
GFK is one of the few wu members left who can rap so i say keep him lol

are you retarded by saying "while associating with the FBI aint cool" u just basically said he was nd agreed...like LOL NIGGUH WAT YA LIFE LIKE???

still mad killbot?
quote me where i said GFK was a snitch

didn't i just tell you to not talk to me until you graduate?
i wasn't kidding son...learn how to read
and stop skipping gym class

it's funny because your one of "those" guys like the brock poster who is a fucking nerd...like lol im not mad it's the internet nd its funny making fun of you...LMAO @ the frail ribbed kid thinking the god is overweight or sumthing mumm ra got his first kiss in college...LOL













































NIGGA WAT YA WIFE LIKE?

Dumb & Dumber
06-15-2010, 04:57 PM
The point is, DMX > GFK

Clan Destine
06-15-2010, 05:06 PM
Getting hurt because your favourite group doesn't match your ideology is childish.

Wanting to replace a member because he is purportedly 'a snitch' is fascistic.

Wu Tang make music. If you ever got behind them for any perceived explicit cause they might have pushed you were delusional.

Ghostface's persona and his lyrics have always been about Ghostface being #1 to Ghostface. Sometimes he may show love to whomever or whatever but I never get it twisted.

DMX seems like a decent person but actually suggesting he be swapped in is retarded. Like the Wu would want it, like DMX would want it, like anybody other than you would want it.

Again, Social Utopians are fascists by nature.






































































MOST IMPORTANTLY Ghost>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>DMX as an MC ULTRA.

Faggot.

check two
06-15-2010, 05:10 PM
I'd have to disagree, because I'm looking forward to hearing 'Back like that' for the forth time on an upcoming album.

Mumm Ra
06-15-2010, 05:11 PM
GFK >> DMX

dmx doesn't have wu style at alllll

Dumb & Dumber
06-15-2010, 05:20 PM
http://nirvana2.com/smilies/haha.gif

Cool story, bro.

Mumm Ra
06-15-2010, 05:28 PM
The point is, DMX > GFK
cooler story, bro

:'(

Sky Blue Danny Kid
06-15-2010, 05:32 PM
snitching is awesome, and a great way for citizens in a close-knit community to help the government look after their best interests by policing themselves.

I have consistently alerted the fbi website to both armand sickle and palehorse posts in hopes of making the world a safer place for my future grandchildren.

Their dangerous ideas will promote dangerous free-thinking.

Obey your benevolent masters.

Also, DMX sucks and power to the people is a huge pusseh

TheBoarzHeadBoy
06-15-2010, 07:25 PM
DMX would be a dope 9th member of the wu. I mean he was supposed to reform as a minister, but I feel like he isn't going to stop making music. I mean realistically DMX is probably as or more popular then Wu is. Plus his flow style would mesh well with theirs'. DMX is underrated as a rapper, we just listen to his barking and antics, but he's on the highest tier of the game. He's got the raw, gritty anger and deep lyrics to hold it with any crew.

But yeah Dan's right, P2TP is a pussy.

Dumb & Dumber
06-15-2010, 10:18 PM
Says the comfortable suburban whiteboy.

Eat a dick you quasi-intellectual invertebrate.

StoneMessiah
06-16-2010, 12:35 AM
with dmx's recent crack possesion charges why would you want him involved with anything

sickdog
06-16-2010, 03:35 AM
lenin is aint shit. fuckin killer bitch.

Dumb & Dumber
06-16-2010, 01:09 PM
5GDuakTG8FI

_ADM62VE6nU

Everyday GFK asks himself how he could be better than X, only to fail miserably.

theDZA
06-16-2010, 01:16 PM
you should replace your head with a bullet

^ this

Dumb & Dumber
06-16-2010, 01:58 PM
Yall a bunch of dickridin' mothafuckas I hope you know.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
06-16-2010, 02:24 PM
Says the comfortable suburban whiteboy.

Eat a dick you quasi-intellectual invertebrate.

I'm quasi intelligent? You spout off communist manifesto talking points like Prof Zurooka drops Catholic propaganda. I can respect views, I say some stuff here, but I think you over politicize things. I don't have a huge picture of Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith shaking hands as my sig (although that would be awesome.)

And I'm not spineless, I'm without conscience...

And in case you didn't know, you're a white guy (you're definitely Caucasian bro) living in Canada.

5hundred&one
06-16-2010, 02:28 PM
every time a post gets made in this thread, plans for a new wal-mart supercenter go into development.

Dumb & Dumber
06-16-2010, 03:10 PM
Speaking of Wal-Mart - these mothafuckas not only have huge anti-union drives from management, they hire inspectors to figure out if you may be unionizing, fire you for bogus reasons. When unions do get through (it's rare but it has happened in Canada/USA), the Wal-Mart responds by shutting down the unionized center and opening shop elsewhere without a union.

Gatineau Quebec is just one of a few examples of this having happened. They do this for the very reason that it's more profitable for them to relocate than it is to pay their workers above the national standard for poverty line (which is, in itself, an underestimated amount) or even any above minimum wage..

Fuckin' bourgey-ass mothafkas.

Sky Blue Danny Kid
06-16-2010, 03:36 PM
Yall a bunch of dickridin' mothafuckas I hope you know.

You are riding the shriveled pink dick of communism.

Dumb & Dumber
06-16-2010, 03:55 PM
http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/655/rally.jpg

http://workerspartynz.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/nepal-maoist-may-day-1.jpg

http://naxalwar.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/nepali-maoists_24014s.jpg

http://www.immigrantsolidarity.org/MayDay2010/Images/38395671%5B1%5D.jpg

You're gonna have to try harder. I can't hear you over the mass of workers demanding socialism.

Sky Blue Danny Kid
06-16-2010, 04:18 PM
Communists, as evidenced by your action shots, as a rule are pretty ugly.

YOu are a socialism teeny-bopper,

We should, like, totally revolt, Dude! It would be sooooo much fun!

Awesome! Let's revolt at your house on Tuesday! I'lll have Mom drop me off!

EAGLE EYE
06-16-2010, 04:55 PM
awesome! Let's revolt at your house on tuesday! I'lll have mom drop me off!



haha

Dumb & Dumber
06-16-2010, 05:04 PM
Unlike most you cats, I live on my own.

Al Capwned.

Dr. Simon Hurt
06-16-2010, 05:10 PM
some one-note motherfuckers around here...

