New Moon Ashes

RE: Advertising
You are not reading what I am writing it seems.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:16 AM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 06:22 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #32
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
You mean ads as communication, right? Without an agenda.
On the one hand I think it’s still a vanity project - your self-valuing will always speak a different value than universal benevolence. You’ll always be biased and thus antagonizing certain others. Still, if the intention is less consciously specific, you might effect better results, in terms of peoples free choice to either hear you or not.

We can bring a degree of freedom to advertising, separate of profi, the techniques of drawing the love of others for the sake of itself - “romancing the stone”.

Even so it wil be hard to match and top the great campaigns of history - drawn broadly you can see the whole of civilization as a war of advertising campaigns. Statues, columns, incense, naked women talking gibberish, a crucifix, a 20th Century Fox intro, evocations of intuitions, One in so many men always knew how to speak that way, and when he did he was followed.

A key to the great campaigns is that they all did carry a rudimentary value to sell, something that could be milked, drawn out over time, emptied to the bottom, exploited. Empires fall when there’s nothing new to advertise, no angle to the original power/glory that fed the kingdom its narrative-political sap.

Advertise with blood. How thin will your ads stretch reality?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:30 AM Post: #33
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Another thought is that between the ad-narratives of history, the conflict and absurd void between, them, that this ‘sea of possibilities’ can be excavated from its being-as-blurr(between logics) into “Form” ad-fundum.

Binah - Ah. Binah is the form that emerges most primordially out of force - instill forms into the nervous system, touch certain ‘chords’ of electrochemical timing, speak to ‘cycles’ - perpetuate certain ‘happiness’ – and arrow, a goal –
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 07:44 AM Post: #34
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Q, if I did understand your meaning, what kind of answer might I write?

I hope we are past suspecting sarcasm in each other.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 04:35 PM Post: #35
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Even so it will be hard to match and top the great campaigns of history

I think that we found ourselves in the realm of selling ideas. Whereas the Bernays stuff was more toward selling things.
Which is to say that, yes, communication is advertising.

Quote:
Without an agenda.

No. With an agenda, just a transparent one. For example, when you to go web page… Fundamentally, there isn’t a lot of lying going on. You just get told what is up.

I know I am not explaining this very well. I will keep trying to do so, though. All I know is I am me, and I know all of you, and this is all based on our past experiences, but I don’t see any moral qualm with working in advertising/marketing. Like I said, I think that it will always be around in some way or another. We sell and we buy. That’s what we do in some way or another.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 05:32 PM Post: #36
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Oh, I don’t see any moral problem with it either. My problem is stratego-philosophical. That’s why I keep using the Meatrix comparison. “Moraly,” if you must, Morpheous and Lock are on the same team.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:06 PM Post: #37
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:14 PM Post: #38
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
As Fixed Cross once wrote, it serves to stimulate the feeling that something interesting is going on, rather than give or move one toward any kind of actual real value. Self-valuing is manipulated, much in the same way that religion manipulates it – co-opted the valuational mechanism and making it serve ends foreign and even self-destructive to it. If the self-valuing values accidentally or only partially, by assuming the standards of others as its own, it breeds in its own destruction.

This is the real problem with advertising, it is just another modern form of quasi-religious intoxication and insanity-manipulation. I agree with Q that advertising can and should be made more efficient, if we are speaking from within the modern paradigm itself, for of course this makes good sense. But seeing the whole picture, all you are doing is helping the system refine its tools, sharpen its fangs, and put even heavier locks on the doors of the self.

The world wants to imprison you. This is what the world “is”, no “conspiracies” needed. Take religion, politics, economics, morality, advertising, you name it. Various systems used to breed various kinds of human beings. Just because your intention is to remove some impurities and excesses of one of these system does not mean your aim is in any way ethical or good, or is not merely assisting the behemoth in its task to devour you whole. Remember, if it doesn’t need to chew quite so much, it’s that much less effort it needs to bother with.

Someone once said that true propaganda slips in without any resistance. And you have not yet defined what you consider to be the distinction between propaganda and advertising. You seem to be clearly against the one, clearly in favor of the other (your idea of it) so where do you draw the difference? Advertising for Coca-Cola has probably killed more humans on this planet than any conflict or war in human history, and probably generated more concentrated wealth than any great colonization and spoils of war.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:17 PM Post: #39
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
In the ideal, I mean.

It seems like being on the internet and advertising is the same thing in a manner of speaking.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:18 PM Post: #40
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Someone once said that true propaganda slips in without any resistance.

I am saying: let’s make this a good thing.

RE: Advertising
Quote:
And you have not yet defined what you consider to be the distinction between propaganda and advertising.

I thought I explained this.

(05-20-2013 10:38 AM)Q Wrote:
The difference is as follows:

Propaganda — Exploiting a known weakness or tendency in someone, or a group of people’s psychology.

(Proper) Advertising — Offering someone something that they may want, tailored to complement that psychology.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:21 PM Post: #42
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
I asked you earlier here toward what end/s you aim, and you replied, “Just for the sake of doing it.”

What makes you think you are in any way qualified to decide what “good” is to be served here?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:28 PM Post: #43
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Why is art made, though?

Just for the sake of doing it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:48 PM Post: #44
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
(05-21-2013 06:06 PM)Q Wrote:
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?

Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:49 PM Post: #45
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
And X = Oligarchic Power Interests in the most brutal way.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:50 PM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 08:51 PM by pezer.) Post: #46
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Much art is sneaky advertising, and that is what perhaps is known as propaganda. (Interesting fact, propaganda is the word for simple advertising in Spanish, the term propaganda política being used for what the simple word is used by gringos.)
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:55 PM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 08:57 PM by pezer.) Post: #47
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Propaganda comes from the verb propagar, -anda is like a kind of “of the.” Propagar means to disseminate, pro- determinign action, movement, and pagar meaning to pay, to give something of value in exchange.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 01:26 AM Post: #48
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
(05-20-2013 10:38 AM)Q Wrote:
The difference is as follows:

Propaganda — Exploiting a known weakness or tendency in someone, or a group of people’s psychology.

(Proper) Advertising — Offering someone something that they may want, tailored to complement that psychology.

It’s subtle, but it is there. I will give you an example.

(05-21-2013 08:48 PM)pezer Wrote:
(05-21-2013 06:06 PM)Q Wrote:
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?

Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.

This is why I see it as both selling the same thing.

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/suRDUFpsHus[/flash]

RE: Advertising
Advertising can pull at your heart? No shit!

I pointed out the difference. Now I feel you are avoiding an answer you didn’t feel comfortable with.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 06:31 AM Post: #50
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
The show itself is a commercial.

Mad Men isn’t selling anything other than itself, though.

It could all be like that. Seamless.

There isn’t a difference between art and advertising that I can see. Not in theory. Obviously in demonstrable practice, but I am not talking about that.

Search Member List Calendar Help
Current time: 08-02-2013, 10:09 AMWelcome back, Fixed Cross. You last visited: Yesterday, 09:40 AM (User CP — Log Out)
Open Buddy List New Posts | Today’s Posts | View Unread Posts | Private Messages (Unread 0, Total 143)

/ Overstanding / Health / Advertising

Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 22 Next »
Post Reply Thread Rating:
1 2 3 4 5
Threaded Mode | Linear Mode
Advertising
05-22-2013, 10:51 AM Post: #51
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
It seems like unless you are unfunded, all art is just a commercial. When you really look at it like I am trying to.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 11:38 AM Post: #52
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Listen, I get it. You want art to not be some pointless thing, to have weight. You see advertising as the way to do that. I’m saying that’s a trap. Undoubtedly, taking a trap head on is often the best way to approach it, I’m just saying that if you make your weight out of these pre-made societal structures, you are taking on a whole bunch of “lizard kings rolling in the back, how 'bout that?” I’m saying fuck that, let’s rebuild. In the end, if you need help for your wacky shit, I will give it. Likewise, maybe you will help me along my more nihilistic path.

Difference is the pathos of true evolutionary process.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 05:11 PM Post: #53
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Maybe this is one of those ‘is Gotham beyond saving’ things, but I’m not totally against society. Just the bankers and corporations that are tying to pull a fast one.

Plus, when I really think about how to affect large-scale change, it’s one of those infiltrate from the inside plans always. I’m just not the nihilistic type.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 06:06 PM Post: #54
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
So what is the approach of your vision to reinterpret advertising? Can it be compatible with non-government?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 02:01 AM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 02:03 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #55
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
There is a huge difference between art, in particular inspired/authentic art or “art pour l’art” and advertising. Advertising wants to manipulate to sell something, to insert lies inside the mind toward some goal that has nothing to do with whatever is good or bad for the victim of the ad. Art rather wants to show and disclose truth, even if this truth is painful or harmful. Often it is not, and even so disclosing suffering and harmful truth through art will lead to mental and emotional uplift and increased self-consciousness. The perspectives and experiences created by art are done from and for the interests of truth, whereas those created by advertising are done not in the interest of truth but in the interest of control. Q, what you may be seeing is the degree of overlap between truth and manipulative control, of course there is some overlap here. But the real spheres of art and advertising are separate, and only intersect a little in the middle, when advertising wants to mimic art to make its control more effective.

This is why advertising is no different from propaganda. Advertising is not art, it is propaganda, trying to sell something regardless of what the victim needs or wants. No one forces art at you, or its message, these must be approached actively and openly and with some conscious intention. Not so with advertising, which shoves its message and image upon you rather you want it or not.

Art cares about you, and values truth. That is why the art exists at all. What does advertising care about and value? Profit, to control and manipulation to create consumers of products. Q, you want to make advertising more like art in this respect, but you cannot succeed, all you can do is give advertising better tools with which to better mimic art, thus making advertising even more effective and deadly. Further contributing to human’s inability to tell the difference for themselves.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 05:52 AM Post: #56
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
We’re all online…

Is the type of art you talk about possible anymore?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 05:53 AM Post: #57
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Think of it in a Marxian sense.

It’s all money.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 06:44 AM Post: #58
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Surely you are not claiming that real art is not being done anymore.

I would not even know how to respond to such an absurd claim.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 10:33 AM Post: #59
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Sure it’s being done offline in caves maybe.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 10:52 AM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 10:52 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #60
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Today even artists using traditional media like canvas put a lot of their work online. Also people create new digital art, just for the sake of art and not because it is part of any ad campaign.

I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say here, it seems Pezer was right that you are just trying to avoid an uncomfortable reality.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 22 Next »

Post Reply

[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Signature
Disable Smilies

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this thread
Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: Fixed Cross*

Contact Us | Natural World Order | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2013 MyBB Group.

Search Member List Calendar Help
Current time: 08-02-2013, 10:09 AMWelcome back, Fixed Cross. You last visited: Yesterday, 09:40 AM (User CP — Log Out)
Open Buddy List New Posts | Today’s Posts | View Unread Posts | Private Messages (Unread 0, Total 143)

/ Overstanding / Health / Advertising

Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 22 Next »
Post Reply Thread Rating:
1 2 3 4 5
Threaded Mode | Linear Mode
Advertising
05-23-2013, 11:04 AM Post: #61
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Lol
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 12:42 PM Post: #62
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
What do you guys say to the Marx point?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 08:51 AM Post: #63
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Cause it’s a pretty old argument.

I am not the first one to look at art critically. I’m not the first one to call into question this Dreamboat conception you have of it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 09:44 AM Post: #64
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Dont bitch around, Q has hold of the most vital part of Earthly power… And he wants to humanize it, naturalizr it. Superhymanize, perhaps. All of us already know the power and the downside of that. Q is looking for an upside.

There is none’ is not a vital answer.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:10 PM Post: #65
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I have failed to really convey the entirety of this, but it is actually a cynical enough approach for you cynics. I recognize the underlying drives in people (and masses), and I am looking to use it.

Let’s drop the aesthetics talk and just recognize that for a second. With Netflix, YouTube, and just the net in general, there is a marketing/advertising revolution occurring.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:49 PM Post: #66
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Let’s advertise the future.

Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:52 PM (This post was last modified: 05-24-2013 12:57 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #67
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
coming soon:
THE FUTURE

Get tickets NOW at NWO

It shouldn’t be hard to top that pitch. But it’s going to be hard to pitch it so that humanity will attain the state of mind conductive of a future we can approve of.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 01:18 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2013 01:21 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #68
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
This so called great power is the tyrannical manipulation and subvert control that reduces man to a passive consumer, an unthinking zombie. The argument of course can be made that man has already been reduced thusly, and who is to say that even before the advent of advertising that man was not in such an unawakened state? (Of course he was). But, my concern here had been with the telos of this intention to grab this power, to change it, to apply it. Toward what ends do you aim?

Merely playing with this power for the sake of play, for the fun of it, represents the lowest kind of aspiration, like that of a child. Intending something “good” only means one has matured slightly if there is a firm understanding of what “good” really means, and of course even if this is the case one is still but a dangerous and ignorant adolescent if one has no real knowledge or skill with how to apply a method to direct and use this power. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, as we know.

I was interested to discover the motives behind the aim. More so, too, to discover the source and substance of these motives, and rather they be informed by any means and maturity regardless of their “goodness”. One only need look to the Stanford Prison Study to learn mankind’s natural inclination to “good will” under having been granted near-absolute power over his brothers. No “natural” will can serve us here, not where the direct, potent and often invisible manipulations of mankind are concerned. Neither will a will to power serve us at this juncture, contrary to what Nietzsche wrote. Nietzsche did not live in an age where the tools and weapons were so easily able to be picked up and wielded by quite literally anybody.

What we have now is all out warfare of ideas, control, dogma, brainwashing, but unlike in the past many “uninitiated” masses of men now play the game. As I wrote, they are made to kill each other without any need for a third party. You are so eager to jump into the trenches as get your hands dirty with them? I would rather undermine the system as a whole, I would rather cultivate something worthy of going beyond this merely animal hell, than deceive myself that I can play this game as good or better than those who have been mastering it for the last 80 years.

First, I propose we analyze a series of essential questions concerned with refining not only our sight but also out taste, from both directions, if indeed your will is to play the game on their own terms. Like Pezer I am more of an anarchist here, but since you are set on your path, let us try and cull something of greater potential from this path.

  1. upon what do you draw when crafting your “improved” ads?
  2. what is man’s relationship to the ads you create
  3. for whom do you work/receive pay in creating ads?
  4. do you have mechanisms in place to evaluate the effectiveness of your ads?
  5. if yes to 4 above, what are the standards you use to evaluate effectiveness or lack of effectiveness?
  6. where do you most realistically see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
  7. where do you want to see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
    Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
    Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
    05-25-2013, 06:01 AM Post: #69
    Q Offline
    5151
    Posts: 469
    Joined: Jun 2012
    Reputation: 5
    RE: Advertising
    Quote:
    Merely playing with this power for the sake of play, for the fun of it, represents the lowest kind of aspiration, like that of a child.

FX, tell him.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 06:04 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2013 06:07 AM by Q.) Post: #70
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
As for the rest, as I have said, it’s not about the content so much as the relevance of the ads.

You keep missing my point. It’s not about what I am writing. It’s about changing the method of distribution so you don’t have the situation where people are zombied through ads they don’t care about.

The stuff I said about wanting to manipulate people’s minds, just forget about. It’s true, but those are not my aspirations. I, as a culture critic, have come to just see most people as wanting to be manipuated.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 22 Next »

Post Reply

[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Signature
Disable Smilies

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this thread
Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: Fixed Cross*

Contact Us | Natural World Order | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2013 MyBB Group.

RE: Advertising
You are not reading what I am writing it seems.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:16 AM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 06:22 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #32
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
You mean ads as communication, right? Without an agenda.
On the one hand I think it’s still a vanity project - your self-valuing will always speak a different value than universal benevolence. You’ll always be biased and thus antagonizing certain others. Still, if the intention is less consciously specific, you might effect better results, in terms of peoples free choice to either hear you or not.

We can bring a degree of freedom to advertising, separate of profi, the techniques of drawing the love of others for the sake of itself - “romancing the stone”.

Even so it wil be hard to match and top the great campaigns of history - drawn broadly you can see the whole of civilization as a war of advertising campaigns. Statues, columns, incense, naked women talking gibberish, a crucifix, a 20th Century Fox intro, evocations of intuitions, One in so many men always knew how to speak that way, and when he did he was followed.

A key to the great campaigns is that they all did carry a rudimentary value to sell, something that could be milked, drawn out over time, emptied to the bottom, exploited. Empires fall when there’s nothing new to advertise, no angle to the original power/glory that fed the kingdom its narrative-political sap.

Advertise with blood. How thin will your ads stretch reality?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:30 AM Post: #33
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Another thought is that between the ad-narratives of history, the conflict and absurd void between, them, that this ‘sea of possibilities’ can be excavated from its being-as-blurr(between logics) into “Form” ad-fundum.

Binah - Ah. Binah is the form that emerges most primordially out of force - instill forms into the nervous system, touch certain ‘chords’ of electrochemical timing, speak to ‘cycles’ - perpetuate certain ‘happiness’ – and arrow, a goal –
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 07:44 AM Post: #34
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Q, if I did understand your meaning, what kind of answer might I write?

I hope we are past suspecting sarcasm in each other.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 04:35 PM Post: #35
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Even so it will be hard to match and top the great campaigns of history

I think that we found ourselves in the realm of selling ideas. Whereas the Bernays stuff was more toward selling things.
Which is to say that, yes, communication is advertising.

Quote:
Without an agenda.

No. With an agenda, just a transparent one. For example, when you to go web page… Fundamentally, there isn’t a lot of lying going on. You just get told what is up.

I know I am not explaining this very well. I will keep trying to do so, though. All I know is I am me, and I know all of you, and this is all based on our past experiences, but I don’t see any moral qualm with working in advertising/marketing. Like I said, I think that it will always be around in some way or another. We sell and we buy. That’s what we do in some way or another.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 05:32 PM Post: #36
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Oh, I don’t see any moral problem with it either. My problem is stratego-philosophical. That’s why I keep using the Meatrix comparison. “Moraly,” if you must, Morpheous and Lock are on the same team.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:06 PM Post: #37
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:14 PM Post: #38
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
As Fixed Cross once wrote, it serves to stimulate the feeling that something interesting is going on, rather than give or move one toward any kind of actual real value. Self-valuing is manipulated, much in the same way that religion manipulates it – co-opted the valuational mechanism and making it serve ends foreign and even self-destructive to it. If the self-valuing values accidentally or only partially, by assuming the standards of others as its own, it breeds in its own destruction.

This is the real problem with advertising, it is just another modern form of quasi-religious intoxication and insanity-manipulation. I agree with Q that advertising can and should be made more efficient, if we are speaking from within the modern paradigm itself, for of course this makes good sense. But seeing the whole picture, all you are doing is helping the system refine its tools, sharpen its fangs, and put even heavier locks on the doors of the self.

The world wants to imprison you. This is what the world “is”, no “conspiracies” needed. Take religion, politics, economics, morality, advertising, you name it. Various systems used to breed various kinds of human beings. Just because your intention is to remove some impurities and excesses of one of these system does not mean your aim is in any way ethical or good, or is not merely assisting the behemoth in its task to devour you whole. Remember, if it doesn’t need to chew quite so much, it’s that much less effort it needs to bother with.

Someone once said that true propaganda slips in without any resistance. And you have not yet defined what you consider to be the distinction between propaganda and advertising. You seem to be clearly against the one, clearly in favor of the other (your idea of it) so where do you draw the difference? Advertising for Coca-Cola has probably killed more humans on this planet than any conflict or war in human history, and probably generated more concentrated wealth than any great colonization and spoils of war.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:17 PM Post: #39
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
In the ideal, I mean.

It seems like being on the internet and advertising is the same thing in a manner of speaking.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:18 PM Post: #40
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Someone once said that true propaganda slips in without any resistance.

I am saying: let’s make this a good thing.

RE: Advertising
Quote:
And you have not yet defined what you consider to be the distinction between propaganda and advertising.

I thought I explained this.

(05-20-2013 10:38 AM)Q Wrote:
The difference is as follows:

Propaganda — Exploiting a known weakness or tendency in someone, or a group of people’s psychology.

(Proper) Advertising — Offering someone something that they may want, tailored to complement that psychology.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:21 PM Post: #42
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
I asked you earlier here toward what end/s you aim, and you replied, “Just for the sake of doing it.”

What makes you think you are in any way qualified to decide what “good” is to be served here?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:28 PM Post: #43
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Why is art made, though?

Just for the sake of doing it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:48 PM Post: #44
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
(05-21-2013 06:06 PM)Q Wrote:
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?

Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:49 PM Post: #45
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
And X = Oligarchic Power Interests in the most brutal way.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:50 PM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 08:51 PM by pezer.) Post: #46
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Much art is sneaky advertising, and that is what perhaps is known as propaganda. (Interesting fact, propaganda is the word for simple advertising in Spanish, the term propaganda política being used for what the simple word is used by gringos.)
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:55 PM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 08:57 PM by pezer.) Post: #47
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Propaganda comes from the verb propagar, -anda is like a kind of “of the.” Propagar means to disseminate, pro- determinign action, movement, and pagar meaning to pay, to give something of value in exchange.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 01:26 AM Post: #48
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
(05-20-2013 10:38 AM)Q Wrote:
The difference is as follows:

Propaganda — Exploiting a known weakness or tendency in someone, or a group of people’s psychology.

(Proper) Advertising — Offering someone something that they may want, tailored to complement that psychology.

It’s subtle, but it is there. I will give you an example.

(05-21-2013 08:48 PM)pezer Wrote:
(05-21-2013 06:06 PM)Q Wrote:
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?

Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.

This is why I see it as both selling the same thing.

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/suRDUFpsHus[/flash]

RE: Advertising
Advertising can pull at your heart? No shit!

I pointed out the difference. Now I feel you are avoiding an answer you didn’t feel comfortable with.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 06:31 AM Post: #50
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
The show itself is a commercial.

Mad Men isn’t selling anything other than itself, though.

It could all be like that. Seamless.

There isn’t a difference between art and advertising that I can see. Not in theory. Obviously in demonstrable practice, but I am not talking about that.

Search Member List Calendar Help
Current time: 08-02-2013, 10:09 AMWelcome back, Fixed Cross. You last visited: Yesterday, 09:40 AM (User CP — Log Out)
Open Buddy List New Posts | Today’s Posts | View Unread Posts | Private Messages (Unread 0, Total 143)

/ Overstanding / Health / Advertising

Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 22 Next »
Post Reply Thread Rating:
1 2 3 4 5
Threaded Mode | Linear Mode
Advertising
05-22-2013, 10:51 AM Post: #51
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
It seems like unless you are unfunded, all art is just a commercial. When you really look at it like I am trying to.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 11:38 AM Post: #52
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Listen, I get it. You want art to not be some pointless thing, to have weight. You see advertising as the way to do that. I’m saying that’s a trap. Undoubtedly, taking a trap head on is often the best way to approach it, I’m just saying that if you make your weight out of these pre-made societal structures, you are taking on a whole bunch of “lizard kings rolling in the back, how 'bout that?” I’m saying fuck that, let’s rebuild. In the end, if you need help for your wacky shit, I will give it. Likewise, maybe you will help me along my more nihilistic path.

Difference is the pathos of true evolutionary process.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 05:11 PM Post: #53
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Maybe this is one of those ‘is Gotham beyond saving’ things, but I’m not totally against society. Just the bankers and corporations that are tying to pull a fast one.

Plus, when I really think about how to affect large-scale change, it’s one of those infiltrate from the inside plans always. I’m just not the nihilistic type.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 06:06 PM Post: #54
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
So what is the approach of your vision to reinterpret advertising? Can it be compatible with non-government?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 02:01 AM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 02:03 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #55
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
There is a huge difference between art, in particular inspired/authentic art or “art pour l’art” and advertising. Advertising wants to manipulate to sell something, to insert lies inside the mind toward some goal that has nothing to do with whatever is good or bad for the victim of the ad. Art rather wants to show and disclose truth, even if this truth is painful or harmful. Often it is not, and even so disclosing suffering and harmful truth through art will lead to mental and emotional uplift and increased self-consciousness. The perspectives and experiences created by art are done from and for the interests of truth, whereas those created by advertising are done not in the interest of truth but in the interest of control. Q, what you may be seeing is the degree of overlap between truth and manipulative control, of course there is some overlap here. But the real spheres of art and advertising are separate, and only intersect a little in the middle, when advertising wants to mimic art to make its control more effective.

This is why advertising is no different from propaganda. Advertising is not art, it is propaganda, trying to sell something regardless of what the victim needs or wants. No one forces art at you, or its message, these must be approached actively and openly and with some conscious intention. Not so with advertising, which shoves its message and image upon you rather you want it or not.

Art cares about you, and values truth. That is why the art exists at all. What does advertising care about and value? Profit, to control and manipulation to create consumers of products. Q, you want to make advertising more like art in this respect, but you cannot succeed, all you can do is give advertising better tools with which to better mimic art, thus making advertising even more effective and deadly. Further contributing to human’s inability to tell the difference for themselves.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 05:52 AM Post: #56
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
We’re all online…

Is the type of art you talk about possible anymore?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 05:53 AM Post: #57
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Think of it in a Marxian sense.

It’s all money.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 06:44 AM Post: #58
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Surely you are not claiming that real art is not being done anymore.

I would not even know how to respond to such an absurd claim.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 10:33 AM Post: #59
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Sure it’s being done offline in caves maybe.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 10:52 AM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 10:52 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #60
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Today even artists using traditional media like canvas put a lot of their work online. Also people create new digital art, just for the sake of art and not because it is part of any ad campaign.

I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say here, it seems Pezer was right that you are just trying to avoid an uncomfortable reality.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 22 Next »

Post Reply

[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Signature
Disable Smilies

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this thread
Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: Fixed Cross*

Contact Us | Natural World Order | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2013 MyBB Group.

Search Member List Calendar Help
Current time: 08-02-2013, 10:09 AMWelcome back, Fixed Cross. You last visited: Yesterday, 09:40 AM (User CP — Log Out)
Open Buddy List New Posts | Today’s Posts | View Unread Posts | Private Messages (Unread 0, Total 143)

/ Overstanding / Health / Advertising

Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 22 Next »
Post Reply Thread Rating:
1 2 3 4 5
Threaded Mode | Linear Mode
Advertising
05-23-2013, 11:04 AM Post: #61
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Lol
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 12:42 PM Post: #62
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
What do you guys say to the Marx point?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 08:51 AM Post: #63
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Cause it’s a pretty old argument.

I am not the first one to look at art critically. I’m not the first one to call into question this Dreamboat conception you have of it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 09:44 AM Post: #64
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Dont bitch around, Q has hold of the most vital part of Earthly power… And he wants to humanize it, naturalizr it. Superhymanize, perhaps. All of us already know the power and the downside of that. Q is looking for an upside.

There is none’ is not a vital answer.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:10 PM Post: #65
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I have failed to really convey the entirety of this, but it is actually a cynical enough approach for you cynics. I recognize the underlying drives in people (and masses), and I am looking to use it.

Let’s drop the aesthetics talk and just recognize that for a second. With Netflix, YouTube, and just the net in general, there is a marketing/advertising revolution occurring.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:49 PM Post: #66
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Let’s advertise the future.

Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:52 PM (This post was last modified: 05-24-2013 12:57 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #67
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
coming soon:
THE FUTURE

Get tickets NOW at NWO

It shouldn’t be hard to top that pitch. But it’s going to be hard to pitch it so that humanity will attain the state of mind conductive of a future we can approve of.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 01:18 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2013 01:21 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #68
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
This so called great power is the tyrannical manipulation and subvert control that reduces man to a passive consumer, an unthinking zombie. The argument of course can be made that man has already been reduced thusly, and who is to say that even before the advent of advertising that man was not in such an unawakened state? (Of course he was). But, my concern here had been with the telos of this intention to grab this power, to change it, to apply it. Toward what ends do you aim?

Merely playing with this power for the sake of play, for the fun of it, represents the lowest kind of aspiration, like that of a child. Intending something “good” only means one has matured slightly if there is a firm understanding of what “good” really means, and of course even if this is the case one is still but a dangerous and ignorant adolescent if one has no real knowledge or skill with how to apply a method to direct and use this power. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, as we know.

I was interested to discover the motives behind the aim. More so, too, to discover the source and substance of these motives, and rather they be informed by any means and maturity regardless of their “goodness”. One only need look to the Stanford Prison Study to learn mankind’s natural inclination to “good will” under having been granted near-absolute power over his brothers. No “natural” will can serve us here, not where the direct, potent and often invisible manipulations of mankind are concerned. Neither will a will to power serve us at this juncture, contrary to what Nietzsche wrote. Nietzsche did not live in an age where the tools and weapons were so easily able to be picked up and wielded by quite literally anybody.