TheBoarzHeadBoy
06-16-2010, 08:32 PM
Lol, I'm gonna get a job at Walmart, not because I need the money, but to hide the drug money trail... Capitalism is king nikka. I don't get what the stigma is with Walmart. They should have the right to fire you whenever they want, pay you as much as they want, decide whether or not to give you benefits, or what ever. It's their company, you're working for them, at your own risk and their whims. If they want to fire you because you're ugly, black, a woman, or gay, let them. If they want to fire you because you're a shitty worker, let them. If they want to pollute the earth, set fire to their building like a grown ass man, don't bitch about it or try to sue.

Dumb & Dumber
06-16-2010, 08:53 PM
Lol, I'm gonna get a job at Walmart, not because I need the money, but to hide the drug money trail... Capitalism is king nikka. I don't get what the stigma is with Walmart. They should have the right to fire you whenever they want, pay you as much as they want, decide whether or not to give you benefits, or what ever. It's their company, you're working for them, at your own risk and their whims. If they want to fire you because you're ugly, black, a woman, or gay, let them. If they want to fire you because you're a shitty worker, let them. If they want to pollute the earth, set fire to their building like a grown ass man, don't bitch about it or try to sue.
Right..

And then you'll realize once you stop living with mum and dad that people's employment is their livelihood. When one has a rent, a car, or a whole family depending on you, you're responsible for much more than just yourself. I only pay car insurance, gas and apartment lease, so I can imagine with kids involved, living paycheck to paycheck and even if just hours are cut short, your stomach'll feel it.

So talk to me when you're an adult and don't have your cracker parents payin the bills.

Dumb & Dumber
07-02-2010, 04:28 PM
Fuck a pig.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-03-2010, 10:42 AM
Right..

And then you'll realize once you stop living with mum and dad that people's employment is their livelihood. When one has a rent, a car, or a whole family depending on you, you're responsible for much more than just yourself. I only pay car insurance, gas and apartment lease, so I can imagine with kids involved, living paycheck to paycheck and even if just hours are cut short, your stomach'll feel it.

So talk to me when you're an adult and don't have your cracker parents payin the bills.

You're still white dude. So don't call my family crackers. That's blind hate talk. You're Iranian. That's straight Aryan. You're like a shade tanner then "white" people. It's called living in a warm climate. Most white people tan darker then Iranians. You guys are wicked light. Which I can't complain about. I'm down with you Aryans and your whole "We straight Muslim ass niggers for real dawg" thing. I'm just not sure it holds up to scrutiny.

Dumb & Dumber
07-20-2010, 03:42 PM
http://i.imgur.com/1shIp.jpg

This is white to you? Get your fuckin eyes checked.

The etymology has little to do with the ethnicity today.

Dumb & Dumber
07-21-2010, 09:50 AM
Idiot.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-21-2010, 11:26 PM
Yup whiter then half of my friends who are of the blood of white Europeans. Hell one of my friends is Danish (as in born there) and he's like two shades darker then you. I'd be darker then you if I was more outdoorsy but I'll admit I haven't spent enough time outside, I've been chilling at people's houses inside more this summer then usual. Probably because we used to be more active before everyone had cars and shit and could go places.

So skin tone says you're white.

We both have dark brown (wavy?) hair, so I'd still count you as being in my ethnic group in that category. Your eyes are dark brown like mine also, so not that different. My eyebrows are just as thick.

Your nose is semitic, but mines not that far from it, although I'm Irish that side of my family have more of a Patrician nose (the "Black Irish" being Spanish you see) and my Russian side is a mix of Slavic and semitic so So my nose is pretty prominent. So while different then mine I'm not particularly Anglo looking but I'm still obviously within the white category as are you.

My lips are sexier then yours... no homo?

So I'm going to conclude as much as you hate to admit it, you're Mediterranean/Semetic looking which is firmly in the white category unless I was a white supremest who only meant White Anglo Saxon Protestant. Look, I wouldn't guess your name to be Ashcroft or something, but no one would guess that was my name either.


I just Google imaged "white person" and half the results were black... get over it.

Dumb & Dumber
07-22-2010, 01:18 AM
You's a cracker.

http://i.imgur.com/Nsgjq.jpg

Ima nigga.

Get it, got it, good.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-22-2010, 01:30 PM
Okay, you're black. But you still look like Mathew Perry.

Dumb & Dumber
07-22-2010, 02:21 PM
Okay, you're black. But you still look like Mathew Perry.
Actually more like this guy, the father of Persian rap:

http://static.wix.com/media/7721d9f601429abe55fff88a42cee0bd.wix_mp

...


..

..

.

.


http://i.imgur.com/9cAUq.jpg

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-22-2010, 04:57 PM
He's even whiter then you. I'd guess he was Russian or something... and certainly Jewish.

Dumb & Dumber
07-22-2010, 07:08 PM
He's even whiter then you. I'd guess he was Russian or something... and certainly Jewish.
He studied in Russia for a bit and raps in Russian as well.

Sick rapper with a sick producer. Check this instrumental:

YGnqSdTi7X0

EAGLE EYE
07-22-2010, 10:08 PM
You's a cracker.

http://i.imgur.com/Nsgjq.jpg

Ima nigga.

Get it, got it, good.




http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSgVDnoYfd91ihrzAyoGhISdINx5Dc7G qnHli0ezJA3tDMbFzI&t=1&usg=__QbWId0geCDUSrS4kEJzF3NPuFJo=

Dr. Simon Hurt
07-22-2010, 10:12 PM
^
*dead

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-22-2010, 10:51 PM
He studied in Russia for a bit and raps in Russian as well.

Sick rapper with a sick producer. Check this instrumental:

YGnqSdTi7X0

Russian eh? Merely simple deduction, my dear Watson.

But yeah that's a sick beat. There's nothing wrong with being white. I'm white and I have plenty of better reasons to hate myself. I still don't, but we can't all be me.

Dumb & Dumber
07-22-2010, 11:04 PM
Russian eh? Merely simple deduction, my dear Watson.

But yeah that's a sick beat. There's nothing wrong with being white. I'm white and I have plenty of better reasons to hate myself. I still don't, but we can't all be me.
What's your fucking deal trying to assimilate other cultures as your own?

Don't you realize how incredibly rude, racist and demeaning it is?

Go fuck off, Iranians are not white.

issues
07-23-2010, 03:48 AM
You's a cracker.

http://i.imgur.com/Nsgjq.jpg

Ima nigga.

Get it, got it, good.

http://www.biografiasyvidas.com/reportaje/bin_laden/fotos/bin_laden_1.jpg

..

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-23-2010, 01:00 PM
What's your fucking deal trying to assimilate other cultures as your own?

Don't you realize how incredibly rude, racist and demeaning it is?