What we have now is all out warfare of ideas, control, dogma, brainwashing, but unlike in the past many “uninitiated” masses of men now play the game. As I wrote, they are made to kill each other without any need for a third party. You are so eager to jump into the trenches as get your hands dirty with them? I would rather undermine the system as a whole, I would rather cultivate something worthy of going beyond this merely animal hell, than deceive myself that I can play this game as good or better than those who have been mastering it for the last 80 years.

First, I propose we analyze a series of essential questions concerned with refining not only our sight but also out taste, from both directions, if indeed your will is to play the game on their own terms. Like Pezer I am more of an anarchist here, but since you are set on your path, let us try and cull something of greater potential from this path.

  1. upon what do you draw when crafting your “improved” ads?
  2. what is man’s relationship to the ads you create
  3. for whom do you work/receive pay in creating ads?
  4. do you have mechanisms in place to evaluate the effectiveness of your ads?
  5. if yes to 4 above, what are the standards you use to evaluate effectiveness or lack of effectiveness?
  6. where do you most realistically see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
  7. where do you want to see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
    Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
    Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
    05-25-2013, 06:01 AM Post: #69
    Q Offline
    5151
    Posts: 469
    Joined: Jun 2012
    Reputation: 5
    RE: Advertising
    Quote:
    Merely playing with this power for the sake of play, for the fun of it, represents the lowest kind of aspiration, like that of a child.

FX, tell him.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 06:04 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2013 06:07 AM by Q.) Post: #70
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
As for the rest, as I have said, it’s not about the content so much as the relevance of the ads.

You keep missing my point. It’s not about what I am writing. It’s about changing the method of distribution so you don’t have the situation where people are zombied through ads they don’t care about.

The stuff I said about wanting to manipulate people’s minds, just forget about. It’s true, but those are not my aspirations. I, as a culture critic, have come to just see most people as wanting to be manipuated.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 22 Next »

Post Reply

[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Signature
Disable Smilies

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this thread
Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: Fixed Cross*

Contact Us | Natural World Order | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2013 MyBB Group.

RE: Advertising
You are not reading what I am writing it seems.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:16 AM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 06:22 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #32
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
You mean ads as communication, right? Without an agenda.
On the one hand I think it’s still a vanity project - your self-valuing will always speak a different value than universal benevolence. You’ll always be biased and thus antagonizing certain others. Still, if the intention is less consciously specific, you might effect better results, in terms of peoples free choice to either hear you or not.

We can bring a degree of freedom to advertising, separate of profi, the techniques of drawing the love of others for the sake of itself - “romancing the stone”.

Even so it wil be hard to match and top the great campaigns of history - drawn broadly you can see the whole of civilization as a war of advertising campaigns. Statues, columns, incense, naked women talking gibberish, a crucifix, a 20th Century Fox intro, evocations of intuitions, One in so many men always knew how to speak that way, and when he did he was followed.

A key to the great campaigns is that they all did carry a rudimentary value to sell, something that could be milked, drawn out over time, emptied to the bottom, exploited. Empires fall when there’s nothing new to advertise, no angle to the original power/glory that fed the kingdom its narrative-political sap.

Advertise with blood. How thin will your ads stretch reality?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:30 AM Post: #33
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Another thought is that between the ad-narratives of history, the conflict and absurd void between, them, that this ‘sea of possibilities’ can be excavated from its being-as-blurr(between logics) into “Form” ad-fundum.

Binah - Ah. Binah is the form that emerges most primordially out of force - instill forms into the nervous system, touch certain ‘chords’ of electrochemical timing, speak to ‘cycles’ - perpetuate certain ‘happiness’ – and arrow, a goal –
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 07:44 AM Post: #34
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Q, if I did understand your meaning, what kind of answer might I write?

I hope we are past suspecting sarcasm in each other.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 04:35 PM Post: #35
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Even so it will be hard to match and top the great campaigns of history

I think that we found ourselves in the realm of selling ideas. Whereas the Bernays stuff was more toward selling things.
Which is to say that, yes, communication is advertising.

Quote:
Without an agenda.

No. With an agenda, just a transparent one. For example, when you to go web page… Fundamentally, there isn’t a lot of lying going on. You just get told what is up.

I know I am not explaining this very well. I will keep trying to do so, though. All I know is I am me, and I know all of you, and this is all based on our past experiences, but I don’t see any moral qualm with working in advertising/marketing. Like I said, I think that it will always be around in some way or another. We sell and we buy. That’s what we do in some way or another.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 05:32 PM Post: #36
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Oh, I don’t see any moral problem with it either. My problem is stratego-philosophical. That’s why I keep using the Meatrix comparison. “Moraly,” if you must, Morpheous and Lock are on the same team.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:06 PM Post: #37
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:14 PM Post: #38
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
As Fixed Cross once wrote, it serves to stimulate the feeling that something interesting is going on, rather than give or move one toward any kind of actual real value. Self-valuing is manipulated, much in the same way that religion manipulates it – co-opted the valuational mechanism and making it serve ends foreign and even self-destructive to it. If the self-valuing values accidentally or only partially, by assuming the standards of others as its own, it breeds in its own destruction.

This is the real problem with advertising, it is just another modern form of quasi-religious intoxication and insanity-manipulation. I agree with Q that advertising can and should be made more efficient, if we are speaking from within the modern paradigm itself, for of course this makes good sense. But seeing the whole picture, all you are doing is helping the system refine its tools, sharpen its fangs, and put even heavier locks on the doors of the self.

The world wants to imprison you. This is what the world “is”, no “conspiracies” needed. Take religion, politics, economics, morality, advertising, you name it. Various systems used to breed various kinds of human beings. Just because your intention is to remove some impurities and excesses of one of these system does not mean your aim is in any way ethical or good, or is not merely assisting the behemoth in its task to devour you whole. Remember, if it doesn’t need to chew quite so much, it’s that much less effort it needs to bother with.

Someone once said that true propaganda slips in without any resistance. And you have not yet defined what you consider to be the distinction between propaganda and advertising. You seem to be clearly against the one, clearly in favor of the other (your idea of it) so where do you draw the difference? Advertising for Coca-Cola has probably killed more humans on this planet than any conflict or war in human history, and probably generated more concentrated wealth than any great colonization and spoils of war.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:17 PM Post: #39
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
In the ideal, I mean.

It seems like being on the internet and advertising is the same thing in a manner of speaking.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:18 PM Post: #40
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Someone once said that true propaganda slips in without any resistance.

I am saying: let’s make this a good thing.

RE: Advertising
Quote:
And you have not yet defined what you consider to be the distinction between propaganda and advertising.

I thought I explained this.

(05-20-2013 10:38 AM)Q Wrote:
The difference is as follows:

Propaganda — Exploiting a known weakness or tendency in someone, or a group of people’s psychology.

(Proper) Advertising — Offering someone something that they may want, tailored to complement that psychology.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:21 PM Post: #42
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
I asked you earlier here toward what end/s you aim, and you replied, “Just for the sake of doing it.”

What makes you think you are in any way qualified to decide what “good” is to be served here?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:28 PM Post: #43
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Why is art made, though?

Just for the sake of doing it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:48 PM Post: #44
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
(05-21-2013 06:06 PM)Q Wrote:
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?

Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:49 PM Post: #45
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
And X = Oligarchic Power Interests in the most brutal way.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:50 PM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 08:51 PM by pezer.) Post: #46
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Much art is sneaky advertising, and that is what perhaps is known as propaganda. (Interesting fact, propaganda is the word for simple advertising in Spanish, the term propaganda política being used for what the simple word is used by gringos.)
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:55 PM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 08:57 PM by pezer.) Post: #47
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Propaganda comes from the verb propagar, -anda is like a kind of “of the.” Propagar means to disseminate, pro- determinign action, movement, and pagar meaning to pay, to give something of value in exchange.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 01:26 AM Post: #48
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
(05-20-2013 10:38 AM)Q Wrote:
The difference is as follows:

Propaganda — Exploiting a known weakness or tendency in someone, or a group of people’s psychology.

(Proper) Advertising — Offering someone something that they may want, tailored to complement that psychology.

It’s subtle, but it is there. I will give you an example.

(05-21-2013 08:48 PM)pezer Wrote:
(05-21-2013 06:06 PM)Q Wrote:
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?

Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.

This is why I see it as both selling the same thing.

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/suRDUFpsHus[/flash]

RE: Advertising
Advertising can pull at your heart? No shit!

I pointed out the difference. Now I feel you are avoiding an answer you didn’t feel comfortable with.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 06:31 AM Post: #50
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
The show itself is a commercial.

Mad Men isn’t selling anything other than itself, though.

It could all be like that. Seamless.

There isn’t a difference between art and advertising that I can see. Not in theory. Obviously in demonstrable practice, but I am not talking about that.

Search Member List Calendar Help
Current time: 08-02-2013, 10:09 AMWelcome back, Fixed Cross. You last visited: Yesterday, 09:40 AM (User CP — Log Out)
Open Buddy List New Posts | Today’s Posts | View Unread Posts | Private Messages (Unread 0, Total 143)

/ Overstanding / Health / Advertising

Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 22 Next »
Post Reply Thread Rating:
1 2 3 4 5
Threaded Mode | Linear Mode
Advertising
05-22-2013, 10:51 AM Post: #51
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
It seems like unless you are unfunded, all art is just a commercial. When you really look at it like I am trying to.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 11:38 AM Post: #52
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Listen, I get it. You want art to not be some pointless thing, to have weight. You see advertising as the way to do that. I’m saying that’s a trap. Undoubtedly, taking a trap head on is often the best way to approach it, I’m just saying that if you make your weight out of these pre-made societal structures, you are taking on a whole bunch of “lizard kings rolling in the back, how 'bout that?” I’m saying fuck that, let’s rebuild. In the end, if you need help for your wacky shit, I will give it. Likewise, maybe you will help me along my more nihilistic path.

Difference is the pathos of true evolutionary process.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 05:11 PM Post: #53
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Maybe this is one of those ‘is Gotham beyond saving’ things, but I’m not totally against society. Just the bankers and corporations that are tying to pull a fast one.

Plus, when I really think about how to affect large-scale change, it’s one of those infiltrate from the inside plans always. I’m just not the nihilistic type.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 06:06 PM Post: #54
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
So what is the approach of your vision to reinterpret advertising? Can it be compatible with non-government?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 02:01 AM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 02:03 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #55
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
There is a huge difference between art, in particular inspired/authentic art or “art pour l’art” and advertising. Advertising wants to manipulate to sell something, to insert lies inside the mind toward some goal that has nothing to do with whatever is good or bad for the victim of the ad. Art rather wants to show and disclose truth, even if this truth is painful or harmful. Often it is not, and even so disclosing suffering and harmful truth through art will lead to mental and emotional uplift and increased self-consciousness. The perspectives and experiences created by art are done from and for the interests of truth, whereas those created by advertising are done not in the interest of truth but in the interest of control. Q, what you may be seeing is the degree of overlap between truth and manipulative control, of course there is some overlap here. But the real spheres of art and advertising are separate, and only intersect a little in the middle, when advertising wants to mimic art to make its control more effective.

This is why advertising is no different from propaganda. Advertising is not art, it is propaganda, trying to sell something regardless of what the victim needs or wants. No one forces art at you, or its message, these must be approached actively and openly and with some conscious intention. Not so with advertising, which shoves its message and image upon you rather you want it or not.

Art cares about you, and values truth. That is why the art exists at all. What does advertising care about and value? Profit, to control and manipulation to create consumers of products. Q, you want to make advertising more like art in this respect, but you cannot succeed, all you can do is give advertising better tools with which to better mimic art, thus making advertising even more effective and deadly. Further contributing to human’s inability to tell the difference for themselves.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 05:52 AM Post: #56
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
We’re all online…

Is the type of art you talk about possible anymore?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 05:53 AM Post: #57
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Think of it in a Marxian sense.

It’s all money.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 06:44 AM Post: #58
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Surely you are not claiming that real art is not being done anymore.

I would not even know how to respond to such an absurd claim.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 10:33 AM Post: #59
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Sure it’s being done offline in caves maybe.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 10:52 AM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 10:52 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #60
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Today even artists using traditional media like canvas put a lot of their work online. Also people create new digital art, just for the sake of art and not because it is part of any ad campaign.

I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say here, it seems Pezer was right that you are just trying to avoid an uncomfortable reality.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 22 Next »

Post Reply

[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Signature
Disable Smilies

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this thread
Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: Fixed Cross*

Contact Us | Natural World Order | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2013 MyBB Group.

Search Member List Calendar Help
Current time: 08-02-2013, 10:09 AMWelcome back, Fixed Cross. You last visited: Yesterday, 09:40 AM (User CP — Log Out)
Open Buddy List New Posts | Today’s Posts | View Unread Posts | Private Messages (Unread 0, Total 143)

/ Overstanding / Health / Advertising

Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 22 Next »
Post Reply Thread Rating:
1 2 3 4 5
Threaded Mode | Linear Mode
Advertising
05-23-2013, 11:04 AM Post: #61
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Lol
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 12:42 PM Post: #62
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
What do you guys say to the Marx point?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 08:51 AM Post: #63
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Cause it’s a pretty old argument.

I am not the first one to look at art critically. I’m not the first one to call into question this Dreamboat conception you have of it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 09:44 AM Post: #64
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Dont bitch around, Q has hold of the most vital part of Earthly power… And he wants to humanize it, naturalizr it. Superhymanize, perhaps. All of us already know the power and the downside of that. Q is looking for an upside.

There is none’ is not a vital answer.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:10 PM Post: #65
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I have failed to really convey the entirety of this, but it is actually a cynical enough approach for you cynics. I recognize the underlying drives in people (and masses), and I am looking to use it.

Let’s drop the aesthetics talk and just recognize that for a second. With Netflix, YouTube, and just the net in general, there is a marketing/advertising revolution occurring.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:49 PM Post: #66
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Let’s advertise the future.

Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:52 PM (This post was last modified: 05-24-2013 12:57 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #67
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
coming soon:
THE FUTURE

Get tickets NOW at NWO

It shouldn’t be hard to top that pitch. But it’s going to be hard to pitch it so that humanity will attain the state of mind conductive of a future we can approve of.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 01:18 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2013 01:21 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #68
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
This so called great power is the tyrannical manipulation and subvert control that reduces man to a passive consumer, an unthinking zombie. The argument of course can be made that man has already been reduced thusly, and who is to say that even before the advent of advertising that man was not in such an unawakened state? (Of course he was). But, my concern here had been with the telos of this intention to grab this power, to change it, to apply it. Toward what ends do you aim?

Merely playing with this power for the sake of play, for the fun of it, represents the lowest kind of aspiration, like that of a child. Intending something “good” only means one has matured slightly if there is a firm understanding of what “good” really means, and of course even if this is the case one is still but a dangerous and ignorant adolescent if one has no real knowledge or skill with how to apply a method to direct and use this power. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, as we know.

I was interested to discover the motives behind the aim. More so, too, to discover the source and substance of these motives, and rather they be informed by any means and maturity regardless of their “goodness”. One only need look to the Stanford Prison Study to learn mankind’s natural inclination to “good will” under having been granted near-absolute power over his brothers. No “natural” will can serve us here, not where the direct, potent and often invisible manipulations of mankind are concerned. Neither will a will to power serve us at this juncture, contrary to what Nietzsche wrote. Nietzsche did not live in an age where the tools and weapons were so easily able to be picked up and wielded by quite literally anybody.

What we have now is all out warfare of ideas, control, dogma, brainwashing, but unlike in the past many “uninitiated” masses of men now play the game. As I wrote, they are made to kill each other without any need for a third party. You are so eager to jump into the trenches as get your hands dirty with them? I would rather undermine the system as a whole, I would rather cultivate something worthy of going beyond this merely animal hell, than deceive myself that I can play this game as good or better than those who have been mastering it for the last 80 years.

First, I propose we analyze a series of essential questions concerned with refining not only our sight but also out taste, from both directions, if indeed your will is to play the game on their own terms. Like Pezer I am more of an anarchist here, but since you are set on your path, let us try and cull something of greater potential from this path.

  1. upon what do you draw when crafting your “improved” ads?
  2. what is man’s relationship to the ads you create
  3. for whom do you work/receive pay in creating ads?
  4. do you have mechanisms in place to evaluate the effectiveness of your ads?
  5. if yes to 4 above, what are the standards you use to evaluate effectiveness or lack of effectiveness?
  6. where do you most realistically see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
  7. where do you want to see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
    Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
    Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
    05-25-2013, 06:01 AM Post: #69
    Q Offline
    5151
    Posts: 469
    Joined: Jun 2012
    Reputation: 5
    RE: Advertising
    Quote:
    Merely playing with this power for the sake of play, for the fun of it, represents the lowest kind of aspiration, like that of a child.

FX, tell him.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 06:04 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2013 06:07 AM by Q.) Post: #70
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
As for the rest, as I have said, it’s not about the content so much as the relevance of the ads.

You keep missing my point. It’s not about what I am writing. It’s about changing the method of distribution so you don’t have the situation where people are zombied through ads they don’t care about.

The stuff I said about wanting to manipulate people’s minds, just forget about. It’s true, but those are not my aspirations. I, as a culture critic, have come to just see most people as wanting to be manipuated.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 22 Next »

Post Reply

[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Signature
Disable Smilies

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this thread
Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: Fixed Cross*

Contact Us | Natural World Order | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2013 MyBB Group.

RE: Advertising
You are not reading what I am writing it seems.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:16 AM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 06:22 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #32
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
You mean ads as communication, right? Without an agenda.
On the one hand I think it’s still a vanity project - your self-valuing will always speak a different value than universal benevolence. You’ll always be biased and thus antagonizing certain others. Still, if the intention is less consciously specific, you might effect better results, in terms of peoples free choice to either hear you or not.

We can bring a degree of freedom to advertising, separate of profi, the techniques of drawing the love of others for the sake of itself - “romancing the stone”.

Even so it wil be hard to match and top the great campaigns of history - drawn broadly you can see the whole of civilization as a war of advertising campaigns. Statues, columns, incense, naked women talking gibberish, a crucifix, a 20th Century Fox intro, evocations of intuitions, One in so many men always knew how to speak that way, and when he did he was followed.

A key to the great campaigns is that they all did carry a rudimentary value to sell, something that could be milked, drawn out over time, emptied to the bottom, exploited. Empires fall when there’s nothing new to advertise, no angle to the original power/glory that fed the kingdom its narrative-political sap.

Advertise with blood. How thin will your ads stretch reality?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:30 AM Post: #33
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Another thought is that between the ad-narratives of history, the conflict and absurd void between, them, that this ‘sea of possibilities’ can be excavated from its being-as-blurr(between logics) into “Form” ad-fundum.

Binah - Ah. Binah is the form that emerges most primordially out of force - instill forms into the nervous system, touch certain ‘chords’ of electrochemical timing, speak to ‘cycles’ - perpetuate certain ‘happiness’ – and arrow, a goal –
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 07:44 AM Post: #34
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Q, if I did understand your meaning, what kind of answer might I write?

I hope we are past suspecting sarcasm in each other.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 04:35 PM Post: #35
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Even so it will be hard to match and top the great campaigns of history

I think that we found ourselves in the realm of selling ideas. Whereas the Bernays stuff was more toward selling things.
Which is to say that, yes, communication is advertising.

Quote:
Without an agenda.

No. With an agenda, just a transparent one. For example, when you to go web page… Fundamentally, there isn’t a lot of lying going on. You just get told what is up.

I know I am not explaining this very well. I will keep trying to do so, though. All I know is I am me, and I know all of you, and this is all based on our past experiences, but I don’t see any moral qualm with working in advertising/marketing. Like I said, I think that it will always be around in some way or another. We sell and we buy. That’s what we do in some way or another.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 05:32 PM Post: #36
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Oh, I don’t see any moral problem with it either. My problem is stratego-philosophical. That’s why I keep using the Meatrix comparison. “Moraly,” if you must, Morpheous and Lock are on the same team.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:06 PM Post: #37
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:14 PM Post: #38
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
As Fixed Cross once wrote, it serves to stimulate the feeling that something interesting is going on, rather than give or move one toward any kind of actual real value. Self-valuing is manipulated, much in the same way that religion manipulates it – co-opted the valuational mechanism and making it serve ends foreign and even self-destructive to it. If the self-valuing values accidentally or only partially, by assuming the standards of others as its own, it breeds in its own destruction.

This is the real problem with advertising, it is just another modern form of quasi-religious intoxication and insanity-manipulation. I agree with Q that advertising can and should be made more efficient, if we are speaking from within the modern paradigm itself, for of course this makes good sense. But seeing the whole picture, all you are doing is helping the system refine its tools, sharpen its fangs, and put even heavier locks on the doors of the self.

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this thread
Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: Fixed Cross*

Contact Us | Natural World Order | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2013 MyBB Group.

The world wants to imprison you. This is what the world “is”, no “conspiracies” needed. Take religion, politics, economics, morality, advertising, you name it. Various systems used to breed various kinds of human beings. Just because your intention is to remove some impurities and excesses of one of these system does not mean your aim is in any way ethical or good, or is not merely assisting the behemoth in its task to devour you whole. Remember, if it doesn’t need to chew quite so much, it’s that much less effort it needs to bother with.

Someone once said that true propaganda slips in without any resistance. And you have not yet defined what you consider to be the distinction between propaganda and advertising. You seem to be clearly against the one, clearly in favor of the other (your idea of it) so where do you draw the difference? Advertising for Coca-Cola has probably killed more humans on this planet than any conflict or war in human history, and probably generated more concentrated wealth than any great colonization and spoils of war.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:17 PM Post: #39
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
In the ideal, I mean.

It seems like being on the internet and advertising is the same thing in a manner of speaking.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:18 PM Post: #40
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Someone once said that true propaganda slips in without any resistance.

I am saying: let’s make this a good thing.

RE: Advertising
Quote:
And you have not yet defined what you consider to be the distinction between propaganda and advertising.

I thought I explained this.

(05-20-2013 10:38 AM)Q Wrote:
The difference is as follows:

Propaganda — Exploiting a known weakness or tendency in someone, or a group of people’s psychology.

(Proper) Advertising — Offering someone something that they may want, tailored to complement that psychology.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:21 PM Post: #42
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
I asked you earlier here toward what end/s you aim, and you replied, “Just for the sake of doing it.”

What makes you think you are in any way qualified to decide what “good” is to be served here?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 06:28 PM Post: #43
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Why is art made, though?

Just for the sake of doing it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:48 PM Post: #44
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
(05-21-2013 06:06 PM)Q Wrote:
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?

Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:49 PM Post: #45
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
And X = Oligarchic Power Interests in the most brutal way.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:50 PM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 08:51 PM by pezer.) Post: #46
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Much art is sneaky advertising, and that is what perhaps is known as propaganda. (Interesting fact, propaganda is the word for simple advertising in Spanish, the term propaganda política being used for what the simple word is used by gringos.)
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:55 PM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 08:57 PM by pezer.) Post: #47
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Propaganda comes from the verb propagar, -anda is like a kind of “of the.” Propagar means to disseminate, pro- determinign action, movement, and pagar meaning to pay, to give something of value in exchange.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 01:26 AM Post: #48
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
(05-20-2013 10:38 AM)Q Wrote:
The difference is as follows:

Propaganda — Exploiting a known weakness or tendency in someone, or a group of people’s psychology.

(Proper) Advertising — Offering someone something that they may want, tailored to complement that psychology.

It’s subtle, but it is there. I will give you an example.

(05-21-2013 08:48 PM)pezer Wrote:
(05-21-2013 06:06 PM)Q Wrote:
Quote:
Advertising is sales, and I don’t trust a sales system based on the premise that it’s fine to make shit up to fit your intended message (in advertising, usually shitty primal ones deemed whatever by the oligarchic order), like it’s art.

How is it really different than art?

Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.

This is why I see it as both selling the same thing.

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/suRDUFpsHus[/flash]

RE: Advertising
Advertising can pull at your heart? No shit!

I pointed out the difference. Now I feel you are avoiding an answer you didn’t feel comfortable with.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 06:31 AM Post: #50
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
The show itself is a commercial.

Mad Men isn’t selling anything other than itself, though.

It could all be like that. Seamless.

There isn’t a difference between art and advertising that I can see. Not in theory. Obviously in demonstrable practice, but I am not talking about that.

Search Member List Calendar Help
Current time: 08-02-2013, 10:09 AMWelcome back, Fixed Cross. You last visited: Yesterday, 09:40 AM (User CP — Log Out)
Open Buddy List New Posts | Today’s Posts | View Unread Posts | Private Messages (Unread 0, Total 143)

/ Overstanding / Health / Advertising

Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 22 Next »
Post Reply Thread Rating:
1 2 3 4 5
Threaded Mode | Linear Mode
Advertising
05-22-2013, 10:51 AM Post: #51
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
It seems like unless you are unfunded, all art is just a commercial. When you really look at it like I am trying to.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 11:38 AM Post: #52
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Listen, I get it. You want art to not be some pointless thing, to have weight. You see advertising as the way to do that. I’m saying that’s a trap. Undoubtedly, taking a trap head on is often the best way to approach it, I’m just saying that if you make your weight out of these pre-made societal structures, you are taking on a whole bunch of “lizard kings rolling in the back, how 'bout that?” I’m saying fuck that, let’s rebuild. In the end, if you need help for your wacky shit, I will give it. Likewise, maybe you will help me along my more nihilistic path.

Difference is the pathos of true evolutionary process.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 05:11 PM Post: #53
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Maybe this is one of those ‘is Gotham beyond saving’ things, but I’m not totally against society. Just the bankers and corporations that are tying to pull a fast one.

Plus, when I really think about how to affect large-scale change, it’s one of those infiltrate from the inside plans always. I’m just not the nihilistic type.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-22-2013, 06:06 PM Post: #54
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
So what is the approach of your vision to reinterpret advertising? Can it be compatible with non-government?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 02:01 AM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 02:03 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #55
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
There is a huge difference between art, in particular inspired/authentic art or “art pour l’art” and advertising. Advertising wants to manipulate to sell something, to insert lies inside the mind toward some goal that has nothing to do with whatever is good or bad for the victim of the ad. Art rather wants to show and disclose truth, even if this truth is painful or harmful. Often it is not, and even so disclosing suffering and harmful truth through art will lead to mental and emotional uplift and increased self-consciousness. The perspectives and experiences created by art are done from and for the interests of truth, whereas those created by advertising are done not in the interest of truth but in the interest of control. Q, what you may be seeing is the degree of overlap between truth and manipulative control, of course there is some overlap here. But the real spheres of art and advertising are separate, and only intersect a little in the middle, when advertising wants to mimic art to make its control more effective.

This is why advertising is no different from propaganda. Advertising is not art, it is propaganda, trying to sell something regardless of what the victim needs or wants. No one forces art at you, or its message, these must be approached actively and openly and with some conscious intention. Not so with advertising, which shoves its message and image upon you rather you want it or not.

Art cares about you, and values truth. That is why the art exists at all. What does advertising care about and value? Profit, to control and manipulation to create consumers of products. Q, you want to make advertising more like art in this respect, but you cannot succeed, all you can do is give advertising better tools with which to better mimic art, thus making advertising even more effective and deadly. Further contributing to human’s inability to tell the difference for themselves.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 05:52 AM Post: #56
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
We’re all online…

Is the type of art you talk about possible anymore?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 05:53 AM Post: #57
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Think of it in a Marxian sense.

It’s all money.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 06:44 AM Post: #58
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Surely you are not claiming that real art is not being done anymore.

I would not even know how to respond to such an absurd claim.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 10:33 AM Post: #59
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Sure it’s being done offline in caves maybe.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 10:52 AM (This post was last modified: 05-23-2013 10:52 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #60
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Today even artists using traditional media like canvas put a lot of their work online. Also people create new digital art, just for the sake of art and not because it is part of any ad campaign.

I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say here, it seems Pezer was right that you are just trying to avoid an uncomfortable reality.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 22 Next »

Post Reply

[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Signature
Disable Smilies

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this thread
Forum Jump:

User(s) browsing this thread: Fixed Cross*

Contact Us | Natural World Order | Return to Top | Return to Content | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2013 MyBB Group.

Search Member List Calendar Help
Current time: 08-02-2013, 10:09 AMWelcome back, Fixed Cross. You last visited: Yesterday, 09:40 AM (User CP — Log Out)
Open Buddy List New Posts | Today’s Posts | View Unread Posts | Private Messages (Unread 0, Total 143)

/ Overstanding / Health / Advertising

Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 22 Next »
Post Reply Thread Rating:
1 2 3 4 5
Threaded Mode | Linear Mode
Advertising
05-23-2013, 11:04 AM Post: #61
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Lol
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-23-2013, 12:42 PM Post: #62
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
What do you guys say to the Marx point?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 08:51 AM Post: #63
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Cause it’s a pretty old argument.