Go fuck off, Iranians are not white.

White is a generalization of skin color. Seeing as you aren't particularly blackish, brownish, reddish, or yellow, that makes you white. You're white, you just aren't Anglo or Nordic or anything.

You're about as white as the Pharaohs (pretty damn white and as inbred as any Hapsburg.)

Dumb & Dumber
07-25-2010, 08:55 PM
http://images.clubzone.com/events/images/upload/DMX_0.jpg

Man, yall gon make me lose my mind up in here.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-25-2010, 09:01 PM
Haha okay, Persians aren't White, but I can't tell the difference? Ok?

Mumm Ra
07-25-2010, 09:06 PM
You're about as white as the Pharaohs
lol do you get your Kemetic history from the Night At The Museum movie?

Dumb & Dumber
07-25-2010, 09:06 PM
Respect.

Dr. Simon Hurt
07-25-2010, 09:19 PM
White is a generalization of skin color. Seeing as you aren't particularly blackish, brownish, reddish, or yellow, that makes you white. You're white, you just aren't Anglo or Nordic or anything.

You're about as white as the Pharaohs (pretty damn white and as inbred as any Hapsburg.)

wtf...where did you get this version of history where everyone is white? you said greeks and spanish people were caucasians too. is this your gimmick?

lol do you get your Kemetic history from the Night At The Museum movie?

hahahahaha

Compulsion
07-25-2010, 09:29 PM
What's your fucking deal trying to assimilate other cultures as your own?

Don't you realize how incredibly rude, racist and demeaning it is?

Go fuck off, Iranians are not white.

Iranians are not 'niggas' either. So you are doing the same god damn thing as he is.

Dumb & Dumber
07-25-2010, 10:42 PM
Iranians are not 'niggas' either. So you are doing the same god damn thing as he is.
Ain't you see the movie 300 with the black Persian messenger?

Word, that guy was my grandpa.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-25-2010, 11:35 PM
wtf...where did you get this version of history where everyone is white? you said greeks and spanish people were caucasians too. is this your gimmick?



hahahahaha

The Ancient Greeks were a mix of ethnic groups. One was what we expect of Greeks, darkish skin and eyes and hair. Another were fair skinned, blue eyed, and blond. These were the Classical Greeks. If you read their ideas on human beauty you'll see where the Nazi's got their ideas. Tall, strong, bronze skinned, golden haired, blue eyed. That was the Greek ideal. Athena is given the epithet "Shining Eyed" which is "Blue Eyed." We know the Greeks had blue eyes because their word for rainbow and eye are the same (Iris)... If they had brown eyes that wouldn't be an easy connection. On the other hand Hera is given the epithet "Cow Eyed" because she had big brown eyes. Also if they didn't have blue eyes would they see Peacock feathers as having eyes or blue dots? Because they saw eyes.

On the topic of Spain, Cameron Diaz... The term "blue blooded" was a term meaning pure blooded, light skinned, Spanish and not foreign Moor because you could see their blue veins on their arms. Spanish people are light skinned and generally brown haired.

But realistically there are no ethnic groupings. Its just people and their ancestry. Its not scientific in terms of division. But if there were, Arabs would be white. Africans would be black. Asians yellow. Indians Brown. And Native Americans Red... Arabs? Firmly leaning White.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-25-2010, 11:38 PM
Ain't you see the movie 300 with the black Persian messenger?

Word, that guy was my grandpa.

Dude Persia was supposed to control the known world. Those black Persians were from Africa... They're called Nubian and Ethiopian... They had a Spaniard play Xerxes, because Persians are tanner than average whites. Persia was the Empire of a Thousand Nations. They say that shit in the movie...

Dumb & Dumber
07-25-2010, 11:47 PM
For a white person to focus so much of his attention on race, it's really disgusting.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-25-2010, 11:59 PM
Yup it's disgusting that when I look at people I look at them and process what they look like.

I have no hate for any ethnic group. I only hate ugly people. People look good from every race, religion, and background. People are just sensitive fagots who take it wrong.

Its like if Blacks want to be African Americans I want to be referred to as Irish American or I'll get pissed. If they wanted to be colored I want to be Fair. If they want to be black then I'm white. See how stupid it is. People are all stupid except me...

Plus you refer to yourself as a Nigga seriously. I've never done that. I've called other white people niggas for ironic purposes but neither of us are Niggas. We're white. I'm just actually cream and you're kind of beige ;)

Dumb & Dumber
07-26-2010, 12:05 AM
The difference is I'm kidding.

You're pure serious when you write whole essays riddled with logical fallacies about race and ethnicity.

Chill the fuck out, you Eugenicist.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-26-2010, 12:07 AM
We don't take kindly to your kind around here.

Dumb & Dumber
07-27-2010, 10:53 AM
You ain't even 18.

Talk to me when your dick is the size of my pinky, boy.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-28-2010, 10:49 PM
Even at birth it's never been the size of a pinky and my dicks even blacker then your face honky. You're a greased out weasel looking middle eastern revolutionary wannabe communist pretending to liberate the very content people of the People's Democratic Republic of Canada. At no point does intimidating come to mind.

I'm not even 18, but you're (I'm guessing) in your mid twenties getting frustrated at a 17 year old who doesn't give a shit. You're way more ignorant then me. You're Don Quixote and I'm the windmill. You can't fathom that communism is not only a proven failure, but its the polar opposite of the Libertarian/Anarcho-Capitalist world that people should be working for. Maybe you're fine being someone's bitch, but I want to earn my bread and eat it to.

So shave your Werewolf of London beard, develop a personality, and get on that grind.

Dumb & Dumber
07-29-2010, 07:10 AM
"Proven failure"?

And I suppose that pre-industrial capitalism, no industrial capitalist state was possible because it was transparently obvious that none had successfuly existed and it was thus proven any attempt was doomed to failure. Heh. Anwyays, without being too sarcastic about it, surely you will not hold that the only way for something to occur is if it has happened in the past. This is a very obvious fallacy. Another example.

Warp to 2007. Human nature will not allow a black person to be the president of the United States -- How do you know that? -- From the transparently obvious fact that none has been elected, and all past attempts had been proven failures.

You can make your own example of this logical fallacy. Just think of something that came into existence at a point in time and then pretend you are in a year before that particular time and claim that it is obvious such a thing will never happen.

Despite your logical fallacy, human experience prior to class stratification (and subsequently prior to the existence of the state) teaches us that humans can and have live communally under the necessary conditions.

Where humans had once lived in tribes and clans as hunter-gatherers, and no person could diverge from procurement of ones own subsistence (let alone the enslavement of others) for there existed no surplus, instruments of labor and their products were communally shared.

Likewise, in a post-industrial society of radical worker democracy where the means of production are communally owned, classes abolished as a surplus is on its way to being eliminated, we can begin to see the same type of egalitarian living - but this is only possible once classes are abolished.

USSR and other attempts at socialism (none of which had the necessary circumstances for a workers' state), as Marxism would claim, far from abolishing classes, perpetuated class domination (of a new kind) for it did not have the means to abolish classes as it was not at all a workers' revolution.

If we were to have a workers' revolution today in Russia, Germany, USA, England, etc, you would not see any of the USSR-style "socialist" deformations, for they would be examples of legitimate workers' revolutions rooted in the necessary conditions in which thus far no 'socialist' revolution has been entrenched in.

A revolution with the conditions for a workers state has not yet taken place, therefore any attempts at a legitimate workers state that could exist can only be forthcoming.

You can't study the product of revolutions of illiterate peasants or guerrilla commandos as being "proven failures" of Marxism, which requires mass workers' revolution within developed capitalist states. You only commit a disservice to yourself.

Dumb & Dumber
07-29-2010, 01:07 PM
By your own logic, miniarchist and anarcho-capitalist/"libertarian" systems are "proven failures" by looking no further than the system within Somalia.

However, I'm not arguing that libertarian/anarcho-capitalism is a proven failure because it has clearly degraded the living conditions in Somalia but rather because it is logically inconsistent, unscientific and facilitates exploitation and authoritarianism under the guise of voluntarism and freedom (anarchy for the rich, slavery for everybody else).

And please, "get on the grind"? I'm 21, live on my own, work a job and go to school. You live with your parents and suck your moms tit. Know your role, bend over and take it like a man, bitch.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-29-2010, 03:11 PM
"Proven failure"?

And I suppose that pre-industrial capitalism, no industrial capitalist state was possible because it was transparently obvious that none had successfuly existed and it was thus proven any attempt was doomed to failure. Heh. Anwyays, without being too sarcastic about it, surely you will not hold that the only way for something to occur is if it has happened in the past. This is a very obvious fallacy. Another example.

Warp to 2007. Human nature will not allow a black person to be the president of the United States -- How do you know that? -- From the transparently obvious fact that none has been elected, and all past attempts had been proven failures.

You can make your own example of this logical fallacy. Just think of something that came into existence at a point in time and then pretend you are in a year before that particular time and claim that it is obvious such a thing will never happen.

Despite your logical fallacy, human experience prior to class stratification (and subsequently prior to the existence of the state) teaches us that humans can and have live communally under the necessary conditions.

Where humans had once lived in tribes and clans as hunter-gatherers, and no person could diverge from procurement of ones own subsistence (let alone the enslavement of others) for there existed no surplus, instruments of labor and their products were communally shared.

Likewise, in a post-industrial society of radical worker democracy where the means of production are communally owned, classes abolished as a surplus is on its way to being eliminated, we can begin to see the same type of egalitarian living - but this is only possible once classes are abolished.

USSR and other attempts at socialism (none of which had the necessary circumstances for a workers' state), as Marxism would claim, far from abolishing classes, perpetuated class domination (of a new kind) for it did not have the means to abolish classes as it was not at all a workers' revolution.

If we were to have a workers' revolution today in Russia, Germany, USA, England, etc, you would not see any of the USSR-style "socialist" deformations, for they would be examples of legitimate workers' revolutions rooted in the necessary conditions in which thus far no 'socialist' revolution has been entrenched in.

A revolution with the conditions for a workers state has not yet taken place, therefore any attempts at a legitimate workers state that could exist can only be forthcoming.

You can't study the product of revolutions of illiterate peasants or guerrilla commandos as being "proven failures" of Marxism, which requires mass workers' revolution within developed capitalist states. You only commit a disservice to yourself.

Communism can work. But with the problems you see even in small scale attempts at communal life it's unlikely to work large scale. It's hard enough to distribute wealth between two people proportionately to their contribution and needs. Both will want more cake. More money more problems. First people predicted "communism" to fall every other year because it was so unorthodox. Then a few decades later and "Communist" Russia couldn't possibly fall because it endured ww2 so damn well. Which actually has nothing to do with communism but instead how fucking tough Russians are. Then Russia collapsed because Reagan unwittingly used raw capitalist tactics to defeat them. America had more money, thus by buying more weapons they have to compete to win but they can't so they fold and go bankrupt essentially. That's how the cold war ended. Reagan was wallmart driving his competitors under.

By your own logic, miniarchist and anarcho-capitalist/"libertarian" systems are "proven failures" by looking no further than the system within Somalia.

However, I'm not arguing that libertarian/anarcho-capitalism is a proven failure because it has clearly degraded the living conditions in Somalia but rather because it is logically inconsistent, unscientific and facilitates exploitation and authoritarianism under the guise of voluntarism and freedom (anarchy for the rich, slavery for everybody else).

And please, "get on the grind"? I'm 21, live on my own, work a job and go to school. You live with your parents and suck your moms tit. Know your role, bend over and take it like a man, bitch.

How is Somalia a failure? Realistically Anarcho-Capitalism isn't designed to be utopian. Communism is. So Communism fails because it's goal are too high. Anarcho Capitalism is a success. That shit's the old west. Yeah you have kings and slaves but that's human nature. Communism makes everyone a slave. Capitalism says there's nothing that doesn't have a price and there's no one to tell you whats what. If anyone tries that shit you give his ass a fucking good kickin'. Neither are very fun, so the sane man tells you to stop at Libertarian. There's a government but it's small and it's job is just to make sure nothing crazy happens. Its not running your life but it will want an explanation as to why you shot your neighbor and ate his body...

Or you can actually design a realist system and go with more feudal hereditary systems which are much smarter in their design. Life is tough and people are shitty. Utopias are far more fantastic then orcs and dragons. Since life is tough and people are shitty design a robust system that gives people a hierarchy, property ownership, manorialism as an organization (as in someone with authority runs shit and people jump when he says jump.)

Dumb & Dumber
07-29-2010, 03:29 PM
Engels, Socialism: Scientific and Utopian (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ch01.htm)

A good piece on the difference between utopian socialism and scientific socialism. First chapter covers utopian. Read it if your balls are as big as your mouth is. I can't tackle the amount of sheltered political viewpoints you have in your suburban brain.

People struggle; you live off of mum's tit. Says a lot about your philosophy.