I am not the first one to look at art critically. I’m not the first one to call into question this Dreamboat conception you have of it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 09:44 AM Post: #64
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Dont bitch around, Q has hold of the most vital part of Earthly power… And he wants to humanize it, naturalizr it. Superhymanize, perhaps. All of us already know the power and the downside of that. Q is looking for an upside.

There is none’ is not a vital answer.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:10 PM Post: #65
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I have failed to really convey the entirety of this, but it is actually a cynical enough approach for you cynics. I recognize the underlying drives in people (and masses), and I am looking to use it.

Let’s drop the aesthetics talk and just recognize that for a second. With Netflix, YouTube, and just the net in general, there is a marketing/advertising revolution occurring.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:49 PM Post: #66
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Let’s advertise the future.

Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-24-2013, 12:52 PM (This post was last modified: 05-24-2013 12:57 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #67
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
coming soon:
THE FUTURE

Get tickets NOW at NWO

It shouldn’t be hard to top that pitch. But it’s going to be hard to pitch it so that humanity will attain the state of mind conductive of a future we can approve of.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 01:18 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2013 01:21 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #68
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
This so called great power is the tyrannical manipulation and subvert control that reduces man to a passive consumer, an unthinking zombie. The argument of course can be made that man has already been reduced thusly, and who is to say that even before the advent of advertising that man was not in such an unawakened state? (Of course he was). But, my concern here had been with the telos of this intention to grab this power, to change it, to apply it. Toward what ends do you aim?

Merely playing with this power for the sake of play, for the fun of it, represents the lowest kind of aspiration, like that of a child. Intending something “good” only means one has matured slightly if there is a firm understanding of what “good” really means, and of course even if this is the case one is still but a dangerous and ignorant adolescent if one has no real knowledge or skill with how to apply a method to direct and use this power. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, as we know.

I was interested to discover the motives behind the aim. More so, too, to discover the source and substance of these motives, and rather they be informed by any means and maturity regardless of their “goodness”. One only need look to the Stanford Prison Study to learn mankind’s natural inclination to “good will” under having been granted near-absolute power over his brothers. No “natural” will can serve us here, not where the direct, potent and often invisible manipulations of mankind are concerned. Neither will a will to power serve us at this juncture, contrary to what Nietzsche wrote. Nietzsche did not live in an age where the tools and weapons were so easily able to be picked up and wielded by quite literally anybody.

What we have now is all out warfare of ideas, control, dogma, brainwashing, but unlike in the past many “uninitiated” masses of men now play the game. As I wrote, they are made to kill each other without any need for a third party. You are so eager to jump into the trenches as get your hands dirty with them? I would rather undermine the system as a whole, I would rather cultivate something worthy of going beyond this merely animal hell, than deceive myself that I can play this game as good or better than those who have been mastering it for the last 80 years.

First, I propose we analyze a series of essential questions concerned with refining not only our sight but also out taste, from both directions, if indeed your will is to play the game on their own terms. Like Pezer I am more of an anarchist here, but since you are set on your path, let us try and cull something of greater potential from this path.

  1. upon what do you draw when crafting your “improved” ads?
  2. what is man’s relationship to the ads you create
  3. for whom do you work/receive pay in creating ads?
  4. do you have mechanisms in place to evaluate the effectiveness of your ads?
  5. if yes to 4 above, what are the standards you use to evaluate effectiveness or lack of effectiveness?
  6. where do you most realistically see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
  7. where do you want to see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
    Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
    Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
    05-25-2013, 06:01 AM Post: #69
    Q Offline
    5151
    Posts: 469
    Joined: Jun 2012
    Reputation: 5
    RE: Advertising
    Quote:
    Merely playing with this power for the sake of play, for the fun of it, represents the lowest kind of aspiration, like that of a child.

FX, tell him.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-25-2013, 06:04 AM (This post was last modified: 05-25-2013 06:07 AM by Q.) Post: #70
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
As for the rest, as I have said, it’s not about the content so much as the relevance of the ads.

You keep missing my point. It’s not about what I am writing. It’s about changing the method of distribution so you don’t have the situation where people are zombied through ads they don’t care about.

The stuff I said about wanting to manipulate people’s minds, just forget about. It’s true, but those are not my aspirations. I, as a culture critic, have come to just see most people as wanting to be manipuated.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator

« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Pages (22): « Previous 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 … 22 Next »

Post Reply

[-]
Quick Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.

Signature
Disable Smilies

Back to top Go down
View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
Fixed Cross
Tower
Tower

Posts : 1237
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: Natural World Ashes Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:14 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
The basic disagreement, however, is that I am looking at the nature of advertising as it IS, right now in this world, and you are looking at the nature of what it could be through your idea of how to alter its content, and perhaps its form as well. I have yet to see any specifics on how Q or yourself would modify advertising to these ends you speak of. In fact, this was the whole point of my asking these following questions of Q, that I assume the potentiality of your aim and thus am interested to see rather or not Q is worthy of this potential. You will notice that these questions I asked of him have so far gone unanswered.

Fair enough. I’d like to add that I see the “as is” in a wider frame, but that follows from what I’ve written above.

Let me try to answer the questions as I see fit.

  1. upon what do you draw when crafting your “improved” ads?
    -This is a bit general, not quite sure what you mean.

  2. what is man’s relationship to the ads you create
    -His libido is activated and stirring his mind.

  3. for whom do you work/receive pay in creating ads?
    -For no one, the ads aren’t made to make money. They’d have to be a ‘pro bono’ thing for starters. Eventually organizations and companies that have interest in them might jump in - organizations that work to advance health and sanity, break the monopoly of disease and madness.

  4. do you have mechanisms in place to evaluate the effectiveness of your ads?
    -Only observing a changing mindset in the environment where they’e disseminated would count.

  5. if yes to 4 above, what are the standards you use to evaluate effectiveness or lack of effectiveness?
    -People taking control is the only mark of effectiveness.

  6. where do you most realistically see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
    -He could just become a total slave, schizofrenic, torn between libido and conscience, between passion and reason. This means a resentful man, hating what he is, unable to address the cause of what he hates about himself because it is what fuels all his actions.

  7. where do you want to see man in 50 years from now, relative to what you think the potential is for your advertising power to contribute toward this future?
    -He has somewhat bridged the gap between his libido and his mind, meaning he is less able to be manipulated through his libido. Meaning: he has been trained somewhat to ‘test the origin of the stimulus’.

Quote:
Who owns the media through which you plan to advertise your counter-movement against these assholes? The assholes own it. Nearly every media outlet that has any viability is controlled directly or indirectly by vested interests. So how do you plan to fight the system when the system has the ability to censor, repress, edit or shut off completely your own content? I see the problem of over-centralization of global multinational power getting worse with time, not better. Monopolies are more common than ever, especially in the media world.

Honestly, I simply refuse to be certain about what I do not know. The ‘machine’ is at this point still manned by humans, and these are all liabilities, uncertainties. Millions of people man the various machines, and all of them can be influenced.

Quote:
Maybe you plan to start small, the local paper, a Youtube channel, maybe start a blog or your own website like NWO. Sure, that’s great, I honestly say you should go for it. But I would ask you to as honestly consider how much of an effect you really think this is going to have in a world with Viacom, Time Warner, Disney, CBS, News Corporation, Comcast, Facebook and Google controlling 99% of the market. And as I said, I see it getting worse, not better.

The biggest direct audience (as opposed to repeated airings) I’ve had is a show on Dutch national television. It was the thing about Islam, which was quite simply an advertisement for an agenda I had chosen. I may no longer agree with that agenda but it was wholly conceived by me and undiluted. When the company began trying to dilute it, I quit. That lasted for about three months.

I’m saying basically you can get around company agenda if you’re smart enough to camouflage the effect/intent with something that appears attractive in general, that ‘sells’.

I do not see a monolithic conscience of oppression - just a general trend. The trend, I believe, can be broken. Gradually, bit by bit and perhaps only for segments of the population. Doing this is ‘fun’ - that is the magic ingredient why it could work - it is not a morose, grudging undertaking, but something that would become addictive fo r an increasing number of people.

Just like life is addictive, ‘stupid’, stimulated by libido and confusion.

Quote:
So I guess I am not disagreeing with your intention, but I want specifics as to how you plan to implement your goals. For better or worse I am incapable of entertaining impossible or unrealistic hope. Believe me, I have tried many times, and failed miserably. I am at heart a bitter pragmatist, despite that the aspiration of my theory reaches for the stars. I want truly to believe in your power here, but until I can see something convincing, rational and reasonable, I have no choice but to see it merely as fruitless fantasy.

Very fair. And I can not prove it to you. I have some very specific plans but I am not going to write them down here. It comes down to the fact that, with what man is able to do today, I see vast potential for attainable glory, sanity and upward motion, and think I discovered some of the keys to such a movement. I would need a significant bit of capital to really get this off the ground… but I am far from hopeless in this regard.

Quote:
Again, why has Q not addressed my seven questions? These more than anything get to the real heart of the problem here. I want to see the answers to those questions because it will tell me a lot about the nature of his ‘struggle’.

They’re difficult questions, for sure.

Quote:
Advertising inserts repetitions and fixation-patterns into the psyche,
Quote:
Well this is what advertising is, at heart. It is manipulation designed to sell something.

It’s a manipulation designed to draw the attention, to fixate the self-valuing on something it thinks may add to it. Perhaps the most dangerous tool there is, yes. But does nature itself not advertise? A female praying mantice advertises sex but sells death. It is not a new phenomenon, and in many cases it works out better than for the male praying mantice.

Quote:
This differs from education in the following ways: Education intends to produce change through rational presentation of accurate information. Education treats the recipient as a rational being with the ability to learn truth if given access to all the relevant facts on a matter. The goal of education is to produce truth, accurate information, whereas the goal of advertising is to alter behavior in a way that benefits the makers of the ads. Granted, a lot of education has become propagandized, but this only proves my point about the difference between education and advertising.

Under no circumstances will I say that advertising must take the place of education, or can assimilate its function. I want advertising to steer toward the sort of mindset that values clarity.

Quote:
I argue that what you are doing is not creating advertising, you are creating art that is intended to educate. This is noble. Your art is very different in nature from advertising, then.

If you intent to use unconscious manipulation to achieve your ends, all you are doing is weakening those whom you intend to strengthen. You cannot treat a human being like a domesticated pet and expect it to experience some sort of intellectual or spiritual uplift. You cannot expect a mass of mindlessly passive drones to be anything but a mass of mindlessly passive drones, no matter what high level of noble content you intent to shove into their heads.

The passivity is bred by separating what JSS calls awareness of hopes and threats from actual hopes and threats. But this is not implicit in the method of advertising. It’s a chosen course.

As man is imperfect in the literal sense, -incomplete - he continues to require ‘agents’ to perfect himself, or to advance. Do you agree to this?

Quote:
May I see some examples of the ads you have created?

I never valued any of them enough to keep them - they were all for the tv station I worked for. I was usually given the assignment to produce the ads and promo’s - it is a government funded station with no real commercial interests, so I was given a lot of freedom and the content sold was really very harmless. They would often rely on me to make harmless things look ‘sexy’ or at least suggest some kind of thrill.

Then I did some advertising of projects like the film “We feed the world”, basically a campaign against genetically manipulated foods, and for some other non profit, idealistic projects, trailers, basically. Many of the ‘thousands of ads’ I made were trailers or promo’s for other material. I rarely made ads for real ‘products’, although I did create ads for things like bars and clubs at one point.

All of these things don’t sell anything that’s not there. I developed a lot of ideas for product-ads, some of which were actually used later on for these products (it’s very strange, it’s like when you think of something it gets ‘out there’ and gets picked up - I’ve had ideas for movies that would appear, diluted, in cinema’s a couple of years later).

It’s safe to say that I was exaggerating my output - in most of these thousands of ads/promo’s for the tv station I just did the editing - but that is where the desire is created, and that is what I was occupied with. I have a lot of potential in this field - but since I will immediately vomit once I find myself in the process of professionally telling an unwholesome lie, this potential doesn’t fit the machine.

For this reason (the potential) I relish in the thought of Q’s intention. It is a theme that has been on my mind for more than a decade. I very vividly see the kind of future I would like to advertise. But I am not in the position to do that just yet - I only want to advertise it if I have the potential to realize at least part of it.

Quote:
Quote:
In a blip: the future is not poisonous.

Please share your evidence/reasons with me. I will be completely honest here, I have seen absolutely no reason to agree with you on this, “the future is not poisonous”. I want you to convince me.

There’s the thing - I can not possibly provide a factual basis for this. I can only create the ideal, as a point in time for man to orient on - a new star to navigate by. to even just allow for the direction, to allow man to make certain steps - to open up a ‘valency rhizome’ simply by disclosing certain yearnings… to connect the libido to truly wholesome perspectives… all of this I see embedded as potential in the craft of advertising. But I certainly agree that another name may be appropriate to distinguish it from ‘selling’.

Quote:
Quote:
The Greek temples were advertisements for the imagined Gods. These Gods compelled people to try to live up to superhuman standards.

Yes, and the deception led all the way to Christian decadence, and necessarily so, and continues to this day. No doubt that we owe tremendous debt to the Greeks, but they had no choice except to mystify conscious experience because they were the first to discover it, they had to make use of the tools that were laying around. Are we still stuck in their deplorably small reality? No, we have inherited an entire mass of culture and tools with which to engage the mind directly, honestly and openly. That is all I am asking for. If this is how you view advertising then we are not disagreeing here, except on the fact that I do not believe advertising is capable of directly, honestly and openly engaging the mind.

I agree - it only engages the libido, it produces drives. What I aim for is that the libido is engaged toward engaging the mind.

It’s like what JSS proposes for a film about RM. The narrative must ‘seduce’ the viewer to consider the logics.

Quote:
You are drawing the distinction between education and propaganda in a very concrete and “deep” way, which I admire. But I have no reason yet to see how this distinction which you draw bears a resemblance to reality as we know it. What makes you think that your sort of advertising will be more effective than the current form of manipulation, brainwashing and death?

Not more effective, just also there. Thus reducing the net effect of the other type.

Quote:
I believe that the instrument and the end-result are intimately connected. Why has the modern world of the last 100 years differed so drastically from what has come before, if advertising is merely, at the level of instrument, no different from education or art? I think the instrument is very, very different.

If you want to revolutionize advertising in the way you state, this is an excellent goal. I do not dispute this. But if you believe you can revolutionize it from the inside, making use of the very same instruments and media and distribution systems as currently push the global advertising insanity and death-machine, I entirely disagree. I also disagree that your own counter-movement, however you plan to carry it out, is able to pose any serious threat to the established order, but this is only because so far I have seen no evidence to make me believe otherwise.

Have either you or Q given real concrete examples here yet? Maybe I missed them, I am very interested in seeing specifically what sort of “advertising” you and Q mean. Again, the questions I designed for Q to really target the substance behind these claims have so far gone unanswered.

I suppose that I am at heart a little more hopeful and optimistic about man and his potential future - but just a little. In the end I think it’s going to be harsh awareness, cataclysm and scientific/philosophical advancement that truly breaks new ground for new health. But since I already am very harshly aware and a scientific philosopher, I consider myself to be in a position to begin advertising my perspective.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-26-2013, 04:16 AM (This post was last modified: 05-26-2013 04:18 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #86
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
The idea is to create a gateway. What’s behind that gateway has already been established. I think that the models of thought we (notably you, JSS, I, Parodites) have brought to each others awareness in the past two years or so is truly worth more than just a little hope and ambition. In fact I find it very hard to even muster a feeling of doubt about the power of any of it. It is this power that I want to ‘advertise’ - as all that drives man is his will to the feeling of power, to bring up Sauwelios’ most adequate contribution to Nietzsche.

And yet as Q says, the content can be conveyed to a good extent in its presentation. In fact, that will be the real ‘revolution’ in advertising - having it convey a seductive truth, rather than a seductive lie.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-26-2013, 06:24 AM Post: #87
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
having it convey a seductive truth, rather than a seductive lie.

Love it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-26-2013, 06:31 AM (This post was last modified: 05-26-2013 06:31 AM by Q.) Post: #88
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Now, having said all of that: Google Glass is crazy.

I am writing an article about all of this that will explain it better, but suffice it say I have seen this thing coming years ago (I thought it would be Apple because at the time I saw them as move inventive) and now that it is here, things are starting to really get nuts. They know where they want to take this thing. The year of ‘testing’ is to dissolve the laws that stand in the way of them bulldozing privacy. You wanna get nuts? Let get nuts.

youtube.com/watch?v=d-MtW7hbzWk

I’m honestly not sure what to say. Eventually, there will be that line in the sand. There will be the ‘purists’ and the borg. lol…“hey sexy. Why don’t you take off your HUD and let’s do this thing.”

More in a bit.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-26-2013, 08:41 AM Post: #89
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I want to express my objections fully, like ChainOfBeing, not to demolish or contradict you, but because if you are to win, you must understand them. Even if you later decide to ignore them.

I think advertisement, the appeal to drives, is a massive disrispect to human chemistry. I may be cruel, but I prefer to let someone be dumb than force him to be smart. I don’t want my friends to be endebted to me to that degree, and anybody that I help is a friend. There is an important element of individuality to human, to mammal, even. To attempt to overcome this is communism, fascism, and all other governmental isms.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-26-2013, 08:43 AM Post: #90
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
In other words, I believe that lust is a private affair, and a human right in its privacy if any thing is.

Privacy isn’t secrecy, just discretion in the sense of initiative.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

RE: Advertising
Absolutely.

This touches on the deep instinct of aversion and disgust I have always had when given the opportunity to lead lesser minds to positions of higher truths. If I am the only thing causing their rise, this is not only offensive to them and me, but is actually harmful to them. And to me. I am only able to speak with, education and elevate minds that have a certain quality about them which means that my “interventions” into their ideas is not manipulation but rather only an exchange of information. I suspect this quality has much to do with the difference between active and passive consciousness.

I think this is something that certain people just do not understand, because they seem to feel none of this aversion in the moment of manipulative influence. To them the ends entirely justify the means, with no “remainder” whatsoever.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-26-2013, 01:02 PM (This post was last modified: 05-26-2013 01:02 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #92
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
And Q, as for Google Glass… so what?

You think we do not already live in a world without whatever values and ideals you think are going to be sacrificed to Glass? Wake up man. Open your fucking eyes.

Glass is just another excuse for you to feel the stimulation of your ego, of your vanity as coerced self-valuing. You are more interested in your own emotional pleasure and self-justification than in anything else, which is why I have questioned you on this whole “revolutionzing advertising” thing from the very beginning here.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-26-2013, 02:19 PM (This post was last modified: 05-26-2013 02:23 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #93
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Fixed Cross, yes I see what you are saying, I agree with you. From your vantage my argument here is basically saying that we should just lay down and give up, just wait to die. However that is not my intention, and this consequence only manifests from the perspective of someone as elevated as yourself.

I do not believe that Q is worthy of the power which you aim for. I believe that you are worthy of it. But I wonder how many there are, who are capable of really taking this power and controlling it, rather than being determined by it. Pezer is correct that one cannot just use the machine itself to try and destroy the machine, it will not let this happen. But what we can do is select certain parts of the machine, for revaluation. This would be the application of strict values-selection and would require both the most general-comprehensive kind of intelligent as well as the most specific-precise kind of intelligence. Value Ontology presupposes both, of course, in those who are able to/compelled to grasp it.

My aim is not to give up on the aim, but to legitimize it. For my part, this means to purge its impure elements. At this point that is all I can really do, because I see this more easily than I see where we actually go forward from here. Your point that the future is not poisoned, yes I see this too – perhaps my issue is with the chasm between the ideal-actual and the real-actual, between the forms of virtuality, as equally real in their own right, and the concrete constructions of hard past, immovable stone, the dead and forever dying.

The mind can slip from one extreme to another and anywhere in between, based only on the most whimsical, psychologistic and arbitrary concern. Desire, need, self-satiety, anxiety and fear, self-defense, the feeling of the will to power… until these are harnessed by something which has gone beyond them, and beyond even the collective sum of them, we can elevate ourselves and our aim with as many theories and ideas as we like, but we have in effect changed nothing. Again this is what Pezer also said with his long list of thinkers-writers and the detrimental consequences of their thought. We must know at least in general toward what ends our aims move. And I do not mean our intention, our vision, but rather a movement seated in the world, in what is already beyond us.

When among those such as yourself, I am not nearly as cynical as I can appear to be. Pragmatism only hides an ideal when viewed through the lens of something greater, of something which truly has grown up from such soil of an ideal itself.

In effect, I long for a society of my peers, and barring this pronounce philosophy and all else merely an eternal vanity, a hopeless self-annihilation.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 02:04 AM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 02:04 AM by Q.) Post: #94
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Someone tell this guy we all get the basic ideas he’s presenting here. We don’t need the tl;dr posts about the basics of conspiracy 101.

And that he doesn’t need to talk like a movie character.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 02:06 AM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 02:11 AM by Q.) Post: #95
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I’ve asked you the same question like fucking 14 times. Why don’t you try answering it, instead of rambling on about shit we’ve beaten into the ground 3 years ago.

We’re growing up. You should think about joining us. You’re just a broken record at this point. You’ve said the same thing in every post in this thread. It’s not that I don’t get it. It’s that I don’t care about your sophomoric stance.

Quote:
I do not believe that Q is worthy of the power which you aim for.

Don’t tell me that power can corrupt a person. You haven’t had enough to know what it’s like.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 02:18 AM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 02:20 AM by Q.) Post: #96
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
I do not believe that Q is worthy of the power which you aim for. I believe that you are worthy of it. But I wonder how many there are, who are capable of really taking this power and controlling it, rather than being determined by it. Pezer is correct that one cannot just use the machine itself to try and destroy the machine, it will not let this happen. But what we can do is select certain parts of the machine, for revaluation. This would be the application of strict values-selection and would require both the most general-comprehensive kind of intelligent as well as the most specific-precise kind of intelligence. Value Ontology presupposes both, of course, in those who are able to/compelled to grasp it.

My aim is not to give up on the aim, but to legitimize it. For my part, this means to purge its impure elements. At this point that is all I can really do, because I see this more easily than I see where we actually go forward from here. Your point that the future is not poisoned, yes I see this too – perhaps my issue is with the chasm between the ideal-actual and the real-actual, between the forms of virtuality, as equally real in their own right, and the concrete constructions of hard past, immovable stone, the dead and forever dying.

The mind can slip from one extreme to another and anywhere in between, based only on the most whimsical, psychologistic and arbitrary concern. Desire, need, self-satiety, anxiety and fear, self-defense, the feeling of the will to power… until these are harnessed by something which has gone beyond them, and beyond even the collective sum of them, we can elevate ourselves and our aim with as many theories and ideas as we like, but we have in effect changed nothing. Again this is what Pezer also said with his long list of thinkers-writers and the detrimental consequences of their thought. We must know at least in general toward what ends our aims move. And I do not mean our intention, our vision, but rather a movement seated in the world, in what is already beyond us.

I don’t know if you are just baked or something, but read this outloud. You realize that you are saying

literally nothing of substance here.

So what should we aspire to, really? Long posts on a forum preaching to the choir? Or actual change in the world? And your counterargument is, “Well I don’t think that guy that can successfully do it.”

You don’t even fucking know me, man. If you did you wouldn’t be talking to me like an 6-year-old about the Will to Power. I will fill you in on something: everyone here understands the Will to Power. We have all read most philosophy books. I even have a degree in philosophy. I don’t need your approval. All I need is for you to answer the question I have posed to you 14 times.

I’m really getting tired of people treating reality like some Star Trek TNG city.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 02:27 AM Post: #97
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
As I said before: I haven’t given up on society.

Have you, chain? Have you completely given up, and do you want things to be some Mad Max scenario?

I don’t see how you guys can just drop words like ‘Anarchist’ and then even be on a forum? Why not just move to some farm or something somewhere and live our your days? I don’t see the use in sitting around hoping for ‘No government’ when that is… just fucking clearly not going to happen. Humans are organized. That is just a cosmic pattern that will never change.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 02:31 AM Post: #98
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Answer this. Fuck. I don’t see how you both can’t look at it like this regardless. All logic leads here. If you can show how commerce doesn’t need to happen, then I’ll drop this pursuit right now.

(05-25-2013 11:07 AM)Q Wrote:
Quote:
It is damaging because it co-opts the self-valuing mechanism toward ends not that the individual is not complicit in and/or is unaware of. Advertising inserts repetitions and fixation-patterns into the psyche, reorganizing desires, fears, ideas, perceptions around a single goal: to get that person to think-feel-act in a way that directly benefits the producers of the ads.

Yes. This is correct. That is to say, advertising is a crazy powerful force.

That is the specific reason why I want to try and change it. Right now, it’s too powerful, and the very act of selling is something that we can’t escape.

So, if we can’t escape selling, we have to change how it is done. That is what I am saying. If you can find me a way around the above, then I would love to hear it.

If you have some way where we don’t need to sell stuff, then let’s do that for sure.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 02:47 AM Post: #99
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
My apologies. I did not realize the full extent of your depravity.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 03:14 AM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 03:15 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #100
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
I will do you the honor of responding to your question, despite that you have wholly ignored my 7 focused questions to you.

I believe this is the one you want a response to,
Quote:
There will always be selling - start with that. I think you will find that a lot of what you said is irrelevant when you consider advertising is going to happen. The question is: how?

I have not ever claimed or assumed that advertising is “not going to happen”. I think you see my position through a false lens because this appears easier for you to understand, that I am trying merely to dismiss the unquestionable reality of the world of selling and advertising, as if these do not reach deep into the core nature of the human essence.

The goal of anarchy is not to undo what has already risen from the inevitable, the goal of anarchy is to produce alternatives, to widen the sphere of the possible. We oppose substance with substance, not substance with absence.

And when dealing with the “how?”, this is what FC and I have been talking about, if you are paying attention.


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower

Posts : 1237
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: Natural World Ashes Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:15 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
RE: Advertising
Quote:
If you want to truly help subvert the modern reality of advertising, find a way to sell things that does not require an ad, a manipulation and distorted presentation.

I think avoiding full transparency is inevitable.

Anyone remember Tristan/XCZ? One of the most important things he said to em is that you if you want anyone to listen, you have to learn how to market yourself. You have to dress things up a little bit.

Like I keep saying, I would like to get rid of ads.

However, if that happens, then the selling cannot be transparent or it won’t be effective. People won’t buy. You can’t have a movie or website that is totally transparent. Just look at how people buy stuff - even the most ethical companies have to play the game because people sort of like to play games.

At the very least, it’s just boring if you don’t.

Money these days is just people viewing and talking with each other online. Advertising will shift to that, it’s just a question of how. What I am trying to do is get close to an evitability more so than create something totally new or put in a lot of work.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 11:25 AM Post: #112
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Maybe they don’t buy because the product, laid bare, is a fucking waste of time. This is what we are saying. If it doesn’t sell itself, it maybe shouldn’t be sold.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 11:27 AM Post: #113
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
That people have been trained not to be entertained by anything other than what they can be advertised into allowing themselves to enjoy is, I am starting to think, enough of a reason to to infiltrate and trick people out of it. So you are reeling me in. But the examples you have used of how advertising is already changing are not that, and seem more like refinements on the old guard technique.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 12:43 PM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 12:46 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #114
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Yes. 90+% of everything sold is either utterly useless or harmful. Advertising makes us want it. If the product laid bare isn’t marketable then either the product is worthless or people don’t recognize it’s value.

So your revolution can begin by establishing the standards of value by which the two are differentiated from one another. Thus letting the first type fall out of the (artificial) market and letting the other stand forth and become value-able in the (real) market.

Productive constructions of artificial or fabricated value still need something more or less substantial and grounded to rest upon. Even Nietzsche with his “great and terrifying masks” knew this. I say, use advertising against advertising. Make anti-ad ads, like what Adbusters does. Don’t refine the system’s tools, expose the tool as tool. Someone is bound to be able to profit off that, so find them/their product and sell it through the anti-ads.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 03:47 PM Post: #115
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
(05-27-2013 11:25 AM)pezer Wrote:
Maybe they don’t buy because the product, laid bare, is a fucking waste of time. This is what we are saying. If it doesn’t sell itself, it maybe shouldn’t be sold.

What product? I’m not talking about a vacuum cleaner. Time to break out of this 1920’s Nietzsche paradigm. That was like a 100 years ago.

We’re not moving into, or will ever exist in some Marxist one-product-per-use society so I don’t know why you guys bother with that stuff.

I mean… be serious. If you want to talk about that, find Detrop in jail and pen pal with him. I’m looking for something that is remotely plausible. Some Soviet state is not plausible to me.

People want to have fun in life. I don’t know why you would even want to live in a society like that. It sounds boring as fuck.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 03:52 PM Post: #116
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
You guys keep reiterating that I shouldn’t walk into the Devil’s playpen and start trying to change the entire game - OK, cool - but then you come up with this ‘Well we want everything to be some Soviet gulag commerce’ thing and it’s just like… is what actually your plan?

You will have to compromise that slightly if you want to have a hope at succeeding because you are looking to change ‘the game’ way, way too dramatically to ever hope to succeed.

My approach may not be the most ethically ‘pure’ but it has a snowball’s chance in hell at actually happening.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 03:54 PM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 03:54 PM by Q.) Post: #117
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I am sensing a whole lot of simply hating advertising. And I mean… I get it. I honestly do. I wouldn’t be saying this stuff if I didn’t fucking despite advertising in its current form.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 04:05 PM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 04:06 PM by Q.) Post: #118
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Guys - this is our first hype thread in a while. I like it. Even if I had to get trolly lol

I am not bragging so much as demonstrating how advertising is required for attention in a given area.

There is too much going on for the fact of the matter to be enough. It took me saying something novel to push people past that threshold of interest.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 05:19 PM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 05:20 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #119
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Wait, who said anything about wanting a Soviet gulag?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 05:22 PM Post: #120
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
An all-out war of anti-ads against the whole advertising system doesn’t sound “boring” to me at all. In fact it sounds a hell of a lot more interesting than the shit setup we have right now, with the proliferation of fake forms of meaning and value-as-cheap-fashion.

Not to mention the positive health benefits for the individual, relationships, politics and the environment if we were to cut out a huge chunk of the fucking waste that commerce produces.

RE: Advertising
I am saying the public doesn’t want complete transparency. I not saying that there should be waste/wasteful/cheap stuff.

If anything, I see those two things as somewhat diametric because I think artistic advertising is more efficient than just saying: “This new vacuum has these new features.”

Why regress back to the pre-Bernays period? That is what you are suggesting.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 05:59 PM Post: #122
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
(05-27-2013 05:19 PM)ChainOfBeing Wrote:
Wait, who said anything about wanting a Soviet gulag?

I tend to be somewhat dramatic. I love to take literary liberties because, well, I am a writer.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 06:22 PM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 06:22 PM by Q.) Post: #123
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
“So have you figured out a way to work “The Wheel” into it?”

“We know it’s hard because wheels aren’t really seen as exciting technology, even if they are seen as the original.”


"He also talked about a deeper bond with the product - nostalgia - it’s delicate, but…it’s potent.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 06:23 PM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 06:24 PM by Q.) Post: #124
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
“It takes us to a place that we ache to go again.”

“It lets us travel in the way that a child travels.”
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 06:29 PM Post: #125
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Bro, you have accused us of much projecting, so you are held to see it in yourself.

Now, listen, advertising is defined as the presenting of a product. If it’s something else, please blow my mind, and don’t use pretty abstractions like you accuse us of doing.

And read me like I mean it, without spite (without moraline Wink ).
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 06:34 PM Post: #126
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Advertising as free-form teasing…?

I can see why you are into the occult… I’m not sying don’t jump into the hell fire!!! By the gods!! I am saying please do,

If anything, I just want you to know that it is hell fire so that you can be prepared to deal with shit once you get there.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 06:34 PM Post: #127
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Now, listen, advertising is defined as the presenting of a product. If it’s something else, please blow my mind,

Ah ha, but here it is:

It can’t be anything else, because that is so broad. That is what I am saying.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 06:35 PM Post: #128
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Dude, did you ever really let the significance of Beyond Good and Evil as a phrase sink in?

Beyond

Good

and

Evil.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 06:37 PM Post: #129
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
That was as far as defusing my appearance of judge and jury. I am a critic, and a colaborationist.

I said you are selling products. You said that is 1920 talk. I say show me how. Yo say I’m being too broad.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 07:01 PM Post: #130
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Let me sleep on it.

Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
It’s 1920’s talk because… this isn’t the 1920s. Like I said, what I am talking about with respect to ads applies to even this forum. Why not just have it all black and white with no quotes or any aesthetic consideration? Why did I color it like this, and behave a certain way? It’s all art. It’s all advertising. It’s all interconnected, and when you try to hate on one aspect, you just invariably end up hating on art.

Or that is how I see it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-28-2013, 07:18 PM Post: #132
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
(05-28-2013 06:31 PM)Q Wrote:
It’s 1920’s talk because… this isn’t the 1920s. Like I said, what I am talking about with respect to ads applies to even this forum. Why not just have it all black and white with no quotes or any aesthetic consideration? Why did I color it like this, and behave a certain way? It’s all art. It’s all advertising. It’s all interconnected, and when you try to hate on one aspect, you just invariably end up hating on art.

Or that is how I see it.

The difference is that beauty does not advertise anything. Beauty becomes an advertisement with the addition of a vainity, insatiable longing, coupling with a desire. This is how philosophy emerges in a state of wonder, as Aristotle said, because conscience or morality/the good, in terms of a human kind of sympathy, bears firstly only the weight of itself and assumes a noble stature of innocence before depravity and lust. The proof is in the pudding. Philosophy is that sign of an arriving aesthetic upon the back of which things become as new, new desires, new lusts, new sympathies and powers.

No one is talking about going back in time to 1920s era, but in the modern world there exists the choice to aim oneself either toward that from which the creative impulse came, even if the aim is itself the child of this impulse and/or its “refinement”, or toward what alone may exist solely because the impulse exists, as a greater measure of its vitality, of a higher possibility.

We don’t want to get mired in the past. That is what we think you are doing.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 01:34 AM Post: #133
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I’m getting mired in Marx. You keep ignoring that point. I will keep bringing it up.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 01:35 AM Post: #134
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
What you are saying has merit, but you’re taking it back to the Greeks.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 01:37 AM Post: #135
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
as a greater measure of its vitality, of a higher possibility.

Please give me an example .
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 02:55 AM (This post was last modified: 05-29-2013 02:57 AM by pezer.) Post: #136
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Me first, then you:

Art is the bringing up of impulses and drives.

Advertising is the presenting of a product (usually through art). If it’s anything else, blow my mind.

Go
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 05:46 AM Post: #137
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Marx
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 06:01 AM Post: #138
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I could just as easily say ‘Advertising is the bringing up of impulses and desires’.

Selling stuff (online) is intractably connected to artistic endeavours. The only kind of art you are taking about would be someone in a cave doing it for no one else. No one does that.

If its online, it’s selling.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 06:03 AM Post: #139
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Why can’t you say the words? You are presenting a product.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 06:05 AM Post: #140
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
And remember, I’m not making a moralistic point. I care fuck all if art dies tomorrow, today.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

RE: Advertising
Ok, fuck the pproduct. Now it’s me being silly. Youa re selling. We agree.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 06:07 AM Post: #142
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Does it not matter what it is you are selling when you are selling?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 06:08 AM Post: #143
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Fuck that too.

Tell me, what exactly are you selling me right n-

Ok. I’m starting to get it…
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 06:09 AM Post: #144
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Yes.

What exactly are you trying to sell me right now?

If you can’t tell me, if you have to dance around it with art, I am deeply suspicious that I wouldn’t want it if I knew what it was. That is a point against advertising, not for it.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 07:22 AM Post: #145
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Yes I will say it: advertising is selling something. I don’t deny that.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 07:24 AM Post: #146
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Everything online is selling. Even this post. I want you to respond.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 08:37 AM Post: #147
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
The problem with selling is the end it denotes. Words for activity tend to include an end-game, and the end-game of selling is to exchange money for whatever. Is that the end game? Isn’t money itself designed to be only a middleman?

Is it the process itself that you are seeking to rejuvinate, change somehow?

Or is the reason you want me to respond not the money endgame of a website’s functioning?

Me, I am not here to sell anything. Maybe that’s why I constantly feel like I’m running into walls. I’m not here to buy, either. I’m here to criticize and collaborate. To exchange perceptions.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 08:39 AM Post: #148
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Philosophical and non-philosophical discussion does not function by the lose something, get something paradigm. It works by showing something and being shown something. The production of value happens inside the philosopher or non-philosopher’s head.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 10:16 AM Post: #149
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Right.

So I have concluded I cannot convey this idea to yours or my satisfaction. Not sure where we go from here.

Prob just to talking about something else.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 10:53 AM Post: #150
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Q, we have stated our belief plainly and with detail. You have stated yours plainly as well, but have given precious little detail. Perhaps we can take it from there.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower

Posts : 1237
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: Natural World Ashes Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:24 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
RE: Advertising
Or maybe if I lay out for you my fears and hopes here we can move forward.

My fear is that your project might be a sexy way to avoid the real work at hand, which is to break down the barriers of stupidity and advance human along its present potential.

My hopes are that advertising can be transformed in the way you are telling us it can be, or that, made smaller, it can act as another force in the field instead of the tyrannical mind-nanny it is today.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 11:08 AM Post: #152
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Dude we’re on page 15. I’ve stated the detail as much as I can. I am not holding out on you. It’s just that you guys keep asking for an example of an advertisement, but you refuse to accept my example, which is a movie or a website. Which one doesn’t matter. At all. I get the feeling you are convinced this will be solved by some example. It won’t, so I’m unsure why you guy keep asking for one.

It may be that I cannot explain this because I have not fleshed it out myself enough.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 11:54 AM Post: #153
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I think that’s the case. I took your examples, they just seem to me like examples of exactly what I don’t want, what doesn’t seem to be what you are proposing.

Do flesh it out, don’t let yourself be dragged into some other person’s agenda.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 12:13 PM (This post was last modified: 05-29-2013 12:13 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #154
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Sure Q, if you define advertising as “to show someone something” then yeah, it’s all advertising.

But then again, in so doing all you have accomplished is playing around with mere semantics. I have been trying to go deeper, unfortunately you seem not to want to come along.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 03:21 PM Post: #155
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Dude, we’d get along a lot better if you just assume we’re all of around the same intelligence, we’re all willing, and we’re all more or less as well read.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 03:21 PM Post: #156
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
(05-29-2013 11:54 AM)pezer Wrote:
I think that’s the case. I took your examples, they just seem to me like examples of exactly what I don’t want, what doesn’t seem to be what you are proposing.

Do flesh it out, don’t let yourself be dragged into some other person’s agenda.

You don’t want a website?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 03:46 PM Post: #157
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
OK, talk to us about the Marx connection again. If anything, it seems to me that advertising just follows the cycle of monopoly of ideas. Is that what you want to work for?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 05:02 PM Post: #158
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I think you put too much stock in our shared knowledge. ChainOfBeing and I recognize intelligence by how that shit is translated, with each philosopher or non-philosopher’s art, into written word. If we seem like we are just trying to sound smart, it is because that is the only way we recognize smart.

We want you to tell us your plan, no refer us to the source theory that supports it.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 06:04 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 06:06 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #159
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
(05-29-2013 03:21 PM)Q Wrote:
Dude, we’d get along a lot better if you just assume we’re all of around the same intelligence, we’re all willing, and we’re all more or less as well read.

On what basis would I justifiably assume any such thing?

You would rather get along than uncover truth?

Know that you ascribe pathological motives to my writings here which do not exist. I am concerned with truth and not with your, or my own, feelings. Do me the honor of being likewise motivated, if you are able. And maybe consider starting by answering those 7 questions that I put to you. Why have you not answered them yet?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 06:06 AM Post: #160
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I will explain it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?

Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Basically, Marx says that all art, no matter what you think, is reduced down to socio-economic forces.

There is no “pure” art for Marx.

I think you can certainly attack this view, but others have and they haven’t faired all that well. I have written numerous times about how Virgina Woolf somewhat does disprove Marx indirectly, but thus far no one has touched on her reasoning.

You all just keep saying, “Yeah, pure art is possible.”

Is it? Unless you are alone in a cave?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 08:08 AM Post: #162
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Whereas I wonder why Q has not answered Chains questions, I disagree with the idea that advertising is always selling something. That’s too narrow. I’m sure you all know the phrase “there’s no such thing as bad publicity”. Advertising is publicity, which means: making it known that some/thing/one exists.

And if you think about this deeper, practically - how else are you ever going to communicate about something that is of value to you, without advertising it? It’s usually impossible. You’re most of the time going to show, convey just a detail, a segment, a part of whatever it is you’re trying to draw attention to.

Selectivity is not primarily due to betrayal, deceit. It’s primarily due to lack of time and space, lack of attention-span, lack of brainpower, lack of opportunity to tell the whole truth. A good advertisement, in my eyes, is one that conveys an idea that in turn evokes the desire to find out the whole truth to which that idea pertains.

Q, you’re not one known to show the back of your tongue. Sometimes you’ll need to do just that to win people’s trust. So, sometimes advertising isn’t enough. Is it fair to say that right now what you’re doing is advertising advertising?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 08:13 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 08:15 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #163
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
From what I read, they’re not saying that pure art (whatever that is) is possible, they’re rather not agreeing that advertising is art at all. The point is not that it’s impure art, but that it departs from a totally different basis.

But then we do get into a shady area. Art generally works to draw the attention to something - most generally and rudimentarily, to the mindset of the artist - and in case of much commercial art, to certain values, a certain lifestyle, certain impulses…

Concerning most of the questions philosophy can ask I have come to a pretty satisfying answer. But on “what is art?” I feel in my bones that I can not give a clear cut definition. Perhaps it is the question that needs to be addressed here, boring, age old and impossible as it may be.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 10:38 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 10:39 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #164
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Art is a process of maintaining fidelity to something, to truth, to an appeal of openness and to the cathartic creative act. Art produces a change in the artist and in the viewer of the art, art fundamentally changes the way that we see, think, believe, feel, value. Real art will fucking change your life.

Art is profound, whereas advertising takes the shortest route and is bent upon efficiency. Efficiency of manipulating the viewer to some end. Advertising is impossible without this desire to influence, whereas art can and often is done with no such desire to influence. Where art achieves influence it is often a secondary thing and perhaps not even intended by the artist.

Where advertising incorporates a more artistic approach it only becomes more like art and less like advertising. The middle-ground between art and advertising, where these overlap, are only the exceptions that most prove the rule, that most show the real differences between the two.

Art may become political, it may emerge from a political truth, but its aim is never only to influence the politics of something. Art is always done at least in part for its own sake, because of the cathartic need, the need for freedom, the creative spirit, and in obedience to some aesthetic or intellectual standard even if only implicitly. Advertising, to the contrary, must have this political intention, it cannot merely emerge from a political truth but must aim toward the political—influence is the only reason that any advertising is ever created. Not so with art.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 10:42 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 10:44 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #165
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
In this way, we can see advertising as a more recent and distorted offspring of art. Advertising has taken art and removed from it the impulse to truth, the need for freedom, the cathartic effect, and the need to open up and maintain a fidelity to the void. Advertising therefore is the corruption of art toward ends which art itself may end up serving, but in its own way, and only as a secondary effect to its primary motive-cause. Advertising removes the core of art and uses the image, the form of it to ends anathema to art itself; art does not need to prescribe its own end, its own effect, rather art deliberately must abstain from doing so if it is to remain authentic, if it is to “groove in an aesthetic” and act as a disclosure of that which is concealed.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 01:14 PM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 01:14 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #166
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
In removing the core of art while retaining its form and something of its impulse, advertising has both liberated self-valuing from any historical boundary, as well as given birth to the greatest monster ever known to mankind.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 03:04 PM Post: #167
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Advertising has taken art and removed from it the impulse to truth, the need for freedom, the cathartic effect, and the need to open up and maintain a fidelity to the void.

Again, we’re not in the Bernays era anymore. Not completely, at least.

I put it to you this way: do you think advertising has changed since the internet has hit?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 04:09 PM Post: #168
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
(05-30-2013 03:04 PM)Q Wrote:
Again, we’re not in the Bernays era anymore. Not completely, at least.

In what way?

Btw, yes, I feel it has gotten more personal, like in that creepy ass show we all watched that one time with the guy living in the world sorrounded by screens. You know, the sequel to the pig fucking politician.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 10:22 AM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 10:22 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #169
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
To be completely honest Q, I see no reason to continue engaging you further here. It isn’t just that you seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge or engage my points (or to answer the questions which I carefully constructed with the aim of furthering this discussion and getting to know your position better), but that you truly seem motivated by something other than honest disclosure of truth. I would say you have an agenda to push, but then again I don’t know you that well really. You may just be ignorant of what you are doing.

This is not a game to me, I am not here to play chess. This is serious, this fucking matters.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 10:53 AM Post: #170
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
You think I am some agent provacateur or something? Lol you must be completely paranoid.

Nice. I like it.

As for this discussion, sure we can end it. I already said that a couple posts ago. I would suggest you guys read Marx. That is pretty key here and it doesn’t sound like that part is clicking.

In the meantime I will refactor this argument

Also if I am making a reference you do not get, just tell me. Instead of saying I’m not answering questions when the answers (or lack thereof) depend on the references.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 10:59 AM Post: #172
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
You guys should put yourself in my position.

All I am seeing is “Art is like…moving people’s emotions, and stuff.”

I’m plenty serious but it kinda sounds like you’re giving me your personal definition for why art is. Let’s skip that and just use actual philosophical stances.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 11:01 AM Post: #173
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
If you want to go with some Aristotlean virtue thing, then why cannot I bring up Marx, who came after and addressed all that?

Why can’t we move from Bernays era into a new one? Why are we being held back by you guys’ personal views that advertising in the 20’s is the same as now. It’s fucking not.

RE: Advertising
Or maybe if I lay out for you my fears and hopes here we can move forward.

My fear is that your project might be a sexy way to avoid the real work at hand, which is to break down the barriers of stupidity and advance human along its present potential.

My hopes are that advertising can be transformed in the way you are telling us it can be, or that, made smaller, it can act as another force in the field instead of the tyrannical mind-nanny it is today.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 11:08 AM Post: #152
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Dude we’re on page 15. I’ve stated the detail as much as I can. I am not holding out on you. It’s just that you guys keep asking for an example of an advertisement, but you refuse to accept my example, which is a movie or a website. Which one doesn’t matter. At all. I get the feeling you are convinced this will be solved by some example. It won’t, so I’m unsure why you guy keep asking for one.

It may be that I cannot explain this because I have not fleshed it out myself enough.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 11:54 AM Post: #153
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I think that’s the case. I took your examples, they just seem to me like examples of exactly what I don’t want, what doesn’t seem to be what you are proposing.

Do flesh it out, don’t let yourself be dragged into some other person’s agenda.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 12:13 PM (This post was last modified: 05-29-2013 12:13 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #154
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Sure Q, if you define advertising as “to show someone something” then yeah, it’s all advertising.

But then again, in so doing all you have accomplished is playing around with mere semantics. I have been trying to go deeper, unfortunately you seem not to want to come along.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 03:21 PM Post: #155
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Dude, we’d get along a lot better if you just assume we’re all of around the same intelligence, we’re all willing, and we’re all more or less as well read.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 03:21 PM Post: #156
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
(05-29-2013 11:54 AM)pezer Wrote:
I think that’s the case. I took your examples, they just seem to me like examples of exactly what I don’t want, what doesn’t seem to be what you are proposing.

Do flesh it out, don’t let yourself be dragged into some other person’s agenda.

You don’t want a website?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 03:46 PM Post: #157
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
OK, talk to us about the Marx connection again. If anything, it seems to me that advertising just follows the cycle of monopoly of ideas. Is that what you want to work for?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-29-2013, 05:02 PM Post: #158
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I think you put too much stock in our shared knowledge. ChainOfBeing and I recognize intelligence by how that shit is translated, with each philosopher or non-philosopher’s art, into written word. If we seem like we are just trying to sound smart, it is because that is the only way we recognize smart.

We want you to tell us your plan, no refer us to the source theory that supports it.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 06:04 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 06:06 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #159
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
(05-29-2013 03:21 PM)Q Wrote:
Dude, we’d get along a lot better if you just assume we’re all of around the same intelligence, we’re all willing, and we’re all more or less as well read.

On what basis would I justifiably assume any such thing?

You would rather get along than uncover truth?

Know that you ascribe pathological motives to my writings here which do not exist. I am concerned with truth and not with your, or my own, feelings. Do me the honor of being likewise motivated, if you are able. And maybe consider starting by answering those 7 questions that I put to you. Why have you not answered them yet?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 06:06 AM Post: #160
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I will explain it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?

Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Basically, Marx says that all art, no matter what you think, is reduced down to socio-economic forces.

There is no “pure” art for Marx.

I think you can certainly attack this view, but others have and they haven’t faired all that well. I have written numerous times about how Virgina Woolf somewhat does disprove Marx indirectly, but thus far no one has touched on her reasoning.

You all just keep saying, “Yeah, pure art is possible.”

Is it? Unless you are alone in a cave?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 08:08 AM Post: #162
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
Whereas I wonder why Q has not answered Chains questions, I disagree with the idea that advertising is always selling something. That’s too narrow. I’m sure you all know the phrase “there’s no such thing as bad publicity”. Advertising is publicity, which means: making it known that some/thing/one exists.

And if you think about this deeper, practically - how else are you ever going to communicate about something that is of value to you, without advertising it? It’s usually impossible. You’re most of the time going to show, convey just a detail, a segment, a part of whatever it is you’re trying to draw attention to.

Selectivity is not primarily due to betrayal, deceit. It’s primarily due to lack of time and space, lack of attention-span, lack of brainpower, lack of opportunity to tell the whole truth. A good advertisement, in my eyes, is one that conveys an idea that in turn evokes the desire to find out the whole truth to which that idea pertains.

Q, you’re not one known to show the back of your tongue. Sometimes you’ll need to do just that to win people’s trust. So, sometimes advertising isn’t enough. Is it fair to say that right now what you’re doing is advertising advertising?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 08:13 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 08:15 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #163
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Advertising
From what I read, they’re not saying that pure art (whatever that is) is possible, they’re rather not agreeing that advertising is art at all. The point is not that it’s impure art, but that it departs from a totally different basis.

But then we do get into a shady area. Art generally works to draw the attention to something - most generally and rudimentarily, to the mindset of the artist - and in case of much commercial art, to certain values, a certain lifestyle, certain impulses…

Concerning most of the questions philosophy can ask I have come to a pretty satisfying answer. But on “what is art?” I feel in my bones that I can not give a clear cut definition. Perhaps it is the question that needs to be addressed here, boring, age old and impossible as it may be.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 10:38 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 10:39 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #164
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Art is a process of maintaining fidelity to something, to truth, to an appeal of openness and to the cathartic creative act. Art produces a change in the artist and in the viewer of the art, art fundamentally changes the way that we see, think, believe, feel, value. Real art will fucking change your life.

Art is profound, whereas advertising takes the shortest route and is bent upon efficiency. Efficiency of manipulating the viewer to some end. Advertising is impossible without this desire to influence, whereas art can and often is done with no such desire to influence. Where art achieves influence it is often a secondary thing and perhaps not even intended by the artist.

Where advertising incorporates a more artistic approach it only becomes more like art and less like advertising. The middle-ground between art and advertising, where these overlap, are only the exceptions that most prove the rule, that most show the real differences between the two.

Art may become political, it may emerge from a political truth, but its aim is never only to influence the politics of something. Art is always done at least in part for its own sake, because of the cathartic need, the need for freedom, the creative spirit, and in obedience to some aesthetic or intellectual standard even if only implicitly. Advertising, to the contrary, must have this political intention, it cannot merely emerge from a political truth but must aim toward the political—influence is the only reason that any advertising is ever created. Not so with art.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 10:42 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 10:44 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #165
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
In this way, we can see advertising as a more recent and distorted offspring of art. Advertising has taken art and removed from it the impulse to truth, the need for freedom, the cathartic effect, and the need to open up and maintain a fidelity to the void. Advertising therefore is the corruption of art toward ends which art itself may end up serving, but in its own way, and only as a secondary effect to its primary motive-cause. Advertising removes the core of art and uses the image, the form of it to ends anathema to art itself; art does not need to prescribe its own end, its own effect, rather art deliberately must abstain from doing so if it is to remain authentic, if it is to “groove in an aesthetic” and act as a disclosure of that which is concealed.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 01:14 PM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 01:14 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #166
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
In removing the core of art while retaining its form and something of its impulse, advertising has both liberated self-valuing from any historical boundary, as well as given birth to the greatest monster ever known to mankind.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 03:04 PM Post: #167
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
Advertising has taken art and removed from it the impulse to truth, the need for freedom, the cathartic effect, and the need to open up and maintain a fidelity to the void.

Again, we’re not in the Bernays era anymore. Not completely, at least.

I put it to you this way: do you think advertising has changed since the internet has hit?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 04:09 PM Post: #168
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
(05-30-2013 03:04 PM)Q Wrote:
Again, we’re not in the Bernays era anymore. Not completely, at least.

In what way?

Btw, yes, I feel it has gotten more personal, like in that creepy ass show we all watched that one time with the guy living in the world sorrounded by screens. You know, the sequel to the pig fucking politician.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 10:22 AM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 10:22 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #169
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
To be completely honest Q, I see no reason to continue engaging you further here. It isn’t just that you seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge or engage my points (or to answer the questions which I carefully constructed with the aim of furthering this discussion and getting to know your position better), but that you truly seem motivated by something other than honest disclosure of truth. I would say you have an agenda to push, but then again I don’t know you that well really. You may just be ignorant of what you are doing.

This is not a game to me, I am not here to play chess. This is serious, this fucking matters.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 10:53 AM Post: #170
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
You think I am some agent provacateur or something? Lol you must be completely paranoid.

Nice. I like it.

As for this discussion, sure we can end it. I already said that a couple posts ago. I would suggest you guys read Marx. That is pretty key here and it doesn’t sound like that part is clicking.

In the meantime I will refactor this argument

Also if I am making a reference you do not get, just tell me. Instead of saying I’m not answering questions when the answers (or lack thereof) depend on the references.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 10:59 AM Post: #172
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
You guys should put yourself in my position.

All I am seeing is “Art is like…moving people’s emotions, and stuff.”

I’m plenty serious but it kinda sounds like you’re giving me your personal definition for why art is. Let’s skip that and just use actual philosophical stances.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 11:01 AM Post: #173
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
If you want to go with some Aristotlean virtue thing, then why cannot I bring up Marx, who came after and addressed all that?

Why can’t we move from Bernays era into a new one? Why are we being held back by you guys’ personal views that advertising in the 20’s is the same as now. It’s fucking not.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 12:31 PM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 12:31 PM by pezer.) Post: #174
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
¡You have yet to fucking make a point at all to explain that!
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 12:33 PM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 12:34 PM by pezer.) Post: #175
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I am trying here man, I honestly am. I could not be more curious as to what redeeming thing you see in advertising. I reallyreallyreallytreallyreally want to know. But your defensiveness is like every time we say something to try to understand, we get hit over the fucking head with a club. It hurts. We do it because we want to help you help us get it.

Please, stop beating us over the head with a club.

Explain your position. To go back to the 20’s in a different way: man up and explain your position.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 01:06 PM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 01:10 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #176
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
Q, yeah, I get Marx, I’ve read Marx. So what? Marx didn’t even fucking write about art, as far as I have ever read or seen. It is not central to his ideas at all.

If modern advertising began with Bernays, then what the hell are you talking about with "There is no “pure” art for Marx. "? You got some quotes or something to back that up, or at least a clear and rational argument? How are you connecting any of this together?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 01:10 PM Post: #177
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
I don’t even care about Marx, honestly. If you want to create an actual argument using some of his ideas, that would be great, I would love to get into that. But you have not done that, not at all.

As Pezer said, you are highly defensive, you continue to just beat us over the head with, well nothing really.

Where is your substance? Why do you hide?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 01:28 PM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 01:29 PM by Q.) Post: #178
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Look, I don’t know what to tell you. Marx isn’t all proletarians and revolutions. If you think he hasn’t written about art, you are wrong.

For like the twenty-seventh time, this is the argument:

Marx explains how there is no “pure” art in the sense that you are describing because you can never escape socio-political contexts that bind people.

Your definition of art:

Quote:
Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.

For Marx, this is non-sensical.

Quote:
Their superb knowledge of world art helped Marx and Engels to elaborate genuinely scientific aesthetic principles. The founders of scientific communism were thus not only able to answer the complex aesthetic questions of the previous age, but also to elaborate a fundamentally new system of aesthetic science. They did so only as a result of the great revolutionary upheaval they had brought about in philosophy by creating dialectical and historical materialism and laying down the foundations for the materialist conception of history. Though Marx and Engels have left no major writings on art, their views in this field, when collected together, form a harmonious whole which is a logical extension of their scientific and revolutionary Weltanschauung. They explained the nature of art and its paths of development, its tasks in society and social aims. Marxist aesthetics, like the whole teaching of Marx and Engels, are subordinated to the struggle for the communist reorganisation of society.