Edit: Somalia's a failure because any time there exists a state, it is only through the complicity of the people it "governs", evidenced by the fact that it relies on them to pay for the state's own existence -- it's called taxes, something you've never had to pay in your life. At any point in which it diverges from this commitment or obligation, when it stops working for the people and against it, then it is a failed and reactionary state.

And everybody knows what a shithole Somalia is today because of it.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-29-2010, 04:10 PM
Engels, Socialism: Scientific and Utopian (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ch01.htm)

A good piece on the difference between utopian socialism and scientific socialism. First chapter covers utopian. Read it if your balls are as big as your mouth is. I can't tackle the amount of sheltered political viewpoints you have in your suburban brain.

People struggle; you live off of mum's tit. Says a lot about your philosophy.

Edit: Somalia's a failure because any time there exists a state, it is only through the complicity of the people it "governs", evidenced by the fact that it relies on them to pay for their own existence -- it's called taxes, something you've never had to pay in your life. At any point in which it diverges from this commitment or obligation, when it stops working for the people and against it, then it is a failed and reactionary state which the people would be better off negating.

And everybody knows what a shithole Somalia is today because of it.

You're acting like you raised yourself.

Look regardless of what you think there are three kinds of people in this world and there always will be:

Lords: People in charge of shit, who still report to a higher authority.
Tenants: People who do what people in charge tell them.
Freemen: People outside of the basic chain of command.

Anarchy is when everyone is a freeman. Communism is when everyone is a tenant. Manorialism works because it combines the utilities of all three classes. People who are wealthy are expected to run things effectively or their boss will strip them of their titles and land. The Tenants agree to work hard and get things done so they can have their house in the village and a steady income. Then Freemen are allowed to be free spirits who'd rather try their hand at running their own little operation and feeding themselves with their skills. If it doesn't work out they can fall back on being a tenant, or if it does they can buy themselves the luxury of lordship.

The Lords know they need the tenants so they'll make sure they're doing okay. Will they have a nice house? Maybe, maybe not, but they'll have a house, food to eat, transportation around the land to and from work, some money in their pocket, and pretty much get the American Dream minus the ownership... Sounds like communism.

Then the Freemen have specific skills that allow them to operate outside of the Lords.

Dr. Simon Hurt
07-29-2010, 04:34 PM
^ your history and government teachers need to be fired and then flogged publically with a 2 foot long dildo.

Dumb & Dumber
07-29-2010, 05:09 PM
You're acting like you raised yourself.

Look regardless of what you think there are three kinds of people in this world and there always will be:

Lords: People in charge of shit, who still report to a higher authority.
Tenants: People who do what people in charge tell them.
Freemen: People outside of the basic chain of command.

Anarchy is when everyone is a freeman. Communism is when everyone is a tenant. Manorialism works because it combines the utilities of all three classes. People who are wealthy are expected to run things effectively or their boss will strip them of their titles and land. The Tenants agree to work hard and get things done so they can have their house in the village and a steady income. Then Freemen are allowed to be free spirits who'd rather try their hand at running their own little operation and feeding themselves with their skills. If it doesn't work out they can fall back on being a tenant, or if it does they can buy themselves the luxury of lordship.

The Lords know they need the tenants so they'll make sure they're doing okay. Will they have a nice house? Maybe, maybe not, but they'll have a house, food to eat, transportation around the land to and from work, some money in their pocket, and pretty much get the American Dream minus the ownership... Sounds like communism.

Then the Freemen have specific skills that allow them to operate outside of the Lords.

Boarz, that is the stupidest pile of fantasy garbage I have ever read. I knew you were a clown.

Where the fuck do you come up with this shit? Political philosophy isn't Dungeons n' Dragons, boy.

It's clear you having not read a piece of Marxist literature, you still have no idea what it is. Here's one that breaks it down easy: The Principles of Communism (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm) by Marx & Engels. Study, then speak.

_GD69Cc20rw

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-29-2010, 10:31 PM
Boarz, that is the stupidest pile of fantasy garbage I have ever read. I knew you were a clown.

Where the fuck do you come up with this shit? Political philosophy isn't Dungeons n' Dragons, boy.

It's clear you having not read a piece of Marxist literature, you still have no idea what it is. Here's one that breaks it down easy: The Principles of Communism (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm) by Marx & Engels. Study, then speak.

_GD69Cc20rw

While Slavaj is amusing you realize he isn't actually saying anything. He's just talking about talking. Its the same bullshit Obama does. If you understood philosophy you'd know Karl Marx wasn't a realist philosopher. Communism would seem far fetched in D&D bromaha. While I'm not serious about Feudalism, it on the other hand worked well for centuries. It only broke down because of the black plague killing off a good chunk of the tenant class making the rest turn to freemen because the social order broke down and it just worked out that way. That wasn't the system failure that was a civilization shaking disaster that killed as much as 2/3s of the people in Europe. Japan was manorial for centuries, as was much of the world. Its a very stable system. Like if that happened today there'd be 4 billion people dead. The entire world would collapse. Japan only got rid of their system because the west had machine guns and they jumped the gun.

Its like honestly I'm gonna watch Jersey Shore. You're more out of touch then they are.

Dumb & Dumber
07-30-2010, 09:42 AM
http://nirvana2.com/smilies/haha.gif

http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/655/rally.jpg

http://workerspartynz.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/nepal-maoist-may-day-1.jpg

http://naxalwar.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/nepali-maoists_24014s.jpg

http://www.immigrantsolidarity.org/MayDay2010/Images/38395671%5B1%5D.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/Xx6cF.jpg

http://hermawan.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/05/14/cimg4882.jpg

http://revolutionaryfrontlines.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/may-3.jpg

http://www.france24.com/en/files/imagecache/aef_ct_wire_image_lightbox/images/afp/photo_1272741471326-1-0.jpg

http://somaliswiss.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/g20-summit-protesters6.jpg

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42870000/jpg/_42870731_moscow_416_afp.jpg

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/news/080513_p9_maoist.jpg

http://andyshen.org/me/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/121271576.jpg

Just because you can't see the struggle from your suburban doorstep doesn't mean it's not there.

15 yr old suburbanite trying to tell me I'm out of touch. I wonder if it has ever occured to you that your political and philosophical views are shaped at all by the comfortable suburban lifestyle you've grown to enjoy, alienated from any life-or-death struggle - because 75% of the world is nowhere near such an economic position.

Out of touch? The fuck outta here; now's not the time to try and grow a dick, boy.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-30-2010, 10:09 AM
No I'm saying you're all out of touch.