When developing their theory of aesthetics, Marx and Engels naturally based themselves on the achievements of their predecessors. But the main aesthetic problems — and above all the problem of the relationship between art and reality — were solved by them in a fundamentally new way, on the basis of materialist dialectics. Idealist aesthetics considered art as a reproduction of the ideal, standing over and* above actual reality. The origin of any art form, its development, flowering, and decay, all remained incomprehensible to the art theoreticians and historians of the pre-Marxian period, inasmuch as they studied these in isolation from man’s social existence.

Marx and Engels considered it absolutely impossible to understand art and literature proceeding only from their internal laws of development. In their opinion, the essence, origin, development, and social role of art could only be understood through analysis of the social system as a whole, within which the economic factor — the development, of productive forces in complex interaction with production relations — plays the decisive role. Thus art, as defined by Marx and Engels, is one of the forms of social consciousness and it therefore follows that the reasons for its changes should be sought in the social existence of men.

Marx and Engels revealed the social nature of art and its development in the course of history and showed that in a society with class antagonisms it was influenced by class ‘contradictions and by the politics and ideologies of particular classes.

In other words, if you are poor, you are selling the poor. If you are rich, you are selling the rich.

I don’t know what is so hard to get about this. It’s a super old argument. All art, commerce, communication, it’s all theoretically been linked. But now it’s happening in actuality. In the very system that we live in.

If you want me to prescribe to a view of art that was surpassed by a guy with a Santa beard 150 years ago, it’s not going to happen. You will have to do better than the basic dichotomy you are presenting here. Marx knocks that shit down.

Quote:
Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.

I mean just read it. Are you satisfied with that? I’m not.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 01:46 PM Post: #179
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
I am trying here man, I honestly am. I could not be more curious as to what redeeming thing you see in advertising.

But I don’t see any real redeeming part to it. I keep saying this. Go back and read the first couple posts. I say that I like to manipulate people (what artist doesn’t) but I do not say that I find advertising redeeming. I say that it needs a serious overhaul.

It’s like you guys have just made up your mind about advertising as completely beyond saving, and then when I ask you OK, what alternative is there? You go on about some anarchist thing, as if people won’t still need to buy and sell things.

If anything, I am the serious one here. I have thought about this carefully.

It comes to to two things:

1.) Is advertising going anywhere, even in some anarchist thing? No. It’s not.

2.) Given the above, there needs to be a change in the advertising industry for the better. Or it will continue to suck.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 02:01 PM Post: #180
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
That is a fine argument, but I have already answered it. This is the form my answer takes: My philosophical studies have led me to believe that, yes, advertising is beyond saving; yet I have changed my mind radically enough about enough things to promise my help to you anyways, let’s do this shit, let’s overhaul advertising.

About Marx, it took me a very long time, but I finally understood that his system has borders as well, there is possible human action outside his framework. Anarchist literature abounds. Art might not have a place there, this I know, and I am willing to make the sacrifice. In my mind, you are right that art is in the end part of the Marxist zeitgeist process, a way to channel both the impulses of the viewer and the artist that allows for “teh system” to sustain “itself.” A way to make an animal ccivilized in the capitalist flavour. An anarchist doesn’t necessarily believe in primitivism, but s/he believes in an overhaul of the sublimating devices that is based on human scientific though in lieu of dumb fucking luck.

In other words, no, I do not believe that selling-buying is necessary at all. All we need is for the cream of the intelligence crop to decide this is true and stop slaving over systems they sub-consciously, if not consciously, know to be below their intellectual capacities.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

Along these lines, here is a video series I made. It lasts about 56 mins total. [flash(0,0)[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ogmMdb4v9U[/youtube]/flash]
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 02:09 PM Post: #182
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
All we need is for the cream of the intelligence crop to decide this is true and stop slaving over systems they sub-consciously, if not consciously, know to be below their intellectual capacities.

What about everyone else? The people on this forum represent like 6% of society.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 02:12 PM Post: #183
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
And how do you expect to make the global 6% do that?

This is why, for me, this always comes back to, ta da, material stuff.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 02:26 PM Post: #184
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
That 6% is the only one that really makes decisions on consciousness. Everybody else just follows. We are the 94%'s future.

Material does not = the current status quo. That’s just what the propaganda is designed to make us feel. By us, I mean the 6%.

People in charge don’t like change, that is why so many intellectuals have historically taken up arms against them. Yet, as I have said, arms are no longer necessary. Though those people in charge don’t see it, the potential our thought has is not dangerous to anybody.

I had a dog once, he was brought in by my mom from many years of living in an abusive family. Everytime I approached him with the intention to pet him and be nice to him at first was met with uncontrollable fear and pissing all over everywhere.

Did I decide to beat him, but in a better way because that’s the only thing he would accept? The only way I could get him to eat the food I served him?

No. Little by little, by being myself, I showed him there was no danger. Eventually, we became close friends.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 02:28 PM Post: #185
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
The world is ours now, Q. We can do what we want with it. Your employers’ employers will all be dead 30 years from now.

What seeds will we plant?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 02:54 PM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 02:59 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #186
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
(05-31-2013 01:28 PM)Q Wrote:
Look, I don’t know what to tell you. Marx isn’t all proletarians and revolutions. If you think he hasn’t written about art, you are wrong.

For like the twenty-seventh time, this is the argument:

Marx explains how there is no “pure” art in the sense that you are describing because you can never escape socio-political contexts that bind people.

Your definition of art:

Quote:
Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.

For Marx, this is non-sensical.

Yeah, because that isn’t my argument, either. You are not reading closely enough.

Quote:
Quote:
Their superb knowledge of world art helped Marx and Engels to elaborate genuinely scientific aesthetic principles. The founders of scientific communism were thus not only able to answer the complex aesthetic questions of the previous age, but also to elaborate a fundamentally new system of aesthetic science. They did so only as a result of the great revolutionary upheaval they had brought about in philosophy by creating dialectical and historical materialism and laying down the foundations for the materialist conception of history. Though Marx and Engels have left no major writings on art, their views in this field, when collected together, form a harmonious whole which is a logical extension of their scientific and revolutionary Weltanschauung. They explained the nature of art and its paths of development, its tasks in society and social aims. Marxist aesthetics, like the whole teaching of Marx and Engels, are subordinated to the struggle for the communist reorganisation of society.

When developing their theory of aesthetics, Marx and Engels naturally based themselves on the achievements of their predecessors. But the main aesthetic problems — and above all the problem of the relationship between art and reality — were solved by them in a fundamentally new way, on the basis of materialist dialectics. Idealist aesthetics considered art as a reproduction of the ideal, standing over and* above actual reality. The origin of any art form, its development, flowering, and decay, all remained incomprehensible to the art theoreticians and historians of the pre-Marxian period, inasmuch as they studied these in isolation from man’s social existence.

Marx and Engels considered it absolutely impossible to understand art and literature proceeding only from their internal laws of development. In their opinion, the essence, origin, development, and social role of art could only be understood through analysis of the social system as a whole, within which the economic factor — the development, of productive forces in complex interaction with production relations — plays the decisive role. Thus art, as defined by Marx and Engels, is one of the forms of social consciousness and it therefore follows that the reasons for its changes should be sought in the social existence of men.

Marx and Engels revealed the social nature of art and its development in the course of history and showed that in a society with class antagonisms it was influenced by class ‘contradictions and by the politics and ideologies of particular classes.

In other words, if you are poor, you are selling the poor. If you are rich, you are selling the rich.

Yeah, except that Marx never said that. His writing is ripe for reinterpretation at the hands of many (over)zealous perspectives bent on turning his thought into whatever they want it to be.

If all you have is some supposed secondary lit., that is pretty shallow. Like I said I have read Marx, and I can tell you that “what is art?” is not an issue he tackles, ever. Is not something essential to his ideas. Granted, we can attempt to infer whatever art might or might not be given what we do know of his system. But what the fuck is the point of that, anyway? The only pathos that could sustain such an endeavor is… worship. Is that where you are coming from? The sum of your argument is a bit of secondary literature about what Marx probably thought about something that he never actually wrote about? Um.

Now, if you knew even a bit about value ontology or tectonics, you would see how this view supposedly attributed to Marx is not at all alien to where I am coming from, in fact it is a part of my overall considerations. Of course art emerges from an historica-cultural milieu in which it is embedded and to which its effect will tend to return. But this does not mean that art is nothing except this self-movement of historical capture, not at all. Like all things art takes part in that which conditions it, and is the sum of these conditioning elements and will reflect these. And as I have already written in this topic, art is a process, it is a movement. A processes maintaining fidelity to the void, however and wherever that happens to appear.

Every moment in history has, well, a historical element. Yeah, it’s pretty fucking obvious. So what is this big deal you are making out of it? If you want me to address this argument you (seem to be) making, here I am doing you that service. This idea that art is nothing but the secondary emergence of historical forces that can do nothing but sell those forces themselves, is absurd. This is nothing but unjustified reductionism that does not understand the essence of art at all: art discloses its historical milieu, among other things, and is a process of movement toward something, emerging as the effect of an inclination toward deeper and more authentic perspective and disclosure of truth. Art turns the status quo upside down. Does advertising do that? Of course not, just the opposite.

Quote:
I don’t know what is so hard to get about this. It’s a super old argument. All art, commerce, communication, it’s all theoretically been linked. But now it’s happening in actuality. In the very system that we live in.

If you want me to prescribe to a view of art that was surpassed by a guy with a Santa beard 150 years ago, it’s not going to happen. You will have to do better than the basic dichotomy you are presenting here. Marx knocks that shit down.

No, Marx never “knocks down” the idea that modern advertising and art are two essentially different endeavors. First of all because modern advertising never existed when Marx was alive, second of all because Marx never even wrote about “what is art?” to begin with, as I have already said.

Quote:
Quote:
Art sells itself. Advertising sells X.

I mean just read it. Are you satisfied with that? I’m not.

Of course not. Good thing I never said that. I have already addressed this, you apparently have not been paying attention.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 03:00 PM Post: #187
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
In selling itself, art sells that which is within the work, whatever combination of impressions, ideas, reflections, etc, the artist uses as well as the paint and canvas themselves, the tools and materials. In selling X, advertisement tries to exist outside of that which is within the advertisement work, and point to X, which is whatever is being sold consciously.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 03:04 PM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 03:04 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #188
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
My point is that using the master-signifying concept of “selling” is a mistake. The point of art, its genesis as a process, as a reflection and a creative movement, goes entirely beyond what “selling” is able to encapsulate.

Anyone who has ever made art will know this. Anyone. Just go ask an artist.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 03:05 PM Post: #189
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
It seems to me that Q and his like want to convince themselves they are artists merely because they create advertising. Well then, I guess how they want to think about their work is up to them, and who am I to shit on their parade?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 03:27 PM Post: #190
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
smh
smh
smh

RE: Advertising
Quote:
No, Marx never “knocks down” the idea that modern advertising and art are two essentially different endeavors. First of all because modern advertising never existed when Marx was alive, second of all because Marx never even wrote about “what is art?” to begin with, as I have already said.

You are better than this.

You know that’s not what I’m saying. That is, I think you know I know that modern advertising started after Marx. I’m saying: apply what he said to modern advertising.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 03:50 PM Post: #192
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
My point is that using the master-signifying concept of “selling” is a mistake.

It’s not a mistake. It’s more that it can be something else. Namely, a website, an (ads free) television show, or a movie. As I have been saying numerous times now.

You are just arguing semantics, and it’s kind of annoying. You can call it whatever you want. If you can’t use the word advertising without getting emotional, fine, but people will (for a while at least) be exchanging things for goods and services. And for that process to happen, advertising is the space between.

Neither of you so far has been able to disprove that. Please do that.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 11:51 PM Post: #193
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Advertising
We don’t need to argue against the fact that advertising happens, selling happens, and are going to continue to happen. Of course this is so. So what? What does that have to do with anything? You have completely, and I mean completely missed our point entirely. And you continue to ignore what I write to you and will not even acknowledge the questions I’ve asked of you.

Sory Pezer, I’m done with this guy. Can’t say I didn’t try, though. Good luck.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 03:17 AM Post: #194
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
And you continue to ignore what I write to you and will not even acknowledge the questions I’ve asked of you.

You keep saying this. It’s not true. I’ve answered all of the questions that you have put to me (in time.)

I honestly don’t really get you here in this thread. Beyond the fact that you’re entertaining some sort of ‘I’m testing you’ thing, which is annoying enough, you’re not really making a point. All you guys have said is, “Anarchy.”

All right. That seems to stand at odds with you just admitting that advertising and selling is always going to happen.

Answer some of my questions. If it has to happen, then what about what I am saying doesn’t make sense?

Either that or you and Pezer actually explain your anarchy position better. I’ll be honest, it just sounds like a bunch of forum philosophy stuff. Sooner or later we have to go out into the world and do stuff. How, precisely, will anarchy change the world?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 03:27 AM Post: #195
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I’m actually convinced at this point.

It’s more or less the same problem we have with JSS, all methodology and no mention or sale of what it is we are going to sell. Remember, the burden of proof is on you to defend advertising, not on us to defend our anarchy which we didn’t make a thread on atm. It’s complicated shit, with a lot of allies, and it’s not just philosophy forum stuff because I’m practicing it, little by little, in afk life. As a general explanation of that, I have invited you down to the part of the world where anarchy may spawn, and you have said “eeewww!”

Fine! I don’t care, I’m not recruting anybody that doesn’t want to join. On the other hand, I’m quite willing to cooperate with you in sales. But I have to know what I’m selling.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 03:51 AM Post: #196
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
If I’m selling better sales practice, I need to know what direction you have in mind.

Netflix doesn’t get my dick hard.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 04:06 AM Post: #197
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Quote:
no mention or sale of what it is we are going to sell.

Is that what this is all about?

You want me to give you some list of items?

And you are mad because I have not? Please tell me that is not what this is about.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 04:20 AM Post: #198
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I guess I want you to give me the unifying idea that will make the items on the list obvious.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 04:21 AM Post: #199
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I understand the motivation, but what is the product of the motivation? Mine is anarchy. You mock it, but that’s what it is. What’s yours?

Again, Netflix doesn’t inflate my balloon.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 04:23 AM Post: #200
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
And yes, there is a stark possibility that one or both of us will be very disappointed by the end of this thread. Let’s keep working to avoid that.

RE: Advertising
Why do you keep mentioning netflix? Because I mentioned one time that I did something pertaining to that at work? I think you guys can separate what I want to do with what I do for my job. You write porn ads so I don’t know why you are intentionally being so obtuse and spiteful. Drop all that and just calm down.

If you will, point me to your seminal work on why we should aspire for anarchy. If it’s that youtube series, you will have to fix the sound. I can’t listen to that weird noise for 45 minutes.

I don’t get anarchy. Look around you. Order runs the universe. The people who strive for anarchy and chaos, guess who those people are? Why play into that? The next couple of years will be anarchy enough. I really don’t get this, “Yo, abandon everyone you know, and everything you’ve done thus far, and move to another country where dissidents can be droned fucked at any time?”

It’s so much more strategic to stay embedded and radiate truth into areas that need it, rather than put all our eggs into some basket creating some… whatever it is we’re creating, totally separated from the public that, if we don’t use to our advantage, will eventually crush us.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 05:48 AM Post: #202
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
These things are not mutually exclusive either. I can help you guys and do my thing. Even if you refuse to help me back lol.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 09:33 AM Post: #203
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
(06-01-2013 05:48 AM)Q Wrote:
These things are not mutually exclusive either. I can help you guys and do my thing. Even if you refuse to help me back lol.

My first point is that yes to this, both ways. I expect your eventual help, and offer you mine. Spite is not in me, only shit-disturberness.

I mentioned Neflix because you seemed to be using it as an example of what you wanted to do. As you well mention, I am very much not in a position to judge anybody. Actually, congrats on having that kinda pull, I thought it was more an aspiration (glad it’s not quite) than work done. Because that’s what I want to know: what direction are you hoping to take this thing?

As for what you think of anarchy and order, booze is chaotic, and so are most drugs. I’m a happy drug addict, I will never accept order fully. You think I’m inviting you to some underground guerilla op? To be droned? No. The kind of thing I’m working on setting up runs only the risk of being pissed on by local authorities in the 1st world, in the 3d nobody gives enough of a shit, I will have space to do things. What I’m working on is simply the decentralization and de-regulation of economic activity. Think of me as a Tea Party asshole if you have to. Except I’m doing things instead of protesting. I guess I’ll make a more detailed thread on my plans at some point soon, if nothing else to show you that anarchy is not teenage drama-queenarchy.

So wait for that thread. Atm, I want to know what direction you are hoping to take this thing. I love that you say that both things can coexist because, historically, neither of our sides were willing to be anything but absolute totalitarian. This is proof of what I keep saying that we are in a different historical point now, we understand that we can live with and be different to the most essential details.

Where to know? What- how do you think advertising can be changed for the better? By better I mean beyond good and evil, just less annoying to us.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 11:39 AM Post: #204
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
About the video, I’ll see what I can do. For fuck’s sake, I don’t got the money for all that shit. I’m an anarchist satandamnit.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 11:48 AM Post: #205
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I’m not sure that you need money. You might be able to run it through some sort of filter that is online maybe. But also, cheap computer mics cost like 5 bucks.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 11:49 AM Post: #206
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
I will explain the future vision you requested better tonight. Right now, I am getting drunk.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 02:48 PM Post: #207
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
That’s a 5$ mic recording. Well, mic/camera, maybe that explains it. I’m lazy as fuck with sound editing as all else, but I am using some new drugs I was made aware of, anti-epileptics lol, to try and concentrate my way through learning it without taking, you know, mental responsibility for the weight of the process. Laziness is a vice I value.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 03:00 PM Post: #208
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
This is getting into something else, but in today’s day and age, interfacing with the net is one of those things I don’t mind investing in.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 03:03 PM Post: #209
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Day in age? Day and age? I dunno.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 03:18 PM Post: #210
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Oh dear, I’m gonna have to go find some booze of my own, I believe.

pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
(Not meant sarcastically)
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 04:45 PM Post: #212
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
Fuck.

Capitalism.

That’s just how I feel. Consider me the corrupted sidekick who helps out for the joke of it, plus some kind of trust.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 04:46 PM Post: #213
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I can put my hate for capitalism aside for my love of productive work, too.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 05:35 PM Post: #214
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
There is a big difference between capitalism and technology.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 05:53 PM Post: #215
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
I know that.

Advertising is more married to one than the other.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-02-2013, 05:47 AM Post: #216
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
So? I mean, I would have bought a computer, etc, - the things I have personally deemed worthy - without seeing any ads.

Case in point: the more efficient you try to be with tech, the more brand loyalty diminishes. Cause you’re trying to be pragmatic. There are whole websites that number crunch this stuff.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-02-2013, 11:20 AM (This post was last modified: 06-02-2013 11:20 AM by pezer.) Post: #217
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Advertising
That seems logical to me in an open sourcey way…

I like the way this is going.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-02-2013, 12:10 PM Post: #218
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Advertising
Me too. My response for this thread has turned into a full on article. It may not answer all your questions but it does a better job than I have so far


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower

Posts : 1237
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: Natural World Ashes Thu Aug 01, 2013 1:27 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Philosophos rap
Word, time to mix up some beatz in da spirit of a love of truth. Post your lyrix here, or spin a heavy beat and link dat shit. Respect.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-14-2013, 09:49 AM (This post was last modified: 05-14-2013 09:50 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #2
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Philosophos rap
(05-14-2013 02:19 AM)ChainOfBeing Wrote:
Word, time to mix up some beatz in da spirit of a love of truth. Post your lyrix here, or spin a heavy beat and link dat shit. Respect.

soundcloud.com/fixedcross/1000-roads-from-rome
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-14-2013, 09:59 AM Post: #3
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Philosophos rap
soundcloud.com/fixedcross/loaded-instrumental

both of these I did the keys and my neighbor the Brazilian Machine behind the Trillion Keys the drums.
I wrote some lyrics to them but I’m not a rapper as it turns out.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-14-2013, 10:27 AM Post: #4
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Philosophos rap
Nice, I like these, especially the second one.

Post your lyrics here if you want.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-17-2013, 10:56 AM Post: #5
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Philosophos rap
Yeah. Good.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-17-2013, 11:01 AM Post: #6
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Philosophos rap
Catchy.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-17-2013, 07:16 PM Post: #7
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Philosophos rap
Any way to get those in discreet audio files?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-19-2013, 01:07 AM (This post was last modified: 05-19-2013 01:41 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #8
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Philosophos rap
Thanks, glad you enjoy them.
You can download them here -
ge.tt/474i30h

My lyrics are old… I prefer words from the future.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-19-2013, 07:03 AM Post: #9
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Philosophos rap
Showdown tonight? Tomorrow?

Bring da muthafucking ruckuts?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-21-2013, 08:59 PM (This post was last modified: 05-21-2013 08:59 PM by pezer.) Post: #10
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Philosophos rap
Rap or not, let’s do this thing today. Say any time that ends before 10 hours from when I’m posting this?

RE: Philosophos rap
Okay what? A battle?
Keep your snake saddled… critters creep, chatter… riddle deep, shattered sleep patterns… eat my feces? At least your beast can reason, not like Jesus, preaching the thesis of evil, reaching the ears of no one within the walls of Sodom… Wood rise in the East like Hillary Rodham… Boredom… whores and randomly fathomed morale like the fantom of Gotham… Lust in sloth, trust in God… roll in the mud, slurp off a slurpie, pig banks, break rank, say thanks for the stank in the back of your truck, trick trouble, lick lucks feathers at get-togethers… meadow of hard-boiled recoiling hearts and minds, there’s no end to the grind, star-staring stumbling, starting to find, no gate to the End, no making amends marks a limit - this Aardvark is finished, replenished, the Earth cut up in trenches all men on the fences, who’s still against us?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-26-2013, 05:51 AM Post: #12
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Philosophos rap
Another beat
soundcloud.com/fixedcross/the-madness
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-26-2013, 08:24 AM Post: #13
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Philosophos rap
Another absolutely dope track.

The madness… It takes me down paths of paths to find the forrest, to recognize the past for the absolute wilderness it is, to see my father’s face and see a child frustrated… yo…
Growing up in Babilon is the greatest trip so far, yet primitive, like licking a broken tipped jar, like smoking big cigars,
and inhaling,
and forgeting for a moment that the lack of danger is only danger this or that way,
The word you’re thinking of is “castrate”
You just want to get your caste straight… It ain’t happenin… Fuck you, your crew, and your momma’s cat’s friends.
It’s evolution motherfucker, spread your ass straight. Or get ready to castrate. Or give up your apish ways and follow me, help get the world baked.

I don’t relate to the abuser, I make him harmless like a bunny rabbit, then I call him “sir,” then I smoke weed behind his back, then I tell him “yeah, sure, in a minute.”
I plot beyond the imaginings of those who only see plots, and even though my lies catch up to me,
they were forged in a mill not accessible to (crack)pots.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 02:23 PM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 02:27 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #14
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Philosophos rap
I wrote this to that last beat you posted, Fixed.

Fuck this line, see me in time as my ideas climb
toward this edifice, no I a’int no Sisyphus
I don’t speak lies in rhymes bitch this shit is an inferno
discern as I cross-breed your need with what you can’t take back
so feed on a matter of fact its a fact that you act wired
whenever you remember to slip back inside your attire
makes you believe you’d rest easy easily forgettin’ your greed
heart stopped beatin’ & they got you still believin’ in preachin’
just like you were seven or popped pills & mopped spills
dropped frills these chills leave you penniless your soul
mind and spirit are restless
Detest this, you gotta run down the rope of your last hope
toward the darkness of what lurks without force or remorse,
But you gave your life anyway, sold your brain for a legacy
proof for a fantasy, your art for a last chance to be lazy
sit back takin’ naps sippin’ that death drippin’ flat on your back
as that smoke makes you fly a dope high delirium whack
you remember nothin’ of forever, so tricked out with fashion
you’ve bled it all into a serum of popular passion
serious, so you said what use for the void?
trace back suffuse it or just abuse the ignored.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 04:43 PM Post: #15
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Philosophos rap
Not peace but more war,
Spread the butter on the fore of the torture norm.
I have no mercy left for the pennyless souls and if
Mine be one then let it fall.

I do not dream of escape,
The darkness includes me fucking unawares, it is mine, I am theirs
Fucking gringos searching for the better sales

No, bro, holy fuck, oh, yo!
I never rebelled, my will was tragic,
like magic, not mallic, but callic,
supercalifragilisticalidallic, I don’t stay down with you, fucking manic.

Time to step up to the truck of the madman’s trance,
You thought you were a block of big duck puck, surrendering the mud blood’s bad mind pot luck
You were mistaken, I never fall,
you are looking down and down, silly fuck, you think it’s up-doors.

The big diffrence b’tween the dance and escape is that
Escape seeks an end,

I fear death because my time is short, too many dumb fucks trying to ignore the
Smart fuck ton of truck fun, son, no sun the light is out of soul of say-ton

The trap you think to cover is the gateway fo tomorrow,
there is no better way, I can offer only greater sorrow.

But once you cross the gate of death and kiss the zombie and hug your morrow,
What seems like dispair is the creative mind held back by rules engenderd by

Nothing but evo, fucking evo, nothing but evo fucking natural selection
there is no God, it just worked, and worked, and now it works only tomorrow be
cause you got scared and tranced the doors of great sorrow,

It takes hard work, the world is really poorer tha
n any criptic imagination can hope, it’s dope, can you fathom, broda?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 04:48 PM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 04:48 PM by pezer.) Post: #16
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Philosophos rap
I hope you don’t mind, but this one is definetly the dopest, and my last verses were retroactively made for it.

soundcloud.com/fixedcross/keep-her-steady
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-01-2013, 08:03 AM (This post was last modified: 06-01-2013 09:36 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #17
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Philosophos rap
Excellent, great lyrics (“discern as I cross-breed your need with what you can’t take back” if I had to pick one line). If either of you would consider recording them, you’re welcome to use the beats. I put them up for download.

Mind theories
Substance dualism, property dualism, ideal monism, reductive physicalism, non-reductive physicalism, epiphenomenalism, anomalous monism, functionalism, psychofunctionalism, panpsychism, panprotopsychism.

Can’t we all just get along?
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-04-2013, 11:04 PM Unread post Post: #2
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Mind theories
I always felt the same way. That is, we can have it both ways if we gorram please, one of the happier consequences of the death of God. Nietzsche was a master of not choosing.

Which is better/worse?
This was brought up in my topic on the banality of belief, but I think it deserves its own topic.

Is it better to believe in god if god is not real, or is it better to not believe in god if god is real? Why?

Hint: if you are about to claim that you know god exists/probably exists then you’d better be able to substantiate that somehow. I don’t prescribe your means of doing so, but some manner of demonstration better be forthcoming.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-04-2013, 10:06 PM (This post was last modified: 06-04-2013 10:08 PM by JSS.) Post: #2
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Which is better/worse?
(06-04-2013 08:18 PM)ChainOfBeing Wrote:
This was brought up in my topic on the banality of belief, but I think it deserves its own topic.

Is it better to believe in god if god is not real, or is it better to not believe in god if god is real? Why?
Believing in the truth is not necessarily the best thing at any one given moment. So your question isn’t really about believing in a truth, but rather in a specific idea.

The problem is that you have to define exactly what you mean by “god” in your question in order to yield a good answer. To me;

A god ≡ who/whatever incontestably determines what can or cannot be concerning a situation.
The God ≡ Who/Whatever incontestably determines All that can or cannot be.

So you have asked (from my perspective) is it is better to believe in your lack of alternatives when you really don’t have that lack of alternatives or to disbelieve in your lack of alternatives when you really do have that lack.

If you believe that you cannot do something when you really could have done it, then you defeat yourself because you do not try what could have worked.

If you don’t believe that you can’t do something that you really can’t do, then you continually attempt things that will never work. That often leads to damage or death.

So you stand a good chance of loosing either way. I think the final resolve would depend on your situation (another name for your God). If your situation allows for you not achieving much without great threat, then believing that you can’t and thus not doing so, would probably not yield much damage. But if your situation requires that you achieve or else, then it would seem that you had better have a good grasp on what is actually possible.

So as usual… “it all depends”.

Quote:
(It just hit me that: “suicide, right or wrong?” might be a good debate topic)

That is an excellent topic. I’ve found it to be the greatest of all mindfucks.

Retro-active Liberation
"Are you naught but the collection of duties assigned to you and the pleasures there-from derived? What would you find if you decided that this was a door in front of something and opened it?

If occultists have one thing right, it’s that you have an inner history and potential that you are magicked into being unfamiliar with. Opposite to the occultists, though, I claim that you can access these things with no external help other than the resources to afford the opportunity cost of sitting down and working it out. Well, drugs will help, but only after the door has been opened.

What would you find if you decided that this was a door in front of something in you and opened it?"

Would this work?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-17-2013, 07:59 AM Post: #2
Dannerz Offline
Student
Posts: 45
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Retro-active Liberation
I consider liberation as a large category, and there is liberation-from, which has to do with specific things, then there is also self-transcendence, which is done through transformative means or very dedicated self control applied in a certain way. Your OP doesn’t seem very specific.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-17-2013, 10:35 AM (This post was last modified: 02-17-2013 12:41 PM by pezer.) Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Retro-active Liberation
It’s a synecdoche, I’m trying to point something out.

Lucid Dreaming
Gobbo inspired me to embarc on lucid dreaming once again. This time, instead of a journal I’ll get bored of, my strategy is to allways think about lucid dreaming for a while before going to sleep. Gobbo already gave me a good link, world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/1…reams.html

The mirror portal thing sounds like the most magicky thing. I had a huge portal once and it was red-purple demonic with four-dimensional plasma-fog, preceded by dreams of kissing zombies. I left for something to do with my family and wasn’t able to make my way back.

Fucking portals.

Anyway, maybe I’ll use this thread as my lucid draming journal.
19 is funny, I’ll let you know if I try it.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-02-2013, 12:39 PM Post: #2
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: Lucid Dreaming
(02-01-2013 08:35 PM)pezer Wrote:
Gobbo inspired me to embarc on lucid dreaming once again. This time, instead of a journal I’ll get bored of, my strategy is to allways think about lucid dreaming for a while before going to sleep. Gobbo already gave me a good link, world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/1…reams.html

The mirror portal thing sounds like the most magicky thing. I had a huge portal once and it was red-purple demonic with four-dimensional plasma-fog, preceded by dreams of kissing zombies. I left for something to do with my family and wasn’t able to make my way back.

Fucking portals.

Anyway, maybe I’ll use this thread as my lucid draming journal.
19 is funny, I’ll let you know if I try it.

There are some better infographs. I will try to find them.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-14-2013, 10:23 AM (This post was last modified: 02-14-2013 10:27 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #3
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Lucid Dreaming
I actually had a lucid dream/astral travel once where something like this happened. I met a girl who dropped her wallet, I remember it being pink and quite large - and I looked inside and saw her ID, saying a name, street and a number. When I came back out of the dream, I looked in the phonebook, and there was this street, and at this number was a resident with that name.

Not as surprised as I should have been, I called, but nobody answered. This was eight years ago. I forgot about it somehow and just read about it a few weeks back in a diary. I recognized the streetname with surprise - two years ago my sister moved into that street. The number in the girls ID was 78. My sisters house number is 39.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-19-2013, 06:19 PM Post: #4
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Lucid Dreaming
Life too tumultuous now to maintain the discipline I need for lucid dreaming. I think I’ll use this as a dream portal until I do, y’all feel free to do the same. After all, there is something very poetic about sharing the most primaly subconscious in the most artificially conscious possible medium. Though I guess consciousness and subconsciousness are really quite obsolete terms…

Right now I kind of qualify as poor, whereas I was not growing up. The experience affects your dreams deeply. For example, sometimes I’ll simply dream that I find a fiver between the pages of a book somewhere, or baggie, with all the intensity of wishing they were there. Then, when I’m awake, I’ll remember I found money or weed somewhere and spend a while looking for it like an idiot. Hell, I’ve dreamt about eating and getting that stomachy feeling, like a food wet dream.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-20-2013, 02:38 AM Post: #5
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: Lucid Dreaming
I’ve been there my friend.

The Soul
The Soul is one of the Church’s greatest mechanisms (well, today it is by far greatest, God lags far behind, or even the ManGods) to keep the little man down. An image is created of part of your belongings being a soul, a third eye sort of essence that was created by a being of the following characteristics: Pure love, Good, Benign, AllPowerful, Your True Father and Above Your Father, Perfect/flawless (a word that hides that flaw precedes flawlesness always). These characteristics are attached a category of subservient feelings that will keep the follower continuously trying to mold his soul to the goodgodsoul. But what is his soul? How does he know?

It is described to him as that which gains by believing and looses by feeling pleasure. He has coordinates, his psychology can attach his life to his ideal and have it, as it was designed to do, severely missmatch.

Now the hoe runs back to the pimp, who opens his hand and grins. A disgusting pedophile pimp, no less, because it is the child they are after.

The Soul is the stupid animal we have inherited, and it is all ours. No pedophile God can peer into your dreams, nothing but the long throes of history really affect you. The soul is not something to be kept closeted away and worshiped into some in-human image, or nailed to a cross. It is not something to ride on blindly, either, as Nietzsche discovered from Schopenhauer, because what kind of animals would we be if we accepted Christianity’s retardation as a gift?

The soul is returned to us with the death of God. What we do with it will determine our honor as scientists and our finesse as suitors.

pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Soul
Of course, my horse. Could be a lot of other things too.

Man is above evolution.

Or is he?

Is it to be above evolution to be above the life-death dichotomy? To be able to see evolution, and judge it, and integrate it into a system… Quite a mind fuck that this very system is a product of evolutionary progress. The competing cycles of life.

This is why the Will to Power is necessary. It’s like the Higgs Boson, really.

Can you smell the void…?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
[/quote]
03-25-2013, 01:26 AM Post: #2
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Above Evolution
It’s just that we are not really subject to naturally selective pressure anymore, most humans can mate successfully regardless of their genes. We do not compete anymore for mates like we used to in the wild, and physical attributes no longer are what tend to further our species’ survival, rather mental and emotional attributes do. But not even that, we survive as a species because we inherit a massive structure of survival ability–culture, language, tehnology–and so we have broken the wheel of natural selection. You might think that logically our natural selection would just have switched over from using physical strengths to using mental/emotional strengths as standards for mate selection, but of course that is not the case, because we have that survival structure of society regardless of how we choose out mates, and of course mate selection is not very conscious and intentional to begin with, for most people. (This is really one of the biggest problems humanity faces currently, that technology has the potential to help fix).

This doesn’t mean we do not evolve or are “above” evolution, it just means our evolution genetically speaking is of a different type. More chaotic, traits important to survival before now tend to stagnate or at least remain flat, while we must now consciously make the effort to value traits that are really beneficial to our survival now.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 02:39 AM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
That would seem to me like arguing that ants have long abandoned evolution. Only two in a colony mate, and who knows what processes ae necessary to get to the top?

Richard Dawkin’s brake-through was to notice that it’s not on the level of a single animal, or any group of animals, or even the gene that evolution can be said to be at work. That’s the level of being-a-product-of, being able, for some cosmic irony or will to power, to notice the originating evolutionary dynamics.

Evolution occurs at the level of philosophy. Nietzsche may not have been the smartest, wittiest, or most convincing, but he is the most important philosopher yet. For noticing that and, as some novelist said about Picasso, ripping it from the world and putting it on a canvas.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 02:47 AM Post: #4
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Above Evolution
I don’t know about how natural selection works for insects, but I do know how it works for mammals, and humans have “broken” it.

“Evolution” is always occurring since “evolution” just means “change”. And yes, we as a species and of course as individuals too evolve in the realm of philosophy, of ideas, knowledge and application. But the really significant thing here is not that humans are still changing (of course we are, everything is) but that we must now consciously direct this change in the absence of naturally selective pressures to keep our genome fit.

Basically, unlike other mammals, survival itself is no longer the “goal” of the human species, genetically speaking. Our genes are “free” from needing to be useful to anything.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 02:57 AM (This post was last modified: 03-25-2013 03:16 AM by pezer.) Post: #5
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
You are wrong, evolution does not just mean change. Think on that! Arithmetic doesn’t just mean thinking, and a spear-point isn’t just metal.

You have not defined what it is is getting “broken.”

“Evolution occurs at the level of philosophy.” The gene is just one way. One could also say that genes are just an evolutionary product of the processes of RNA. It doesn’t matter, we don’t have to study it like this, we are right smack in the middle of it. We are that which chooses how to go about things, because not choosing would spell our doom. So far as evolution goes anyway. This is why the Will to Power matters… maybe.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 06:44 AM Post: #6
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Above Evolution
Evolution means change. It means a kind of change. There are many kinds. My point was that you’re use of the term “evolution” without qualifying what kind, orders and structures/logics of evolution doesn’t make sense. We can talk about natural selection and genetic reproduction, or we can talk about the history of ideas and cultures, science, philosophy, technology, morality, whatever.

Note that I said we have broken natural selection, not evolution.

If you think natural selection operates on levels beyond the genome/mate selection then it is on you to demonstrate that. I’m open to the notion but I’m not just going to take it on faith.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 07:07 AM Post: #7
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
I seem to have made a big mistake here. I don’t think I’ll make it again. When I say evolution, every single time, I mean it as an abbreviation of evolution by natural selection. Shorthands, you know how it goes…

"We can talk about natural selection and genetic reproduction, or we can talk about the history of ideas and cultures, science, philosophy, technology, morality, whatever. "

I challenge you to point the difference out to me.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 07:12 AM Post: #8
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
On the heels of that challenge, allow me to try to answer yours first.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 07:22 AM Post: #9
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
“If you think natural selection operates on levels beyond the genome/mate selection then it is on you to demonstrate that.”

All I have are philosophical arguments, but science has been done on this too. It’s written down in the book The Extended Phenotype.

The argument is the following: look at your screen now. You see a forum, colors, posts, words, maybe megabytes, maybe ideas. But none of this was achieved by any kind of evolution of color, posts, words, etc themselves. It was achieved by manipulating electricity through binary circuits, and even that is a cover of so many other things!

In the same way, perhaps idas, cultures, science, etc, may seem to convey a certain kind of evolutionary information, when the actual processes shaping this information can be understood to work according to the principles of the most primitive evolution by natural selection.

Yet we wouldn’t say that the byte is the basic unit of programming (it would take decades to write the simplest programs!), or that the primitive processes I’m talking about that boil down, equivalently, to the gene, are the basic units of evolution by natural selection. Rather, as Dawkins does, I prefer the phenotype, if anything.

The basic unit of evolution by natural selection is its own products. Only Will to Power can be said to save us from circularity.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 08:04 AM Post: #10
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Above Evolution
No one, at least not me, is arguing that everything is produced by naturally selective and “ex post facto” process. But many things are, like living organisms’ bodies and structures of consciousness. Beyond that, I would refer to value ontology for a more complete picture.

Certainly humans create ex ante, after teleological methodology. The propensity to become able to do so exists as a consequence of non-teleological biological evolution, a la natural selection, but once produced this new method goes on to constitute its own essential nature, process and logos. Such is the way of things to transcend the conditions of their own conditional natures. Tectonics comes in at this point, to explain how and why this is the case.

Phenotypes are both genetically and environmentally driven. In fact to say “phenotype” is just to say “genetics + situation”.

Beyond all this, I’m sorry but I fail to see your point. Maybe we are in agreement here, but honestly I have no idea, because I don’t really know what you are trying to say.

RE: Above Evolution
We are not in agreement, essentially, here: “but once produced this new method goes on to constitute its own essential nature.”

Precisely the whole point of this thread is that question, perhaps. Is Value Ontology beyond evolution? The only honest answer that occurs to me is: yes. Or is it?

You know of a void, ChainOfBeing, but can you smell it?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 08:31 AM (This post was last modified: 03-25-2013 08:32 AM by pezer.) Post: #12
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
No, another mistake… Not Value Ontology, but Man.

Perhaps if we ask “is value ontology beyond man?” we can reach the same kind of what-the-fuck that I am getting to here.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-26-2013, 01:40 AM (This post was last modified: 03-26-2013 01:43 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #13
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Above Evolution
Evolutionary process qua natural selection is very different from the evolutionary process by which humans create ideas. Natural selection works with random mutation and accidental changes, which serve no overt purpose and appear for “no reason”; once they appear thusly, they propagate throughout the gene pool and tend to do so more the more they will give some immediate survival advantage. Read: immediate advantage, random appearance, and overall tendency toward producing individual survival advantage.

Human ideas are created because they serve a purpose, they are intended. They do not arise “randomly” but through guided process and design. There are not “random ideas” appearing and being selected based on how well they further individual survival. Human ideas contribute directly and intentionally to an overall edifice of knowledge, they are not designed to give immediate survival benefit but rather to serve this edifice somehow, to build directly upon previous knowledge and ideas toward the abstract aim of the idea of scientific progress, future benefit, etc. This is not how idea formation works. In fact, natural selection and the process of human ideation are about as opposite methodologies as one could imagine.

The human mind is a teleological (read: future- and purpose-oriented) process. Nature is not.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-26-2013, 07:03 AM (This post was last modified: 03-26-2013 07:05 AM by pezer.) Post: #14
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
Honestly man, you’re understanding of evolution is pre-Dawkins. A disparate set of small, immediate, incremental steps might have been the case with the first enzymes or something, but when you are considering the action of many genes withing a single body-unit, no small incremental advantage itself is enough. Or, rather, evolution is such that sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t, and the small increments affect each-other in whatever mathematically describable system beyond the simple equation you sketch out.

A body-unit is a conglomerate of such incremental processes, and the interactions between those processes… But so is a colony unit, a family unit, a friend unit, an ideological unit…
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-26-2013, 12:54 PM (This post was last modified: 03-26-2013 01:00 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #15
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Above Evolution
(03-26-2013 07:03 AM)pezer Wrote:
Honestly man, you’re understanding of evolution is pre-Dawkins. A disparate set of small, immediate, incremental steps might have been the case with the first enzymes or something, but when you are considering the action of many genes withing a single body-unit, no small incremental advantage itself is enough. Or, rather, evolution is such that sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t, and the small increments affect each-other in whatever mathematically describable system beyond the simple equation you sketch out.

A body-unit is a conglomerate of such incremental processes, and the interactions between those processes… But so is a colony unit, a family unit, a friend unit, an ideological unit…

Ok, what are these other kinds of changes, other than “small, immediate, incremental steps”? How do they work, physically, biologically? We are talking about natural evolution here, natural selection in your own words. Or are you saying that non-human animals are also directing their own evolution “intentionally”? I am open to what you are talking about, but you need to state it plainly and explain it if you want me to understand. If you think my view of natural selection, the only one I have ever known and read, and which makes perfect logical sense, is somehow no longer relevant, show me where/how this is so. I want to learn. You seem to have this knowledge of this subject, which I seem to lack, so please educate me. Also, remind me what your point was here, as regards humans and evolution.

Here is my take on it: the way an idea is created, in a human mind and society, is very different from the way genes change in natural selection. We know how genes change. Survivable genes tend to beat out less survivable ones. Throw in some random mutation and random environmental events and influences, combined with limited resources, and you basically get… all of nature. But humans don’t produce a bunch of random ideas in a limited environment and then see which naturally “survive” the others; no, we envision things first, form logical deductions, we understand, we anticipate, we create with purpose toward an end. I cannot see your point, that somehow this also takes place outside of the human mind. Where in nature do we see anything analogous to the process of human ideation? Unless you want to reduce human intellect and imagination to mere instinctive operations, in which case, you have an argument there, but still one that I will disagree with, based on my understanding of the rational nature/structure of consciousness.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-26-2013, 06:20 PM (This post was last modified: 03-26-2013 06:22 PM by pezer.) Post: #16
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
Beauty… Beauty must make itself. To understand a joke, you must share some amount of the cruel intentions behind it. To smell wine, particles of the elixir have to enter our noses, be broken down, incorporated into our very biological structures, if only as trace amounts of X. This is how we know wine. It becomes part of us.

When you think of the idea of a can of ham. A can. Of ham. The metal, the grinding of can opener gears, the smell of processed cow… All these things must already make a part of you, somehow, and with some extendable balance. Those hows are the tiny increments, but they are of no interest to the end product. A moth has no interest or knowledge in looking like an owl, much less its genes.

Which brings me to my point regarding humans and evolution: Are we above it?

Or do we not notice ourselves under it?

I believe there is a unifying thread to all biological life, and the closer the life-form to our genetic branch, the more understandable their will. This is a grotesque statement, from grotesque thought experiments aided by LSD. Yet it is absolutely true, I have visited the will of a whale for the few nano-seconds that I could bear the horror. I believe this thread extends even further than biology.

Life, as we all know is the principal lesson of evolution by natural selection, is shaped by death; but must it not also shape itself in order to make any sense as a changing system?

Perhaps not. It’s a gamble.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-26-2013, 11:53 PM (This post was last modified: 03-26-2013 11:55 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #17
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Above Evolution
(03-26-2013 06:20 PM)pezer Wrote:
Beauty… Beauty must make itself. To understand a joke, you must share some amount of the cruel intentions behind it. To smell wine, particles of the elixir have to enter our noses, be broken down, incorporated into our very biological structures, if only as trace amounts of X. This is how we know wine. It becomes part of us.

When you think of the idea of a can of ham. A can. Of ham. The metal, the grinding of can opener gears, the smell of processed cow… All these things must already make a part of you, somehow, and with some extendable balance. Those hows are the tiny increments, but they are of no interest to the end product. A moth has no interest or knowledge in looking like an owl, much less its genes.

A moth has a great deal of interest in looking like an owl, of course. And its genes naturally change to accommodate such an interest. The moth’s body becomes to resemble an appearance of an owl (or whatever) based on this natural tendency, which is rooted in random mutation and natural selection. This is significant. Of course the moth does not “know” that it is resembling an owl, it does not know what is happening on the level of its genes. But its interests are not predicated upon such possible kind of knowledge.

What you say about the can of ham, yes indeed we must have “bits” of something “inside us” in order to respond to it, to understand it. This I would phrase within tectonics, as how every causal plane and milieu within or among planes constitutes its own particular kind of ‘logical order/ing’ by which “forces” (activities) act and change, and that every such plane or level interacts with what is above AND below it, directly. Most of the conditionality of a thing resides “below” it, but once you move further up the chain the amount of “temporal dimension” (see Kitaro here) a thing incorporates as itself increases, it responds more and more essentially to its “above” also.

Tiny changes exist, accumulate, cause bigger changes. I certainly agree. Sometimes these tiny changes are “random” (you already know my position on “randomness”, of course, so this should make sense to you without confusion about what I am really saying) and some are not random, meaning that some arise from a teleological or logical order/ing directed and aimed at/by some purpose, an ‘end’. Survival is not an end in natural selection, genes do not mutate and go on to either propagate or not based on any kind of end or goal, this phenomenon just happens as a consequence of non-purposeful activity taking place within a space of certain guidelines and rules (limited resources, competition, etc.)

When humans ideate about something, or probably when any animal experiences something there is definitely a degree of “non-non-purposeful change”. Change that arises from a particular kind of logical order/ing and “aim”, namely as the consequent of some rational mandate of a thing (see value ontology here). But let’s not confuse this with natural selection, and let’s not blow its scope or degree of influence out of proportion. Life changes like this, absolutely, but at the heart of biological change is natural selection, without aim or purpose, shaping things to be what they are based only on the fact that in the past their particular forms have tended to produce survivable behavior within a certain kind of environmental limitation. Entities form from this situation and go on to become “valuers”, absolutely. But I merely want us to see the whole picture, and not to confuse one thing incorrectly with another. Proper delimitation is always my goal.

Quote:
Which brings me to my point regarding humans and evolution: Are we above it?

Or do we not notice ourselves under it?

In the sense which we now mean it here, yes humans and indeed all animal life probably is above evolution. Meaning that we force/direct a degree of our own evolutionary change. Or maybe you are right that, too, we do not notice ourselves under it. Much of our human or supposed “enlightened” behaviors still follow a largely naturally-selective and “accidental” mandate, meaning they are what we have inherited and now have “little or no control over”, regardless rather or not these behaviors now make sense or are helpful/useful.
Quote:
I believe there is a unifying thread to all biological life, and the closer the life-form to our genetic branch, the more understandable their will. This is a grotesque statement, from grotesque thought experiments aided by LSD. Yet it is absolutely true, I have visited the will of a whale for the few nano-seconds that I could bear the horror. I believe this thread extends even further than biology.

Life, as we all know is the principal lesson of evolution by natural selection, is shaped by death; but must it not also shape itself in order to make any sense as a changing system?

Perhaps not. It’s a gamble.

I agree with this. Every living thing has a subjectivity, a perspective of/for experience. The “will” of one thing is probably not able to be tolerated by another thing, just because of the immensity of the difference.

Life does shape itself, definitely.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-27-2013, 04:53 AM (This post was last modified: 03-27-2013 04:56 AM by pezer.) Post: #18
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
Random. Here is the key.

As I remember, last time we discussed this, someone said something fucking brilliant (and I do paraphrase): There is no such thing as a pure random generator. In the end, the physical computer itself will be the parameters. The smell of electricity is the computer’s “randomness,” it’s WilltoPower. That which forms from the interaction of the components of the self and emerges with demands.

In a world of interconnectivity, as we have agreed upon above, surely this is proof of grand, terrifying and awe-striking potentialities of WilltoPower.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-27-2013, 07:01 AM (This post was last modified: 03-27-2013 07:22 AM by pezer.) Post: #19
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
This video is long and isn’t necessary for my arguments, but it is a fantastic illustration of the kind of thing I’m talking about. Feel free to continue the discussion without acknowledging it if you lack time or inclination.

This scientist is both more right than anybody, and a medieval thinker compared to what we can imagine imagining.

[flash(0,0)][youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzfSPK9eE_E[/youtube][/flash]

E: Above Evolution
Not potentialities of WilltoPower itself, since it only acts upon itself, but expressions of it. The only demand of WilltoPower is power, and all it can get is more WilltoPower. That is why I am still able to be horrified by the whale’s will. That is the common thread, both the necessary Higgs boson of evolution by natural selection and a very real experience of life.

03-27-2013, 02:30 PM Post: #21
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
What is most important about the WilltoPower is not the WilltoPower itself, its experience really is enough. What is important is what it tells us about our very real, concrete, day to day sorrounding world. There is no God! There is no otherworldlyness that threatens us! There is only WilltoPower, and we must focus only on the things that WilltoPower requires to thrive: only on pursuits of the world of Value, as knowable by Science.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-29-2013, 02:46 PM Post: #22
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Above Evolution
And when I speak of science, I mean Post Evolution Science, the type that evolves.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-29-2013, 11:09 PM (This post was last modified: 03-29-2013 11:14 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #23
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Above Evolution
Regarding the difference between, on the one hand unconscious beings that evolve through trial and error depending on their “fitness” and on the other, conscious creatures, humans, who fit into intellectual/mental schemata that allow them to exist and procreate without having to “survive” in the brutal sense - this seems a false dichotomy to me.

The mental world, the construct or “social contract” that we live by is not fundamentally different from, let’s say “the ocean” or “primordial soup”. It is our soup. It is true that a great deal of relatively physically unfit creatures is allowed to procreate, but there still is a standard for fitness, and this is all that matters to the argument, from a value ontology perspective.

After all, physicality is nothing but a standard to appropriate value (physicality). Intellect is such a standard, as are morals.

What evolves right now is the soup itself. This forum here, this new world order site, is an experiment in the evolving soup. We try to upgrade the substance of the soup that disallows for the good-old version of evolution. To make it less hospitable and rewarding for passivity.

Of course, this is a way to communicate to ourselves, to create a space for ourselves within the soup. But never in history did soup, sea, air or knowledge evolve linearly - rather always in trends. A bird finds out to pick through a milk-bottle cap in England, at the same time a bird finds out in New Zealand. Our seemingly isolated efforts are likely not as isolated as they may seem.

Evolution then will come as two strands of seemingly isolated effort meet and grab hold of each other. At that point an “adaption” occurs - a step to greater power. In a sports team, or in a war effort, the individual has to rely on the utmost effort of those he can not control or perceive. Philosophers (since Nietzsche especially) have to do the same. The Christians used to call this sort of thing “faith”, but only the true fanatics knew how to arrange for this faith to come true. “God helps those who help themselves” is a theme that is recurring now as a meme - we are an interesting group in that we are no longer purely “ourselves” - we have already evolved.

The road is long and bleak and dark, yes. But we are so incredibly far advanced beyond those who have not even set out - we set out two years ago, and the road has further darkened, and it will likely continue to darken, but this is not a reason to cease the effort of making that road. Evolution comes at the end, as a result of this evolved tendency to pioneer. Evolution itself is a product of survival of the fittest. Only those that tend to grow toward a point where they may adapt to increased potential do evolve at all.

To find joy in the struggle is required to keep evolution going. It does not need to be an overwhelming or even a dominant joy, not at all - a grain of pleasure in the desert of pain.

Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
Guattari’s Machinic Systems
Guattari held that there is something which can be described as a technological consciousness, a mechanic way of thinking that is at the same time human and extra-human (here I remember trajicomic, who really made some inroads into questioning what human is useful for anyway).

I believe this is one of those things where people are commonly simply not able in any sense to accept an abstract reality. The fact is that much of our behavior, of course even when we feel or think otherwise, is determined by machinic systems with a logic different from that of any (traditional?) human thinking. Baudrillard named it well as the homicidal action of science (I paraphrase). In this sense, it is an occult matter.

The reason these logics can persist and make evolutionary sense is the way they are able to blend with the process from which, after all, they were formed. Advanced technology and the consciousness it is linked to came into humanity’s life well before our own animal processes were held to any important analysis and incorporation into, let’s call it, ubermenschity. Thus, its own inertia is demolishing fetal things in us, and our own historical retardedness stands in the way of our curbing it in any significant way.

Guattari never liked simulations and stuff, and I guess the essential difference between him and Baudrillard is that Guattari held it all within the psychoanalytic human ether, while Baudrillard felt free to call this an inhuman, or human-less process. One may be more drawn to Baudrillard’s brutal honesty, but Guattari’s more remixed yet unitary approach offers as an end result a density of knowledge that is largely unmatched.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 03:51 PM Unread post Post: #2
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Guattari’s Machinic Systems
It’s been a while since I read Guattari (and really only when he was merged with Deleuze) Baudrillard I have read some essays of, but frankly I just zone out. Bad machine gear mesh, his fault, my fault, who cares…
But could you give me some examples of what G is referring to as this technological consciousness as you see it, perhaps in your own mind, and what one does with this knowledge, if anything. What use is the insight?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 05:22 PM Unread post Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Guattari’s Machinic Systems
Ah, you thought he was complaining!

In the case of Guattari, he was quite comfortable with the idea of a relentleslly self-dependent wilderness that we can interact with. That is, the world could make sense to him as inhuman. It was inhumanity within humanity that he seemed to me to dislike, and so he took all of what is inhuman about consciousness, patterns of neurological operation, and analyzed them into a kind of body of post-Marxism. The machinic unconscious, techno-consciousness, whatever, are simply the logistical human acts that machines require to function. In Baudrillard’s case, this is seen as innately, or rather evolutionarily human.

What use?

Personally, I saw every single person I saw after that realization differently. For example, we have all been in a place where a logician or scientist dances some circles around us, making us feel less wise. I can now understand that feeling: it is the lack of machinic consciousness. The shame is almost the logician’s now!
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 08:24 AM Unread post Post: #4
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Guattari’s Machinic Systems
(03-30-2013 05:22 PM)pezer Wrote:
Ah, you thought he was complaining!
Actually I figured not, but I wasn’t sure. Bad machine gears was me not understanding.
[/quote]
Still not sure I get it. concrete examples?
Seems like a contrast between mechanical processes in humans that continue existence, the whole sequence of automatic pilot taking the instameal out of the microwave and then shoving in mouth while watching sports news…and I am not sure what he is contrasting this with. But maybe that is not an example of what he means.

Quote:
What use?

Personally, I saw every single person I saw after that realization differently. For example, we have all been in a place where a logician or scientist dances some circles around us, making us feel less wise. I can now understand that feeling: it is the lack of machinic consciousness. The shame is almost the logician’s now!
So when you are experiencing cognitive dissonence the machine processes have stopped for a moment?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 10:18 AM Unread post Post: #5
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Guattari’s Machinic Systems
You may as well think of it as machinic logic, except then I would have posted this in the Philosophy forum.

He is contrasting it, like thinkers tend to with pointlesness, with opportunity cost, and also imaginary opportunity cost. What is it we are not doing? What is it we think we’re not doing?

But the contrast is a tool in Baudrillard, not the point itself.

Effort, Leap, Perception
It has been thinking to me lately that effort is the basic unit of evolution. Unity is required… But where? Only in the beginning. Then it’s all trajectories and equations. Effort describes unity of beginning.

This question would need to be tackled: whose effort is the owl shape of a butterfly’s back?

Very theoretical! Let us take a leap.

Already, to choose praxis is risky, and to travel so short a while back in time puts us on a sure and steady course to crazyness. But to choose Praxis to post in… Why? Why the effort?

I was lead almost by the hand. I thought I was the tip of the drill, and suddenly a small wave of philosophers starts violating my walls, sometimes not even surpassing but jut being beyond my limits.

It’s enough to make one jump into a rabbit hole!

What is it then, once I made the effort, took the leap, that remains?