Communists are out of touch will basic psychology, philosophy, and just basic human nature. Its counter productive. It doesn't even work that way within a family unit. Hierarchy is natural and hereditary. A man is subservient to his father until he has his own family, but then he still feels fealty (love) to his father. That love is loyalty. Thats what human en devours are built upon. Loyalty to blood and loyalty to authority.

Communism is about comradeship between the workers. That's not getting shit done. That just leads to people whacking off watching porn or water cooler breaks. People need authority figures. People need authority figures who were personally invested with power. Either elected, appointed, or inherited. The first one gives power to those who buy it. The second gives power to those who blew everyone on the way up. The third didn't want power and had it thrust upon them. These are the best leaders. People who are asked to serve and do so out of love of country are going to be better then politicians who just want a finger on the button and a platform to shape the minds of their people. Or Bureauocrats who serve the system and waste precious time and money in "research" and "expenses" instead of making yes or no decisions.

Aristocracy is a better system then Communism. It's efficient, it rules from the top but it stratifies power to the locality. As long as it's an aristocracy instead of an Autocracy while laws will be in the favor of a minority. The majority of this minority will be good people and will use reason and will serve the people and their own ends in compromise. But they will know they rule on behalf of the people and not the other way around. I think the by the Will of God bit is not a good basis for power. We are all who we are by the will of God, so while yes, so is the aristocrat, his power is not divine, but mortal and he is a public servant with a hard job who's playing with his own money, not that of the common people.

Dumb & Dumber
07-30-2010, 10:17 AM
Communists are out of touch will basic psychology, philosophy, and just basic human nature. Its counter productive. It doesn't even work that way within a family unit. Hierarchy is natural and hereditary. A man is subservient to his father until he has his own family, but then he still feels fealty (love) to his father. That love is loyalty. Thats what human en devours are built upon. Loyalty to blood and loyalty to authority.

The nuclear monogamous family has only existed for a couple thousand years - something that has come only with the rise of property (prior to monogamy existed pairing marriage, group marriage, among others* (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consanguine)). This claim is absolutely ridiculous, for in the entire evolutionary process of man, only recently do we know who our fathers are. Only with the rise of property and consequently the passing of inheritance and ensuring the man's kin as truly his own, has monogamy been enforced on the woman. Humans are in fact not monogamous by nature.

On your issue of authority, once again there have (and in some uncontacted places, continue to) exist societies without authoritarian leadership, which can manifest itself with or without a hierarchy. For example, tribal chiefs which have a key role in the hierarchy, yet are fully immersed in the tribal society as opposed to alienated from it. They can and could not be economic benefactors of their position for the very reason the existence of the tribe can not physically warrant such a thing.

Take a sociology class.

Communism is about comradeship between the workers. That's not getting shit done. That just leads to people whacking off watching porn or water cooler breaks.

Ignoring your misrepresentation of what communism is (ie, not "about comradeship between workers", but rather the public ownership of the means for labour), this is entirely unresearched garbage. Don't talk nonsense. If a progressive standstill was the case, how did we progress out of the necessitated communal hunter-gatherer/primitive communist tribe societies into higher levels of political and economic systems?

Because the desire for labour is inherent to the nature of humans, and all people have a right to it. You isolate a problem from its context. Only in this capitalist system are able-bodied people able to work and contribute yet are unable to and often unemployable because of, besides other factors, an unemployment rate at no fault of the workers, but as a result of fuck-ups by the bourgeois class which monopolize the means of production and expropriate the exploited wealth to themselves rather than creating more employment.

Since you missed it the first time, I'll say it again:

I wonder if it has ever occured to you that your political and philosophical views are shaped at all by the comfortable suburban lifestyle you've grown to enjoy, alienated from any life-or-death struggle - because 75% of the world is nowhere near such an economic position.

Out of touch? The fuck outta here; now's not the time to try and grow a dick, boy.

Why don't you educate yourself on the matter before you speak?

Dr. Simon Hurt
07-30-2010, 10:38 AM
^don't even waste time on boarz, he hasn't graduated high school yet, but he's offering these 'definitive' opinions on things he has no practical understanding of.

it's hilarious how elaborate his essays become without displaying any actual synthesis or analysis of the subject matter, just spouting what is probably the 'conventional wisdom' that he's absorbed from those around him that he preceives to be knowledgable.

the more you know, the more you know that don't know anything...and the inverse is doubly true.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-30-2010, 10:50 AM
The nuclear monogamous family has only existed for a couple thousand years - something that has come only with the rise of property (prior to it, pairing marriage and group marriage), so this claim is absolutely ridiculous, for in the entire evolutionary process of man, only recently do we know who our fathers are. Humans are in fact not monogamous by nature. Take a sociology class.

Yeah, and property kicks ass. Without property what do we have? Do we even own our bodies in communism?

Ignoring your misrepresentation of what communism is (ie, not "about comradeship between workers", but rather the public ownership of the means for labour), this is entirely unresearched garbage. Don't talk nonsense. If a progressive standstill was the case, how did we progress out of the necessitated communal hunter-gatherer/primitive communist tribe societies into higher levels of political and economic systems?

We don't know they were communist. Some assume they were. I doubt they were. Look even small children don't share well. Even a Tabula Rasa shows greed. Its a survival thing. People are naturally possessive. Communism didn't happen. Hunter gatherer was communism only if nuclear families are communist. They're not. The chief (everyone's grandpappy orthe greatest warrior) divies shit up. First to the hunters/warriors who get fat shares and everyone else gets a smaller share.

Because the desire for labour is inherent to the nature of humans, and all people have a right to it. You isolate a problem from its context. Only in this capitalist system are people able to work and contribute yet are unable and often unemployable because of, besides other factors, an unemployment rate at no fault of the workers, but as a result of fuck-ups by the bourgeois class which monopolize the means of production and expropriate the exploited wealth to themselves rather than creating more employment.

Since you missed it the first time, I'll say it again:



Why don't you educate yourself on the matter before you speak?

Why should they create more employment? People create their own jobs. It's called creating the market. If you're out of a job sit around and try to think up a business plan. See what people need, figure out how to get them what they need at a reasonable price and how to scrape enough money from it to live and pay off investors, find some other people with money, try to convince them to throw you a bone to try out your idea, and then when it works boom, new jobs created. Capitalism has no shortage of jobs. And mass production only came into being because the workers want more money all the time, so they figured out how to do shit with less people. The worker is as greedy as the bourgeoisie. Why? Because people are greedy. Its a survival instinct. We horde wealth to guarantee our own success. This puts strains on group efforts, but we overcome it through authority.