My preconceived conclusion, of course: pure perception, in the style of paranoia, where effort and leaping is rendered meaningless.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 11:50 AM (This post was last modified: 03-31-2013 11:53 AM by Heathen.) Post: #2
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Effort, Leap, Perception
(03-30-2013 06:18 PM)pezer Wrote:
It has been thinking to me lately that effort is the basic unit of evolution. Unity is required… But where? Only in the beginning. Then it’s all trajectories and equations. Effort describes unity of beginning.

This question would need to be tackled: whose effort is the owl shape of a butterfly’s back?
According to Darwinists either no one’s - the machine of other things being eaten more and younger have ‘last man standinged’ them, so to speak; or the crashings of a lot of various localized individual efforts - predators and prey - leading to the statistical advantage of a pattern. If you have eyes on your back, good on ya. If they seem to be attracting predators instead, you might want to wear a cape, being housed in an individual and not being your whole species, let alone the system of your whole species and those species who prey on it. If it works for you to attract predators - cause you end up eating them - well, no cape is needed and effort could be put elsewhere.

Unless one’s own mind/self is that system,with predators and prey - and most minds and selves seem like this - then you get to work with individual efforts based on received patterns.

If that seems to be working for you - or you really just want to let natural selection do the culling - then praxis can be no praxis, first thought is best thought, but not in the Buddhist developmental sense. Don’t push the river, drown, live whatever…

If it does not seem to be working for one to be this predatory and prey system, internally, then some praxis might shift things where one will.

If the very idea of effort creates an internal predator, then some serious contemplation might be a good first step.

A hammer can certainly be used on your own head, but if you were hoping to pull out some nails instead of your own teeth, you don’t know what you are doing when you reach for the hammer. Might be best to find that out and let more effortless desire then make the effort.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 12:31 PM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Effort, Leap, Perception
No, and you still don’t understand my point about fear.

You are right in one thing: the more you let go, the more you will learn where you’d prefer to hang on. It only works if you listen though. Chanting blinds.

A Monkey on my Back
I have a monkey on my back, brought on by the usual: romanticism. Romanticism is like herpes; you can control it, minimize its damage, but you can never fully be rid of it. Non-romantics are usually good enough and kind enough to ignore it.

In my romantic dance with reality, I found Shaitan. Satan. Satanael. Lucifer. Luzbel.

Luzbel…

None of these things, that I love dearly, are real.

If I insist on bringing them up, it is because they point to very real philosophical ground. That ground that only Nietzsche has so far been able to scout without betrayal.

RE: A Monkey on my Back
Ok I will engage.

Once I was in a Lucifer trip, lasted for a couple of years. At the heat of it, I did a meditation, and was guided through the summer city. I walked like a blind man, just trusting my feet, trusting Lucifer to guide my feet. I ended up at a small bookmarket I did not know was there. I walked straight to a stand and picked up a large black book. On the back there was a small silver print: “White Magic”.

I took the book home, and read from it. It was immediately clear that it was dangerous and if used to good measure, very powerful. I only ever used one technique out of it, possibly the most powerful technique I’ve done - the breathing of the soul.

Everything changed after I did that exercise a couple of times, lying on my apartments floor red carpet. Within a week, I had lifted a curse that was resting on my ancestral home. Within a month, I had acquired 50.000 euro’s. A few months later I found myself visiting Faust in Maine, bought a van from his friend, and from there on things got even more interesting and rewarding.

Music.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 05:27 AM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: A Monkey on my Back
That was one of the most powerful things I have ever read. How beauuuutifull!!!

But my path is already fraught with sacrifice, I will not stop here.

The path of the Nietzscheous is frought on all sides by the power of the eld and the inequities of those who must answer. For answers are the fruit of our labor, and these would seek to take it from us, give us back some juice of theirs that might or might not include our fruit. If they are smart it includes a scent of it.

The magician is our most fearsome enemy, and we love him more deeply than any other. They can court our hearts, only they have the right to tempt us out of truth. How beautiful their drawings…

Heart breaking.

I love you, executioner!! I love you so!

I will kill you and have no mercy. Then I might kill myself. Who knows, I will become quite powerful if I don’t.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

RE: Accept the Dark Side
How dare you ever accuse me of excessive crypticness?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-13-2013, 01:39 PM Post: #4
Moreno Offline
Student
Posts: 2
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Accept the Dark Side
So, what does accepting the dark side mean to you, Pezer?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-13-2013, 10:07 PM (This post was last modified: 03-13-2013 10:44 PM by JSS.) Post: #5
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Hey there Moreno…
…welcome to the Nude World Order… wait I mean the New World Oder… wait…hold on… I’ll get it…
…Natural World Oder??
…hmm…
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-14-2013, 02:51 AM Post: #6
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
That is a great question, Moreno.

Precisely the one I challenge any reader with cojones to ask themselves. The guy that wrote that song, who Cash covered, asked himself. He was a Christian about it, but by God he did ask himself.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 09:11 AM Post: #7
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Accept the Dark Side
I haven’t used that term so much, but I guess the dark side has always covered stuff that I can’t ‘see’ well and that I judge(d) to be bad. ID, Shadow, naughty to evil impulses, the actual motivations which I can’t face and so on. And then I started to explore what this stuff really was and what it felt like to integrate it. Return of energy, less guilt, less splits, etc.

I think there is other unintegrated stuff we are not conscious of, but that doesn’t seem to fit what people focus on when they talk about the dark side - often in the assumptions/judgments area.

I also notice that people who talk about the dark side often focus more on the Yangy stuff, agressive sex and violence, hatred, and very dark ill will. All feeling good to integrate, but then the fear and confusion, for example, seem to get skipped over.

The Dark Side has a Dark Side.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 12:21 PM Post: #8
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Fear and confusion… I guess it depends on if all “dark” feelings where relegated to the dark side or if some where successfully kept from the get go, that is, if the inspiration for them was a constant that can be interacted with. Fore some feelings, we have simply amputated them from reality. Those are recoverable too.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 02:02 PM (This post was last modified: 03-30-2013 02:02 PM by Heathen.) Post: #9
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Accept the Dark Side
(03-30-2013 12:21 PM)pezer Wrote:
Fear and confusion… I guess it depends on if all “dark” feelings where relegated to the dark side or if some where successfully kept from the get go,
Yes, people have different self-images from each other to protect. Some hide this, others that. I just notice that some who speak of contacting the dark side nevertheless never seem to develop a tolerance for confusion. The accept their will to power. They accept aggressive undercurrents in themselves. They accept urges to violence. And so on. And then they present as very certain all the time, often habitually ‘owning’ (cough, cough) nasty interpersonal jabs, which ends up being a habit of avoiding the terror of being uncertain especially where others can see it. And also fear in general is often not considered dark. That’s just some sissy thing.

Others start with fear more up front and find this easier to accept, at least to some degree, and feel release and integration when going into anger, but rage and hate are still no, nos. And any hints of perpetrator like energies in themselves are judged, still as bad. Beyond dark. So they are left with integrating righteous anger, victim anger
all the nice angers
and not going down into the stuff that really goes against the good person they are always trying to be, even in this process of getting into the dark side.

Both patterns lack self-trust.

Must be others.

Quote:
Fore some feelings, we have simply amputated them from reality. Those are recoverable too.
So how do you recover them? A praxis question.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 05:35 PM Post: #10
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Fine, Heathen, I see where you are going.

It’s all a matter of knowing that I don’t know what I don’t know, even if I might already know it. I trust myself deeper than the moment of lust, I know I cannot understand all of my decisions at any single moment. Confusion-san.

I dive in, fully in the knowledge that I am diving into… Water, dark water of unknown depths. “But I haven’t resolved th-” “What about the fluffy in-” “Surely, we should try to calculate how l-” I look around me and have already forgotten what I was looking for. Only hanging on for dear life now exists. Fear-sama.

Those I’m comforable with, even. I wrote this post thinking of cruelty.

Cruelty is like all dark things and grows as it’s ran from.

So yes, there is others. They are mostly me.

RE: Accept the Dark Side
Dive in…?

Roll around on the floor in the dark letting all the shit come out in sound?
Contemplate in neo-buddhist fashion watching the id like a movie?
Graffiti your darkest fantasy on a bank wall?
4) ?

Dive in?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 10:56 AM Post: #12
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Not quite…
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 11:12 AM Post: #13
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Accept the Dark Side
yah, it was a question. But if you don’t want to answer, that’s fine.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 11:27 AM Post: #14
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
You are asking me to specifically define fear. I’m doing my best.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 11:31 AM Post: #15
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Accept the Dark Side
(03-31-2013 11:27 AM)pezer Wrote:
You are asking me to specifically define fear. I’m doing my best.
Actually I wanted to know what ‘diving in’ meant.

I thought you were answering my praxis question back here…

Quote:
Quote:Fore some feelings, we have simply amputated them from reality. Those are recoverable too.
Quote:
So how do you recover them? A praxis question.

So I took diving in to be how you recover them. I just didn’t know what that meant. Perhaps it is simply obvious. You dive into the feelings, though if they are amputated, how do you get to them? Or perhaps just the intent carries you there.

Anyway, that’s what i was asking about, not asking you to define fear.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 12:25 PM Post: #16
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Walking in leaps again… Is the view nice from up there? One would think there isn’t much oxygen.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 01:20 PM Post: #17
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Accept the Dark Side
OK. I lost interest in trying to communicate with you Pezer.
Must be comfy not quite ever really saying anything. Stay in your ‘profound haze’.
Maybe you will run away again.
Either way, I will ignore you from here on out.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 01:21 PM Post: #18
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Maybe some day you’ll decide to re-open communication.

I’ll be waiting.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:15 AM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2013 06:22 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #19
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Accept the Dark Side
DEARTH
starscream
starskkream
OPTIMUS PLUNGE

curge
Flirt with Serge

COP IN THE BEVVY

Dark Corner LA Hood
Lums are on the corner. Crack is sold in solid quantities under laternlights, a police van drives by nothing happens.
A king sits in his bed accompanied by his queeen and a partyhat, a chessboard before his confused gaze.
Why is that - pawn now there?
His king stands erect but his queen wanders

over to him
clue in clue out, less clues for you sire.

I meant sir. But words are the icing - eat and have cake and why I said dove -

I get ow, also l the crows.
Frost nails one man
a letter from a dead king
full of empty words
carried through the wild to serve
the waste of man.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:24 AM Post: #20
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
I have no fear,

I cast out to her, and it is in her hands now to save me.

Or I will fight. It must be as it must be.

I still see the temple… I will die with dreams if I die.

RE: Accept the Dark Side
When darkness came lurking I was working.
Treebird my pa looked over my shoulder.
Then came a thunderstrike in the eyes of my mother.
trust was broken without ever having known itself.
Well here commences good news, as all was wet and free.
life came back to dead mans hands and reaped the fallen tree.
the fruits were bright and sweet to taste tra tralala what glee.

++++++++

Here the poet dies a sudden heartattack and rises to Christ.
CHRIST:
What have you here?

POET
I have… nothing.

CHRIST
Why … not?

POET
I spent it all.

CHRIST
Ah… on … what?

POET
[pointing to the Earth]
Well, on them.

CRIST
[headpalm]
Christ… Oh…

POEM.
Now can I get through?

CHRIST
Yes… why not. Duck.

POET
[walking ahead through the magnificent and even more enormous gate]
For what?

CHRIST
You’ll find out if you don’t.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:41 AM Post: #22
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
I don’t get it. Why Christ?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:42 AM Post: #23
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
I see…
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:42 AM Post: #24
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
We don’t need him.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:43 AM Post: #25
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Must we do war?

Is science not enough?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:44 AM Post: #26
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
No. I suppose not.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:44 AM Post: #27
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Because he did not give so that he received. Which means he did not give it to them at all.

And then Christ pulled the trick on him. The sheep-maker. The darkside-evil-maker. Normally the gate was high anough not to duck. But fear and doubt were instilled in the man. it had to be done.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:45 AM Post: #28
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Science is enough for the righteous. But the righteous are few, and Diplomats less.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:45 AM Post: #29
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Enough for what?
I used Christ to tell a story.

I don’t believe in “Him” or whatever -
I just know him, as Jesus, the theatre-miracle of Babylon.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:47 AM Post: #30
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
To resign to fire… That is not science.

E: Accept the Dark Side
It is enough for strong alliance.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:53 AM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2013 06:53 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #32
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Accept the Dark Side
What’s your beeft with Jesus?
I was raised without him that could help.
Thats how I like to refer to the religion once in a while - as a friendly afterthought.
Plus, they built cathedrals.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 06:59 AM Post: #33
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side

Japanese bullshit stories are the best and most true bullshit stories.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 07:01 AM Post: #34
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Except you failed with me, I live still, and I am not a martyr.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 07:01 AM Post: #35
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Jesus is of worth the same way as any God revered by man - a potency, a valency.
You have strong reservations, and this is logical as we can not think without reservations toward such a concept as a son of God.
I have a bit of respect for him knowing some of the men who have believed in the myth to be meaningful and magickal, and respecting their acts as manly and archaic, real as stone blood, and not at all forgiving of bullshit.
I can’t help to have a little respect for Christianity. Especially after seeing the interior of the “tip” here:

scenery-wallpapers.com/walls/mont…normal.jpg

It’s not “my thing” in the sense of priesthood - but the warriorquality of building this fortress, in order to build this abbey on top - this is just in one word admirable.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 07:07 AM Post: #36
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
When I saw your face the first time, didn’t I almost sing of glee from having found an enemy?

It was not because you are different than me, it is because you are almost reversed. And because you are different.

I come “from” Jesus, son of God. From. I am a herald of that land that you discovered, too late.

You describe it aptly and with Truth. You are a man of Truth.

It is only Right that you should struggle madly with Jesus.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 07:08 AM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2013 07:09 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #37
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Accept the Dark Side
There is an open garden on the top- a regular cloister - patio, with a gallery and a “sacred” square of green in the middle. Outside the wind is howling at 100 km/h. I opened one to a crack of the shutters in one of the halls of stone preceding the open garden - the force of the wind blasted through the hall and I was instantly in the middle ages, as real as I’ve ever been. And it was not un-awesome.
I once had a vision. It reminded me that Christians knew a thing or two about fear, and thus of respect.

Respect can come without fear. But fear can not come without respect.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 07:11 AM Post: #38
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Accept the Dark Side
Are we not more powerful yet than Machiavello?

How long will it take?

E: Accept the Dark Side
Answer me Fixed Cross, or don’t.

Why do you have to lie, whilst I feel free of it?

Angels Don’t Hug
As I delve deeper into Satanism, the revelations get better and better. Dig this one, bet it never occurred to you: angels don’t hug!

They show up, in some firey display of might, lay onto you some dope werdz and gtfo. Maybe the “Holy spirit” can have sex with girls, maybe, and I’m more and more convinced anyway that the holy spirit is Satan. Plus, is hugging strictly necessary for sex?

Now Shaitan, as the eloquent Arabs call 'im, is sometimes seduction itself, woman, Shaitan loves life and Man and, like all who suffer that affliction, loves to hug.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 05:21 AM Post: #2
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
Angels might not “hug”, but they can sure fuck you up.
…or cover you with kindness.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 06:14 AM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
“Angels might not “hug”, but they can sure fuck you up.”

And herein lies the key to faith.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 07:46 AM (This post was last modified: 03-31-2013 07:52 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #4
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
[this was gay]
It is not always bad to be beaten down by an angel, as long as the fight is chivalrous.
Angels who are not chivalrous -

what are their names?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 07:54 AM (This post was last modified: 03-31-2013 07:57 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #5
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
Aren’t angeles “Gay” in the common sense?
Is not the Satan myth the castration of God, Gods penis running away from him?

Gods other “angels”, his attributes, are not nearly as valuable to him as his obelisk-inspiring Godhood.
But this was only to keep God from those who let him be kept.

This God-in-the-closet aspect was always what inspired excess, religious dedication, marvelous art because being unseen yet known is the most godly feature.

Now God is made bland and dead by science. God used to be more or less autonomous, now he only exists as logic to us. Satanael is illogical, irrational, takes the space between problem and solution, and sometimes becomes where God cannot - pure justification.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 08:15 AM Post: #6
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
All Monotheists know to predict the rise of the Antichrist, precisely because God’s closeted essence is not God’s, and even the closet isn’t. Satan is like the ball of real that was produced from the fancyhood of Godly constructs. All the other angels are Diplomats, trying to mediate.

Now God is dead, Satan is curiously still vibrant.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 10:45 PM (This post was last modified: 03-31-2013 11:36 PM by JSS.) Post: #7
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
God isn’t dead, He’s just waiting for people to get through their anx.

Btw, an angel is a stratagem. An archangel is a fundamental stratagem underlying many others. And God is the stratagem underlying all of them, the “Head Angel”.

The “Devil” is also a stratagem, a really serious one, based on giving people Hell.

So in the Bible when they said , “she knew the angel”, they meant what they said. The whole “sex” thing, as usual, was merely another of many tempting distractions to keep people off course chasing a “space alien” story, with the final intent of making the Church seem like silly superstitious fools.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 02:52 AM Post: #8
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
They ARE silly superstitious fools. That everybody else also is doesn’t change that.

You did do one good thing for me today, O JSS. You confirmed for me, from a Christian perspective, that God was just another Demon. The tyrant of Heaven.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 03:56 AM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2013 03:56 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #9
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
God is not contextual.
How can he exist?

Only as context-creating. A standard and its minimum requirements. God is the potency of there being anything at all. For things the exist there must be difference, for there to be difference change is required. For change we must have comparable instances, which requires ‘slowness’, constancy, and its interaction with other slow constancies. The separation of bits of affect is qua measure defined by their capacity to relate to each other. This means ‘to interpret in terms of self-value’. -
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 05:33 AM Unread post Post: #10
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
(04-01-2013 03:56 AM)Fixed Cross Wrote:
God is the potency of there being anything at all.
Otherwise known as a “potential”.

(04-01-2013 03:56 AM)Fixed Cross Wrote:
The separation of bits of affect is qua measure defined by their capacity to relate to each other. This means ‘to interpret in terms of self-value’. -
Yep.
There can’t be a self until there is a not-self as well.

RE: Angels Don’t Hug
(04-01-2013 05:33 AM)JSS Wrote:
(04-01-2013 03:56 AM)Fixed Cross Wrote:
God is the potency of there being anything at all.
Otherwise known as a “potential”.

(04-01-2013 03:56 AM)Fixed Cross Wrote:
The separation of bits of affect is qua measure defined by their capacity to relate to each other. This means ‘to interpret in terms of self-value’. -
Yep.
There can’t be a self until there is a not-self as well.

To call potential itself God is, ironically, quite Satanic in action.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 07:15 AM Post: #12
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
(04-01-2013 06:09 AM)pezer Wrote:
To call potential itself God is, ironically, quite Satanic in action.
Just because God is potential doesn’t mean that potential is God.
Get your set theory straight. Wink
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 07:18 AM Post: #13
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
I did misunderstand, then.

It might not be Satanic in that case, but it’s still certainly demonic.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 07:36 AM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2013 07:37 AM by JSS.) Post: #14
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
“Demonic” means “dividing the whole”, or “de-unifying”.
What would God be de-unifying that God didn’t create already de-unified?

God, as a strategy, is a unifying principle, because there is only one of Him and IF everyone accepts Him, then everyone cooperates (not that you would guess that by the history of the apes).

God = let’s all agree to agree.
Devil = let’s all agree to disagree.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 07:40 AM Post: #15
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Angels Don’t Hug
If everyone agrees to eat dirt at 2:00 pm every day, then everyone cooperates.

God: let’s all agree to stop sensing, perceiving and thinking.

Devil: Fucking never, God bitch.

New Mythology
What are the Gods of today?

  • Jah Rastafari
    Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
    03-03-2013, 05:45 AM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2013 05:46 AM by JSS.) Post: #2
    JSS Offline
    Moderator
    Posts: 287
    Joined: Dec 2012
    Reputation: 5
    RE: New Mythology
  1. Electromagnetic Force
  2. Gravitation Force
  3. Strong Force
  4. Weak Force (although currently romancing the EM Force)
  5. Quantization
  6. Entropy
  7. Socialism
    Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
    03-03-2013, 11:00 AM Post: #3
    Gobbo Offline
    .:
    Posts: 406
    Joined: Nov 2012
    Reputation: 6
    RE: New Mythology
    The self/self-aggrandization/phones
    “I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
    Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
    03-30-2013, 11:49 AM (This post was last modified: 03-30-2013 11:50 AM by Heathen.) Post: #4
    Heathen Offline
    Probationer
    Posts: 64
    Joined: Mar 2013
    Reputation: 1
    RE: New Mythology
    That these are positives:
    Transhumanism
    Genetically Modified Organisms
    AI

That this is the case:
The Self is the Body Surface + Possessions

That this exists:
Democracy

That there is no action over distance
That death is the rule and the life is the exception
That ‘matter’ means anything
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 12:35 PM (This post was last modified: 03-30-2013 12:38 PM by JSS.) Post: #5
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: New Mythology
(03-30-2013 11:49 AM)Heathen Wrote:
That these are positives:
Transhumanism
Genetically Modified Organisms
AI

That this is the case:
The Self is the Body Surface + Possessions

That this exists:
Democracy [false]

That there is no action over distance [true]
That death is the rule and the life is the exception [true]
That ‘matter’ means anything [true]

You have a keen eye.
…except that the last 4 don’t fit together.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 01:46 PM Post: #6
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: New Mythology
I am not quite sure what you mean. I am not sure what democracy has to do with the last three. I did mean that it is a myth democracy exists - on any large scale that is. There may be a group of under, say, 300 that manages this.

If you are saying that death is the rule and life is the exception, how can God be everywhere and in everything. Or perhaps you meant calling that a myth was true.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 02:04 PM (This post was last modified: 03-30-2013 02:06 PM by JSS.) Post: #7
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: New Mythology
(03-30-2013 01:46 PM)Heathen Wrote:
I am not quite sure what you mean. I am not sure what democracy has to do with the last three. I did mean that it is a myth democracy exists - on any large scale that is. There may be a group of under, say, 300 that manages this.

Sorry, I thought that you had intended the last four to be grouped under the same heading.

(03-30-2013 01:46 PM)Heathen Wrote:
If you are saying that death is the rule and life is the exception, how can God be everywhere and in everything. Or perhaps you meant calling that a myth was true.

That of course, depends on your definition of “God”
and that gets into what you want to believe of Truth versus Truth itself
and that gets into Truth versus Reality
and that gets into Definitional Logic
which of course, gets into Rational Metaphysics:Affectance Ontology and/or Value Ontology. Big Grin

new “myths”??
…or new takes on Reality?

…and they wonder why they don’t see all of the answers at once. Dodgy
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 02:11 PM Post: #8
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: New Mythology
(03-30-2013 02:04 PM)JSS Wrote:
That of course, depends on your definition of “God”
Sure, though I haven’t met many who would say God was dead. Except in the atheist metaphorical sense, that is.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 02:13 PM Post: #9
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: New Mythology
Like all real Logic, there is always a third choice, not merely “Dead / Alive”.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 02:41 PM Post: #10
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: New Mythology
(03-30-2013 02:13 PM)JSS Wrote:
Like all real Logic, there is always a third choice, not merely “Dead / Alive”.
Well, then whatever that is is the rule and not death.

RE: New Mythology
The third choice in this case is, “Not Applicable”.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 03:54 PM Post: #12
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: New Mythology
Well then, the rule I disliked is off. Not applicable is the rule. Or at least an underlying rule.

That said. No action at a distance? Didn’t you say somewhere you’d done remote viewing. Wouldn’t what you saw have affected you? If nothing else in the specific memories what you saw created, let alone how what you saw may have shifted how your thought, even if only in specifics, and perhaps what you did?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 04:03 PM (This post was last modified: 03-31-2013 02:40 PM by JSS.) Post: #13
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: New Mythology
(03-30-2013 03:54 PM)Heathen Wrote:
Not applicable is the rule.

Isn’t it more often than not?

(03-30-2013 03:54 PM)Heathen Wrote:
No action at a distance? Didn’t you say somewhere you’d done remote viewing. Wouldn’t what you saw have affected you? If nothing else in the specific memories what you saw created, let alone how what you saw may have shifted how your thought, even if only in specifics, and perhaps what you did?

Remote viewing doesn’t work by remote cause to local effect.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 08:38 AM Post: #14
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: New Mythology
(03-30-2013 04:03 PM)JSS Wrote:
(03-30-2013 03:54 PM)Heathen Wrote:
Not applicable is the rule.

Isn’t it ore often than not?

(03-30-2013 03:54 PM)Heathen Wrote:
No action at a distance? Didn’t you say somewhere you’d done remote viewing. Wouldn’t what you saw have affected you? If nothing else in the specific memories what you saw created, let alone how what you saw may have shifted how your thought, even if only in specifics, and perhaps what you did?

Remote viewing doesn’t work by remote cause to local effect.
OK, so how is it not something far away connected directly to someone ‘here’? IOW I understand you disagree with what I wrote, but not how you see it as wrong.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-31-2013, 02:40 PM Post: #15
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: New Mythology
(03-31-2013 08:38 AM)Heathen Wrote:
OK, so how is it not something far away connected directly to someone ‘here’? IOW I understand you disagree with what I wrote, but not how you see it as wrong.

In a word, “Entanglement”.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 09:23 AM Post: #16
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: New Mythology
(03-31-2013 02:40 PM)JSS Wrote:
(03-31-2013 08:38 AM)Heathen Wrote:
OK, so how is it not something far away connected directly to someone ‘here’? IOW I understand you disagree with what I wrote, but not how you see it as wrong.

In a word, “Entanglement”.
So are you with the mainstream consensus that no information can be passed via entanglement or against this consensus - or have some third position, etc.? I assume you can see why I ask this in context.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 09:25 AM Post: #17
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: New Mythology
Ah, I just thought of a 3rd position - not that there can’t be more. No information passes, it’s already ‘here’. Hence no action at a distance. Though distance is sort of eliminated, so saying no action at a distance is not a proper denial.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 01:31 PM Post: #18
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: New Mythology
(04-01-2013 09:25 AM)Heathen Wrote:
No information passes, it’s already ‘here’. Hence no action at a distance.

There you go.

(04-01-2013 09:25 AM)Heathen Wrote:
Though distance is sort of eliminated, so saying no action at a distance is not a proper denial.

I don’t think that I understand that part.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 01:40 PM Post: #19
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: New Mythology
(04-01-2013 01:31 PM)JSS Wrote:
(04-01-2013 09:25 AM)Heathen Wrote:
No information passes, it’s already ‘here’. Hence no action at a distance.

There you go.

(04-01-2013 09:25 AM)Heathen Wrote:
Though distance is sort of eliminated, so saying no action at a distance is not a proper denial.

I don’t think that I understand that part.
Well, you agreed with my saying no information passes since it is already here. To me one way of putting this would be that the mind takes up more space then we generally allow, though not just minds since entanglement involves all matter. To me the idea of distance is cut into if I am direction connected to ‘there’. There is no distance, if only in one way, but as far as consciousness, there is none.

As a related question, are your ruling out, then, action at a distance, for example like healing and thought exchange - the latter without a traditional medium - like say a telephone.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 02:54 PM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2013 02:59 PM by JSS.) Post: #20
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: New Mythology
Hmm… I don’t discard distance. The distance is there. It just isn’t relevant for this concern. What I believe in is something you could call “transentanglement”.

Imagine that you mentally witness a problem that someone is having at a distance. You envision the solution. But the solution doesn’t actually occur at that distance. Why not? Because the other party wasn’t envisioning you and your solution.

The “connectedness” of consciousness occurs through “transentanglement”, each party envisioning the other, thus in a sense, “discussing” the situation with each other, even though no information actually passed from any to any other. It all occurs as quickly as they can envision.

RE: New Mythology
(04-01-2013 03:07 PM)pezer Wrote:
All very interesting… But what is the new God here?
A) the “god” = enticing illusion.
B) the “God” = same as always.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 03:27 PM Post: #23
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: New Mythology
So… aReality and bNihilism?

Yeah, nothing new under the Sun.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 03:30 PM Post: #24
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: New Mythology
Nihilism is like Lucifer… Missleading. Lucifer was once Lucibel. We have already concluded that nothing is really more than nothing, infinite more.

Making you… A Chaos worshiper. My creation!

No, not my creation. My creation was Nietzschean, Chaos of honesty.

If you want to be a cynic with my brand, you must abandon all falsehood.

Mental Health as Honesty
Nietzsche’s contributions to the health sciences of psychology can be reduced to that: honesty is equivalent to health. This has some interesting consequences.

Think now of the shadow people of your city. Those who are disgruntled and smell bad even in spirit. What common thread can we find in them? Is it not the righteousnesses of a priest?

Always, we see high opinions of everything, which instantly anger us and make them smell even worse. But they feed off of it, and somehow their delusions become more real with it.