Dumb & Dumber
07-30-2010, 10:58 AM
What you believe about tribal society is directly in contradiction with the findings of American anthroplogist and social theorist Lewis H. Morgan (whose writings went on to influence the likes of Darwin, Freud and even Marx). He not only studied ruins of ancient society, but was adopted into several uncontacted ones and wrote greatly of their inner relations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_H_Morgan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Society

Somehow I trust Morgan's researched findings more than your unresearched opinions.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-30-2010, 11:04 AM
Somehow none of that mentions communal life... In fact it mentions Gentes and tribalism which supports my idea of authoritarian tribes serving a dominant male or female. Like apes have...because we are apes. Gorillas follow the biggest and oldest male. Chimps are either patriarchal or matriarchal depending on the subspecies. But mostly patriarchal.

Dumb & Dumber
07-30-2010, 11:08 AM
Perhaps if you cared to look beyond the wikipedia article and perhaps hit a library or two.

But as for the wiki, it is the period of 'savagery' (of natural subsistence). Note how this period of, his estimate, 60,000 years comes before the period of government. Yeah. The more you know.

The explanation is that in this period of natural subsistence, where a surplus had yet to exist for no person/no tribe could diverge from the daily calorie-intensive procurement of their own means of subsistence, there was no means to exploit one another. One could not exist alone without the tribe, and the tribe could not live without its people. Without a surplus, there is no means for exploitation, there is no class stratification.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-30-2010, 11:11 AM
If you cared to look beyond the wikipedia article and perhaps hit a library or two.

But as for the wiki, it is the period of 'savagery' (of natural subsistence). Note how it comes before the period of government. Yeah.

We're still savage. Nothing's changed. Government exists in animal groups. I don't think you understand. Animals follow a leader or they follow themselves. Mammals are naturally aristocratic or Anarchic. There are no intelligent communists. Bugs are communists. That's it. Only ants and wasps and bees and shit are communists. But they're almost machines almost entirely controlled by pheromones. That's your people's opium.

To address your new point about survival, you're ultimately saying communism only works when everyone is on the verge of starving to death and are forced to work together or die. Point made. You lose this debate. Communism cannot be a success while people are successful.

Dumb & Dumber
07-30-2010, 11:17 AM
Holy shit, you're so stupid.

The explanation is that in this period of natural subsistence (forget the word "savagery", this is just an outdated word Morgan used), where a surplus had yet to exist for no person/no tribe could diverge from the daily calorie-intensive procurement of their own means of subsistence, there was no means to exploit one another.

One could not exist alone without the tribe, and the tribe could not live without its people. Without a surplus, there is no means for exploitation, there is no class stratification. There is no need to mention communal living in the wiki (but is easily mentioned in his documents), it's evidenced by the lifestyle if you can put two and two together.

Class stratification denotes a class domination, but a social hierarchy among tribes limited to natural subsistence, devoid of classes and thus with no means to exploit its people has no such domination.

Yes, there are plenty of intelligent communists. In fact, "Das Kapital" by Marx is a required reading in many economics classes for it taught capitalists a lot about their own system. "The Wretched of the Earth" by philosopher Fanon is also a required reading for all members of the pentagon, I suppose to empathize with the struggles of racial minorities and colonized people.

You commit a disservice to yourself and your own philosophical development if you throw everything red out of the window. Wake up and smell the struggle.

I wonder if it has ever occured to you that your political and philosophical views are shaped at all by the comfortable suburban lifestyle you've grown to enjoy, alienated from any life-or-death struggle - because 75% of the world is nowhere near such an economic position.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-30-2010, 11:24 AM
Economists are scientists. It makes sense to see both sides of the coin. You have to know what the problems are with both principles and weigh the odds. Most people see that capitalism is the lesser evil.

I wear red all the time, but "I keep a blue flag hanging out my backside
But only on the left side, yeah that's the Crip side
Ain't no other way to play the game the way I play"

I don't want to smell your struggle. Filthy heathen savages fighting with sticks and stones? Unsporting wot?

Dumb & Dumber
07-30-2010, 11:31 AM
Interesting that Morgan, besides being a world renowned anthropologist, was himself a capitalist in the railroad industry, yet documented tribes that he lived with who existed without classes and private property.

You're right, social science involves both ends of the coin. I used to be a conservative and later a liberal (around your age) before I became a communist. John Stuart Mill was my favourite long before Marx came into my life.

I had huge utilitarian illusions, before I began to realize that Mill's concept of 'harm' has no account for economic manifestations of the word - unlike Marx who saw the quality of our very lives dependent on it, which I believe is not an absurd notion at all.

So the only reason I give you the time of day is because you remind me of a younger version of myself. However, know that your views are subject to change, and they hopefully will, especially once you live on your own and you're scraping by to survive with a disgusting job and indebted to the government for a commodified post-secondary education that is a free right in dozens of other progressive nations.

Sky Blue Danny Kid
07-30-2010, 02:21 PM
it's hilarious how elaborate his essays become without displaying any actual synthesis or analysis of the subject matter, just spouting what is probably the 'conventional wisdom' that he's absorbed from those around him that he preceives to be knowledgable.

the more you know, the more you know that don't know anything...and the inverse is doubly true.

the irony of the fact that you said this IN DEFENSE OF P2P is blowing my mind right now.

That description IS P2P

I won't comment on BHB's KTL-style posts because they are far too long for and meandering for me to ever consider reading.

But then it's rare that I see any KTL post by anybody that doesn't make me embarrassed to be human

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-30-2010, 02:24 PM
Yeah but while you went from conservative to liberal to communist I can't see myself doing that. I'm trapped in an infinity loop between Authoritarian Conservative and Individualist Liberal. I don't like the idea of Authoritarian Liberal. Its impossible to work. That's what communism always turns into. You're chasing a dream. Fascism worked. Communism worked. Neither were nice. Fascism purely as an economic socialist principle works better then communism. The other elements of fascism are ugly but the core idea works. Capitalism controlled by the elite for the good of the whole. While Stalin the "Communist" starved Ukraine like a brute, Hitler's only flaw (politically speaking) was his progressive beliefs. Hitler took progressive American liberal ideas like Eugenics and Racial superiority and used the power of fascism to destroy those enemies. Fascism is Imperialism distilled down to its science. Government powered "Third Position" capitalism. Realistically its the middle position.

Anyhow I think our quality of life has nothing to do with economics and that its easier to be poor and happy then rich and happy. Economics is simply there to keep us alive and moving forward. I'm happy, but not because I have a nice house and a car and nice clothes. I'm happy because I'm alive, the weather is nice, the air is cool, there are puffy white clouds in the sky and the water I'm drinking is clean my salsa is spicy and my chips are salty. I could have the same experience on welfare.

Spanish Falangist leader Josť Antonio Primo de Rivera was critical of both left-wing and right-wing politics, once saying that "basically the Right stands for the maintenance of an economic structure, albeit an unjust one, while the Left stands for the attempt to subvert that economic structure, even though the subversion thereof would entail the destruction of much that was worthwhile".

Professor Poopsnagle
07-30-2010, 02:36 PM
DMX is ill as fuck and I don't really like Ghostface. Voted yes.

Dr. Simon Hurt
07-30-2010, 02:41 PM
the irony of the fact that you said this IN DEFENSE OF P2P is blowing my mind right now.

That description IS P2P

I won't comment on BHB's KTL-style posts because they are far too long for and meandering for me to ever consider reading.

But then it's rare that I see any KTL post by anybody that doesn't make me embarrassed to be human

lol

i know, i know...it's just with boarz it is more egregious; because his posts on any subject become multi-paragraph rambles filled with fallacies and poorly thought out arguments that have been given a fresh coat of upper-middle class pseduointellectualism.

Sky Blue Danny Kid
07-30-2010, 02:54 PM
the idea of BHB and P2P actually reading all of, and then actually breaking down, and then responding to, one another's posts actually impresses me.

The problem with "discussing" topics online is flawed because nobody has an open mind. The step missing from the communication process is "consideration".

Nobody really cares what anybody has to say, because nobody has an open mind. Every one has already informed an opinion on everything and refuse to consider that they might not know everything.

It's pointless Except in KTL sometimes when people bring up completely theoretical nonsense and then it turns into a "build" which is KTL-ese for a pseudo-intellect dick-measuring contest, where a bunch of douchers try to out-google eachother for obscure theories by other douchers to see who's adopted non-provable theory is the KTL-est of them all.

But usually it's Palehorse being retarded


Damn, I got way off topic.

Also, I'm just as bad as everyone else, in that I don't care what any of these retards thinks about anything

Dr. Simon Hurt
07-30-2010, 03:06 PM
^hahaha you broke it down perfectly

and i'm the same way...it's like discussing politics with co-workers, everyone belives what they believe and all you end up with is people trying to say the most clever shit and not listening to the other person.

Dr. Simon Hurt
07-30-2010, 03:08 PM
Anyhow I think our quality of life has nothing to do with economics and that its easier to be poor and happy then rich and happy. Economics is simply there to keep us alive and moving forward. I'm happy, but not because I have a nice house and a car and nice clothes. I'm happy because I'm alive, the weather is nice, the air is cool, there are puffy white clouds in the sky and the water I'm drinking is clean my salsa is spicy and my chips are salty. I could have the same experience on welfare.

lmao

take the nice house, clothes and car away and live in squalor, surrounded by other people who are indignant, poorly educated and also live in squalor and see if you continue singing this tune.

Professor Poopsnagle
07-30-2010, 03:18 PM
The problem with "discussing" topics online is flawed because nobody has an open mind. The step missing from the communication process is "consideration".
This is true. No one is out to convince anyone, or be convinced. If you come here for serious talk, you're in the wrong place. People only start arguments here to win the argument, not to learn.

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-30-2010, 03:23 PM
But the thing is I don't need to build a real argument. I'm just throwing shit at his shit.

If you read what I've been saying (not that I ask expect or want you to) I'm alluding to advocating FASCISM PURELY BECAUSE he's advocating COMMUNISM. I'm just fighting fire with fire. He rants about how cool marx was and I'm dropping my own retarded quasi logic. He can't see the irony but its there.

His in depth but flawed perspective amuses me. I'm just cobbling shit together as a foil. The fact he feels the need to respond keeps me going. I could rant about how smart Hitler and Mussolini were but that's below me. They were just as clueless as Stalin and Mao.

Realistically all leaders are idiots except a handful. The only smart leaders ever were probably America's founding fathers because they were smart, rational, and didn't abuse power. Everyone else is a wannabe hack job trying to fill Washington's huge shoes.

Uncle Steezo
07-30-2010, 09:21 PM
dmx is a communist/socialist.
his dissertation on the redistribution of wealth says it all...

yall been eatin long enough now stop being greedy/
keep it real patna, give to the needy/
ribs is touchin don't make me wait/
fuck around and ima bite you n snatch the plate

i think he could atleast get an honorary wu decoder ring.

EAGLE EYE
07-30-2010, 09:49 PM
hahaha whats funny is that I WENT and bought a half rack of ribs this afternoon and had it's dark and hell is hot playing in my car.

EAGLE EYE
07-30-2010, 09:53 PM
Realistically all leaders are idiots except a handful. The only smart leaders ever were probably America's founding fathers because they were smart, rational, and didn't abuse power. Everyone else is a wannabe hack job trying to fill Washington's huge shoes.

If you can convince a retarded-ritard tea bagger with this; I will buy you a beer.

Uncle Steezo
07-30-2010, 10:15 PM
hahaha whats funny is that I WENT and bought a half rack of ribs this afternoon and had it's dark and hell is hot playing in my car.
that underrated gem stays in rotation in my ride too.
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:xs0X6UpufjjkcM:http://scrutinyhooligans.us/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/blog_highfive.jpg&t=1

TheBoarzHeadBoy
07-30-2010, 11:32 PM
If you can convince a retarded-ritard tea bagger with this; I will buy you a beer.

I'm not really down with their movement (far too populist and plebeian, all those unwashed masses with the signs reeks of communism, plus they secretly hate black people... (which is kind of silly seeing as black people are probably the ethnicity most likely to join an ignorant anti-government conspiracy movement... but i digress) I'm pretty sure they think something like that seeing as they're trying to reestablish the letter of the constitution.

I mean they're afraid of the government and want the constitution which was presided over in its writing by George Washington and Co. enforced. I'm pretty sure they'd agree with me that 99% of leaders are sacks of shit and the 1% regretted having gotten tangled up in it afterwards.

All I want in government is that when my house catches fire someone will come to help me put it out. And someone to answer my 911 call so I can get someone to record me warning the burglar to leave before i kill his ass. And I'd like an ambulance to come when I get in a car crash or my grandma is sick or something. And maybe, the roads are maintained. That's it. Everything I don't really need the government for. I don't need a military. If shit actually popped off and we got invaded there'd be so many gun toting volunteers with illegally converted machine guns not to mention all the gun toting police we have that those gooks would get be dead before they got off the beach. Anything else is an abuse of power.

Wu Tang is Forever... Mutha Fuckas

Sky Blue Danny Kid
07-31-2010, 08:39 AM
HksJCN5YPSc