Another thing: those opinions smell bad, and anger us, because they are lies. That is to say, they are knowing misrepresentations of life as we have perceived it before.

We must never forget, though, that rot and fermentation can often make sweet intoxication, and we are right to love this intoxication. We leave having had a high, and the wrech is left, at least, with the feeling of having cheered life.

Unsettling… He’ll soon get over it. But perhaps his cruelty has been lightened.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-01-2013, 08:31 AM (This post was last modified: 04-01-2013 08:47 AM by pezer.) Post: #2
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Mental Health as Honesty
More on why honesty is equivalent to health:

What does health mean? If you ask a Freudian, they will say it is the ability to go through your day effectively. We will go with this, of primitive masters of the true psychology.

To go about your day, there needs to be a you, a day, and shit to get to in it. These worlds need to coordinate with updated, fluctual information.

How can communication occur between these?

In the mind, one has a plan for them. This plan will eaither be feasable or not, and either correspond to the conditions one will meet or not. It all depends on the mind’s ability to accurately predict what the day will be, what the task will require and what one has to work with from the outset. The plan, the strategy, must be good. But much before that, the plan has to be the product of an honest assesment of what’s waiting for you out there.

Otherwise, you might just get the timing wrong when you walk into the subway train, menial things like that are suddenly dangerous tasks…
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-03-2013, 09:59 PM (This post was last modified: 04-03-2013 10:03 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #3
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Mental Health as Honesty
Yes, I like this.

We like to forget the implicit dangers in everything we do, and in general man does little to minimize his exposure to these dangers. “Go through your day effectively”, this assumes A LOT. For one thing, we do not always need “the plan” but rather the ability to improvise/adapt and to change plans. This is more important, I think: a “meta-plan”, or what is often called a moral/ethic.

Social forms give this meta-planning. Religion, politics, interpersonal relationships, occupation, consumption and continual re-stimulation of the instinctual organism. This is meta-planning, and “the plan/s” as dictates our more specific day-to-day lives are like little off-shoots of the meta-plan. But I would also refer to Kaczynski’s concept of power process, such a simple and obvious idea but which is easily overlooked. Taking some of itself from Nietzsche, of course, the idea is that we need to proceed through stages of power-seeking, working-suffering, and power-getting. If the amount of power we achieve in the end is too little, or the work-suffering is either too easy or too difficult, then this process will be weak and inadequate. But if we hit the right balance of valuation and action-struggle, not too much but not too little, we are rewarded with “meaning”, what you call here “health”.

Health has social and personal dimensions, dimensions in time and space, dimensional along a continuum of the Real. The objet petit a drives our plans, and regardless of that object itself we are rewarded with health, meaning and power so long as our effectiveness, as you called it, is achieved relative to it. This is radical self-valuing manipulation. And it is, I think, the unconscious nature of this manipulation that is what really offends us when we hear the shadow people speaking of their virtues. (And the only conscious form of meta-planning that I know of is philosophy, and perhaps also certain occult systems with which I am not very familiar).

Personally I have a hard time breathing in the intoxicating fumes from the “shadow people” and their constant and noisy decaying. Perhaps it is an acquired taste, but…
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-03-2013, 10:31 PM (This post was last modified: 04-03-2013 10:32 PM by pezer.) Post: #4
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Mental Health as Honesty
Don’t get me wrong, it’s not worth seeking out. But if you are sucked into a situation with a person like that, or tricked to drink his self-aggrandizing fantasies, if you are already in the situation then the effort-reward balance works out better for enjoying it. Like when you counter-attack in chess from the very tip of your opponent’s attack, once you are seemingly overwhelmed. A practical application of Sun Tzu’s idea that it is better to leave your enemy space to escape, if you will, except the war you are having is who can enjoy themselves most; and everybody wins a war like that.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

Shifty
There are two kinds of shiftyness, and only one is real.

There exists the shiftyness of the Buhddist, which moves itself and is like a show.

Then there is the other one.

Then there is the shiftyness of magicians who have trained for it. This one is artificial.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 09:13 AM Unread post Post: #2
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Shifty
I have been told I have ‘shifty eyes.’ I totally do.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 10:06 AM Unread post Post: #3
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Shifty
(04-04-2013 09:13 AM)Q Wrote:
I have been told I have ‘shifty eyes.’ I totally do.

Pics or it didn’t happen.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 10:08 AM Unread post Post: #4
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Shifty
How can I post a pic of my eyes being shifty? Maybe I can make a video.

The Philosopher’s Demolition Derby and Path
Two painful things are that of philosophers. The first, the one one encounters first, is the destruction.

A Truth seeker, in this world of twisted reality, must first demolish all inherited understandings. He kills himself many times over. The philosopher bears it: he can see a goal. The self-destroyer bears it too, but differently.

I have broken a pact and a promise to come back and say this: That philosophy is the most dangerous thing only in the sense of the deepest, and being most relevant while mostly out of one’s hand. The second painful thing, after destruction of inherited things, is the making of old mistakes anew.

This one is actually quite exciting. One can feel one’s self relate both to ancesters high in the past and all the mistakes that came from their blundering attempts to make sense of it. One makes the mistakes of an idiot child!

And one begins to learn anew what mean things like responsibility, fear, cockyness and desire for life.

Philosophers, stop your trembling. Grit your teeth, look outside, and begin the work that is ahead of us.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Report this post to a moderator
04-03-2013, 09:17 PM (This post was last modified: 04-03-2013 09:18 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #2
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: The Philosopher’s Demolition Derby and Path
This is good advice to those who must walk this highest and most insane path. If not for the embrace of destruction and mistakes, all we can look forward to inheriting is death, a loop, an ending that is the same as where we began. We must avoid such dreadul “beautiful symmetries” of perfection and sense-making, and rather aim at crushing, crumbling those sense-making arches of being that mark our path, the path that marks us, the path that denies us our mark, our path-making.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Report this post to a moderator
04-03-2013, 10:08 PM (This post was last modified: 04-03-2013 10:09 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #3
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: The Philosopher’s Demolition Derby and Path
…And where the philosopher also seeks to attain happiness, here we may witness the most widespread and precise destructions (of truth). Inherited understanding and its demolition become as kindling for the flame of a more true creation, a more true annihilation of truths (toward the end of…) …
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Report this post to a moderator
04-03-2013, 10:48 PM (This post was last modified: 04-03-2013 10:49 PM by pezer.) Post: #4
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Philosopher’s Demolition Derby and Path
No, the philosopher must not chase after his own fruit. He does not seek happiness, he envisions it. Destruction is breathing. Envisioning is needing to breathe.

One of my main points is that philosophy is largely passive, due its immense weight.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 01:17 PM (This post was last modified: 04-04-2013 01:20 PM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #5
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: The Philosopher’s Demolition Derby and Path
Happiness is a concept no serious philosopher would admit being interested in or taking seriously, much less pursuing actively for themselves. This means only that there is something about this philosopher’s type which makes the notion of happiness anathema. We would do well to inquire further here and not merely concede the limitation.

Philosophy is cultivating a strength for things, not least of all for truth. But not only for truth. Philosophy is heavy, the philosopher need not be. We may heed Nietzsche’s warnings in Zarathustra, if we are wise enough to hear them, if we are humble and ambitious enough to get out of our own way.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 11:42 PM Post: #6
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8

Bill Wiltrack Offline
Probationer
Posts: 86
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: The Philosopher’s Demolition Derby and Path
.

…[Image: X9gt9Wr.gif]

When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return.









[img]Bill%20Wiltrack%20Offline%20Probationer%20Posts:%2086%20Joined:%20Feb%202013%20Reputation:%201%20RE:%20The%20Philosopher's%20Demolition%20Derby%20and%20Path%20.%20...........................................................[Image:%20X9gt9Wr.gif]%20When%20once%20you%20have%20tasted%20flight,%20you%20will%20forever%20walk%20the%20Earth%20with%20your%20eyes%20turned%20skyward,%20for%20there%20you%20have%20been,%20and%20there%20you%20will%20always%20long%20to%20return.%20~~~%20Leonardo%20Da%20Vinci%20~~~%20.%20Send%20this%20user%20an%20email%20Send%20this%20user%20a%20private%20message%20Find%20all%20posts%20by%20this%20user%20Give%20Reputation%20to%20this%20user%20Report%20this%20post%20to%20a%20moderator%2004-05-2013,%2010:14%20AM%20Post:%20#8%20Q%20Offline%205151%20Posts:%20469%20Joined:%20Jun%202012%20Reputation:%205%20RE:%20The%20Philosopher's%20Demolition%20Derby%20and%20Path%20Cool%20gif%20mang.%20How%20bout%20getting%20off%20all%20these%20antibiotics?%20How%20bout%20stopping%20eating%20when%20I'm%20full%20up?%20Send%20this%20user%20an%20email%20Send%20this%20user%20a%20private%20message%20Find%20all%20posts%20by%20this%20user%20Give%20Reputation%20to%20this%20user%20Report%20this%20post%20to%20a%20moderator%2004-05-2013,%2012:36%20PM%20Post:%20#9%20ChainOfBeing%20Offline%20Probationer%20Posts:%20178%20Joined:%20Dec%202012%20Reputation:%204%20RE:%20The%20Philosopher's%20Demolition%20Derby%20and%20Path%20Accepting%20happiness%20will%20lead%20to%20your%20highest%20truth.%20Abandon%20all%20hope,%20ye%20who%20enter%20here.%20Send%20this%20user%20a%20private%20message%20Find%20all%20posts%20by%20this%20user%20Give%20Reputation%20to%20this%20user%20Report%20this%20post%20to%20a%20moderator%2004-05-2013,%2001:45%20PM%20Post:%20#10%20pezer%20Offline%20Pothead%20Saruman%20Posts:%20800%20Joined:%20Jan%202013%20Reputation:%208%20RE:%20The%20Philosopher's%20Demolition%20Derby%20and%20Path%20Yes,%20but%20it%20blocks%20future.%20The%20philosopher,as%20you%20will%20recall,%20still%20needs%20a%20little%20chaos%20in%20his%20heart%20if%20he%20is%20to%20give%20birth%20to%20a%20dancing%20star.[/img]

Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Report this post to a moderator
04-05-2013, 10:14 AM Post: #8
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: The Philosopher's Demolition Derby and Path
Cool gif mang.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I'm full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Report this post to a moderator
04-05-2013, 12:36 PM Post: #9
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: The Philosopher's Demolition Derby and Path
Accepting happiness will lead to your highest truth.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Report this post to a moderator
04-05-2013, 01:45 PM Post: #10
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Philosopher's Demolition Derby and Path
Yes, but it blocks future. The philosopher,as you will recall, still needs a little chaos in his heart if he is to give birth to a dancing star.
Warning Level: 0%
RE: The Philosopher's Demolition Derby and Path
The world is largely passive due to its immense weight. Hence, science, which reflects this weight in immutable law. Philosophy is the task of giving wings to that which is heavy.
The serpent and the eagle, if you recall, belong together, flanking the philosopher who is looking at the sun.



RE: The Philosopher's Demolition Derby and Path
While the expert swordsman will wield an expert blade, and go about choosing and caring for it with equally rare skill, the true master is not choosy, for he can pick up and wield anything to any end he desires.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Report this post to a moderator
04-06-20


For the philosopher, happiness is the greatest chaos of all.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.


The Age of Us
I am finally able to evolve into my Internet self. Indeed, this place is like a Journal, a private repository of often unpolished thought.

However, this is the year fucking 2013 after the Death of Iesus (hellelujah), and our notebooks talk back.

Instead of a solitary fat-ass or a schizophrenic way, the voices in my head tearing me down and doubting me... Are not mine at all!

My self-training is the training of a community now, individuality has been transfigured into that disgusting, smelly realm of shared emotions in a real way, mocking Truth by instating Reality as an imitation of an Imitation of something not-real-enough-for-perception, and the best of us are working with this chemical reaction to achieve what before took at least ten more levels of madness to achieve.

Fixed Cross, Q, Friends, let's do Art.

We'll be the new Kierkegaard. Monstrous, disgusting, and potentially more beautiful that we can imagine imagining.




I am Nothing
A philosopher is nothing... and happy to be so!

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHh!!!!! WWWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOORRRLDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!​!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[myspace.com/t3hshredboiz](http://www.myspace.com/t3hshredboiz)
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:33 PM  Post: #2
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: I am Nothing
[flickr.com/photos/karlfontaine/page2/](http://www.flickr.com/photos/karlfontaine/page2/)
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:34 PM  Post: #3
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: I am Nothing
[xkcd.com/](http://xkcd.com/)
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:35 PM  Post: #4
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: I am Nothing
[btdigg.org/search?info_hash=e71e5...20mountain](http://btdigg.org/search?info_hash=e71e5...20mountain)
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:35 PM  Post: #5
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: I am Nothing
[en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lsd](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lsd)
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:36 PM  Post: #6
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: I am Nothing
[bitcoin.org/en/](http://bitcoin.org/en/)
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:37 PM  Post: #7
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: I am Nothing
[webexhibits.org/causesofcolor/1B.html](http://www.webexhibits.org/causesofcolor/1B.html)
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:38 PM  Post: #8
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: I am Nothing
[xkcd.com/1133/](http://xkcd.com/1133/)
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:40 PM  Post: #9
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: I am Nothing
[ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.n...058729.pdf](http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.n...058729.pdf)
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:40 PM  Post: #10
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: I am Nothing
[cplusplus.com/](http://www.cplusplus.com/)




Balance
Can somebody tell me what the obsession is with balance and keeping things as they are?

Explain it to me. It seems like a malicious death wish to me, not because I hate God, I don't hate the dead, but because you exit the system and then, instead of using your own powers and stuff... You look to re-define old terms!

This is how it seems to me. If I am wrong, show me how without dancing around me.
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 10:18 AM  Post: #2
W.C.  Away
Calathumpian
Posts: 152
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Balance
'Suddenly I was tired of Lotterman; he was a phony and he didn't even know it. He was forever yapping about freedom of the press and keeping the paper going, but if he'd had a million dollars and all the freedom in the world he'd still put out a worthless newspaper because he wasn't smart enough to put out a good one. He was just another noisy little punk in the great legion of punks who marched between the banners of bigger and better men. Freedom, Truth, Honour — you could rattle off a hundred such words and behind every one of them would gather a thousand punks, pompous little farts, waving the banner with one hand and reaching under the table with the other.'

I hope this helps. I felt it might.
— W.C.

'Through the dark decades of your pain, this will seem like a memory of Heaven.'
Send this user a private message  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 10:21 AM (This post was last modified: 04-06-2013 10:23 AM by pezer.)  Post: #3
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Balance
It helps explain why punks are called punks by such as wrote that quote. Not much more.

I have little respect for men who use only one hand.
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 10:37 AM (This post was last modified: 04-06-2013 10:37 AM by W.C..)  Post: #4
W.C.  Away
Calathumpian
Posts: 152
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Balance
In my mind, it succinctly connected that it is these punks that hold the obsession with balance and keeping things as they are. They use the words of the great changers, but they themselves change nothing, do nothing of consequence. They utilise external stimuli in order to solidify their being 'in the in crowd,' just like everyone else, because they're not quite smart enough to utilise it for change, life and progress just yet.
— W.C.

'Through the dark decades of your pain, this will seem like a memory of Heaven.'
Send this user a private message  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 05:31 PM  Post: #5
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Balance
From the perspective of a money making member of society, with a place and position, that is the normal thought.

Punks make it their duty to yell the truth at you anyway.

"There is only X in this world."
"What?!?! But look at all the Y, Z, C, H, R, E, etc.!!!!"
"Um.... We don't talk about those in polite society. It makes us aware of the bullshit of our existence. You punk."
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 06:39 PM  Post: #6
Q  Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Balance
(04-06-2013 09:34 AM)pezer Wrote:  
Can somebody tell me what the obsession is with balance and keeping things as they are?

Explain it to me. It seems like a malicious death wish to me, not because I hate God, I don't hate the dead, but because you exit the system and then, instead of using your own powers and stuff... You look to re-define old terms!

This is how it seems to me. If I am wrong, show me how without dancing around me.

Balance and keeping things as they are two completely different things.

Water will eventually find a balance, but it's always in motion. Fluid. It never really stays as it was.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I'm full up?
Send this user an email  Send this user a private message  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 07:22 PM  Post: #7
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Balance
I don't quite like that, being more of a fire-man myself, but at least I can understand and respect it.

I did choose the "and" there carefully.
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 07:32 PM  Post: #8
Q  Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Balance
(04-06-2013 07:22 PM)pezer Wrote:  
I did choose the "and" there carefully.

I considered that.

But what connects those two things?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I'm full up?
Send this user an email  Send this user a private message  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 09:22 PM  Post: #9
BigTom  Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Balance
I suppose the thing that connects the two is that balance is the illusion of a perpetual state of stillness.

But you're right, as Derrida said, 'there is no balance'. Everything falls over eventually. Particularly if you apply enough fire or water to it.
Send this user an email  Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 03:33 AM  Post: #10
ChainOfBeing  Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Balance
"No growth without assistance. No action without reaction. No desire without restraint. Now give yourself up and find yourself again."


RE: Balance
(04-06-2013 09:22 PM)BigTom Wrote:  
I suppose the thing that connects the two is that balance is the illusion of a perpetual state of stillness.
It certainly can be, though really balance is maintained by a lot of motion, at least for creatures moving through space/life. And if things are out of balance, balancing may require not simply movement, but even violence or what seems like it.

But it is complicated. Numbness/lack of awareness/distraction and balance seem to be conflated a lot. People have their little worlds and set ideas and what 'upsets the balance' might actually improve things, but that momentary tilting feeling, like you are about to fall off the bike, is too much and the messenger gets a smack in the face. 'Don't make me feel that!" Though usually this gets translated into 'You are crazy' 'You are out of balance'.
Send this user an email  Send this user a private message  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 07:57 AM  Post: #12
pezer  Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Balance
It all depends on what's at stake. One can drop a nuclear bomb on LA and destroy much of humanity.

One can drop a nuclear bomb under a specially designed spaceship in a deserted field and send humans to outer space.
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"



BigTom wrote:

    Heathen wrote:

        BigTom wrote:

            I suppose the thing that connects the two is that balance is the illusion of a perpetual state of stillness.  

        It certainly can be, though really balance is maintained by a lot of motion, at least for creatures moving through space/life.   And if things are out of balance, balancing may require not simply movement, but even violence or what seems like it.


    Exactly.  Even this dude:

    [video=youtube][/video]

    Was hurtling round the sun at many thousands of miles an hour.  On a piece of rock that itself was spinning as thousands of miles an hour.  

    Quote :
        But it is complicated.  Numbness/lack of awareness/distraction and balance seem to be conflated a lot.   People have their little worlds and set ideas and what 'upsets the balance' might actually improve things, but that momentary tilting feeling, like you are about to fall off the bike, is too much and the messenger gets a smack in the face.   'Don't make me feel that!"  Though usually this gets translated into 'You are crazy' 'You are out of balance'.


    The reduction of mental illness to mere chemical imbalances in the brain (as though the brain isn't in a constant state of chemical reaction) is one of the most dangerous myths around.  Likewise the myth that we humans are somehow unbalancing nature, when in reality we're part of nature.  

    But what you're talking about is different, I think, it is the ease with which people are upset, 'ease' relative to their desire to not be upset.  Some people thrive on emotional instability and though I'm the opposite sort of person I say good luck to them.  But when people want what I have (near-perpetual peace of mind) but don't know how to get it, that is a problem.  Maybe I should start running evening classes for the emotionally conflicted on learning how to not worry about anything.  It'd basically be lessons in how to smoke a lot of dope, obviously.  Though when I quit dope completely for several months I didn't find it at all stressful.





RE: Balance
I need dooope. We should start a dope fund.

Goddamn unreliable dealers.

Btw Tom, I shamelessly blame all conflict on lack of it.
Science is found in the question "how do you know?"
Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-09-2013, 05:14 AM  Post: #15
BigTom  Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Balance
To be fair I do think that dope is a better long-term investment than bitcoin. I mean, you can't smoke bitcoins (yet).

This is the problem with drug dealers - they have all the drugs they could ever want, which makes them unreliable. The day I meet a sober, reliable drug dealer... is the day I meet an undercover cop.
Send this user an email  Send this user a private message  Visit this user's website  Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-09-2013, 07:28 AM  Post: #16
Q  Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Balance
That's too bad. Here it's a fairly serious (for what it is) business. People smoke weed on the job and they get fired or 'management' recognizes that they could make more money and instills some sort of code to deter them from smoking on the job. Plus it makes things so much more heat with the cops. If you're not high, you're just someone in a car. No one has anything smelly or anything like that.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I'm full up?
Send this user an email  Send this user a private message  Find all posts by this user  Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply  Quote this post  Report this post to a moderator
04-09-2013, 09:24 AM  Post: #17
Heathen  Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Balance
(04-09-2013 03:10 AM)BigTom Wrote:  

Heathen wrote:

    BigTom wrote:


        The reduction of mental illness to mere chemical imbalances in the brain (as though the brain isn't in a constant state of chemical reaction) is one of the most dangerous myths around.
        I strongly agree. We've isolated brains, so they can be pathologized, and then make money off them. Horrible.

        Quote:
        But what you're talking about is different, I think, it is the ease with which people are upset, 'ease' relative to their desire to not be upset. Some people thrive on emotional instability and though I'm the opposite sort of person I say good luck to them. But when people want what I have (near-perpetual peace of mind) but don't know how to get it, that is a problem. Maybe I should start running evening classes for the emotionally conflicted on learning how to not worry about anything. It'd basically be lessons in how to smoke a lot of dope, obviously. Though when I quit dope completely for several months I didn't find it at all stressful.
        I'm not sure how serious this is, in total or in part. I was thinking, for example, of things like someone saying, hey, I think the war in Iraq is really about oil. This is upsetting. What if it were true? The reaction can be to want to maintain what at least feels like balance - or is it numbness, distraction - and attack the person saying it. Generally people do not say, hey that upsets my balance (numbness, fantasy), they generally launch into a 'rational argument' or scream about patriotism, in this instance also. But I think much of the reaction is actually about being upset that someone is upsetting their state of mind.

        If you got upset, say, at blacks having police dogs turned on them or firehoses, for wanting to vote or have non-segregated eating, this was often reacted to as being out of balance. IOW balance is seen as even keel, even keel is seen as good, not even keel is seen as bad. Which really limits the options of being human.

RE: He who says little, says much! (and other crimes against Nietzsche)

Three Varieties of Thinkers - There are streaming, flowing, trickling mineral springs, and three corresponding varieties of thinkers. The layman values them by the volume of the water, the expert by the contents of the water—in other words, by the elements in them that are not water.

Friedrich Nietzsche
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
01-24-2013, 06:44 AM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: He who says little, says much! (and other crimes against Nietzsche)
Futile - The idea of forever is futile, as it itself does not last forever. It is strange to think how much of all languages of European descent (I don’t mention others out of ignorance) is based on this idea of forever.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
01-29-2013, 03:44 AM Post: #4
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: He who says little, says much! (and other crimes against Nietzsche)
Good Liars - If women had men’s capacity for honesty, they would make movies maybe too beautiful to bare.

Pezer
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-01-2013, 03:54 AM (This post was last modified: 03-01-2013 03:55 AM by pezer.) Post: #5
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: He who says little, says much! (and other crimes against Nietzsche)
Love - In order to know yourself, you must accept your enemy’s actions as intrinsically part of you. You must hate your enemies with love.

Gaspar

RE: He who says little, says much! (and other crimes against Nietzsche)
That last pic was kind of funny.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message

E: He who says little, says much! (and other crimes against Nietzsche)
An Amendment - I propose we do away with the rest of the prayer, and just keep this modified bit: “Give us today our trespasses, and forgive our daily bread as we forgive others’ daily bread against us.”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-21-2013, 08:57 AM (This post was last modified: 03-21-2013 08:58 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #10
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: He who says little, says much! (and other crimes against Nietzsche)
lol.

Eternal Vanity.- Man does not believe in death only because he does believe in it.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.

RE: He who says little, says much! (and other crimes against Nietzsche)
Praise and Worship - So far, we have praised and worshiped the nothing, the imaginary, kept it distant, and acted in the animal world. Let us rather give praise and thanks for the animal things, and tether the imaginary to that instead of vice-versa. Let us fill the nothing! It is right there waiting fur us: the animal will keep us safe and guide us true if we use it as a beacon in times of darkness… A lollipop is good, no matter who you are or where you’re from, barring systemic interferences like allergies.

A piece of creamy, fluffy cake…

Oil.

Cumin,

Cuming,

Each of these Gods has their own attribute, treats us good in predictable ways, is powerful beyond our concrete comprehension (ain’t all other just good lies?), and require very specific rituals in order to commune with them.

Or, you know we can worship… What was it again? Some destitutes and their crucified nihilist comforter?

I know many here may be tired of me harping on tyhe Iesus thing, but look within yourselves. I mention it for a reason.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-25-2013, 04:11 AM Post: #12
exzc Offline
Student
Posts: 13
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: He who says little, says much! (and other crimes against Nietzsche)
My dear Lou and Ree: - Please do not be too much disturbed about the eruptions of my “megalomania” or my “injured vanity.” And even if I should, by chance, yielding to some impulse or other, take my life there would not be too much to be sad over. What concern have you with my whimsical ideas! (Even my “truths” have not concerned you till now.) Both of you please get together and ponder on this very carefully that, in the last analysis, I am touched in the head, half ready to be confined to the lunatic asylum, totally confused by my long loneliness.

I have arrived at what I call reasonable insight into how things stand after I took a tremendous dose of opium, out of despair. But instead of losing my mind, I seem to have at least come to my mind. By the way, I was sick for week,s and if I say that for 20 days we had Orta weather here, I need say no more.

Friend Ree, Please ask Lou to forgive me everything: she too is giving me an occasion to forgive her. Up to now I have not forgiven her.

It is more difficult to pardon your friends that it is to pardon your enemies.

There with Lou’s defense…

[quote=“pezer”]
Interesting… It was the opium that unchained you. The mention of it, I mean, and I suppose I should have guessed it was that easy to catch.

Anyway, to say opium is another of those original sins of the philosopher. Better to mention the specific substances, all chaos is not the same.

A Deleuze quote comes to mind (and I paraphrase): “I would rather die than grant anything to oedipal psychoanalysis!”

[video=youtube][flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/IrZdOZzr4as[/flash][/video]

But you can already see the crimes against Nietzsche I enjoy, my violations of the Manu.

Nuclear “weapons”
Every single undetonated atomic bomb is Nuclear Reactor fodder that hasn’t been used yet. Or spaceship launcher, but we might be a bit too far from that one yet.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-21-2013, 06:55 AM (This post was last modified: 04-21-2013 06:57 AM by pezer.) Post: #2
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Nuclear “weapons”
I am scouring Google and Google Scholar to no avail. If truly there be physicists/engineers among us, start working on this shit. Ask me for any help you may need outside of the science itself.

I’ll keep looking for documentation for now.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-21-2013, 04:43 PM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Nuclear “weapons”
Still nothing, but this site is an incredible resource for a muggle understanding of nuclear technology.

world-mysteries.com/sci_9.htm

Reversal of Sacrifice
With all the Gods dying and scrambling for survival, it is time to officialy announce that it is now the Gods who must sacrifice to us.

Any God that cannot prove his or her power by some sacrifice to us will be considered dead, and die.

pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Submissions from Forum
Ehem… Alright, fuck it, here goes:
I am a Tyrant

I am a tyrant, born and raised as one. Socially and economically elevated, intellectually cultivated and isolated, politically motivated outside of politics.

I am Hitler, and I want it now! My child screams at me to grasp control of all I know. My child berates me for not forcing truth down liars’ throats. It has a bunch of swords, and even wants me to hold them all at the same time. My child doesn’t want blood, but it does want to see it. It doesn’t want to hurt, but it wants to belong to the hurting.

Poor child… Oh, sweet child of mine, how many thousands of years now have you pursued and achieved this path? How many thorough disappointments at the wreckage that strips all your desire of truth? How many unwittingly dehumanized slaves, slobbering over your boots even after failure?

Is this where you gave birth to adult, kiddo? To accept and work with the unacceptable and unworkable, purely out of a prideful sense of responsibility and, yes, not wanting to look fully? Did you tattoo on your face in reverse “I have won, and will win again?”

Anarchy, childe ye Roland. Anti-tyranny, so that you may still enjoy tyranny for a little while longer… Follow Nietzsche, and throw all the rest of your lumber into the anarchist fire. It was impossible before, with no Gods, Masters and only darkness. Now science awaits for you before, during and after the trial. Now have you a beautiful maiden, stronger forever than you in potentia, always interested only and only in helping you, serving you, giving you Tools and Power and Silly Joy.

Pray, child, and then stop praying for good… In the middle of the prayer, if possible!

Keep your swords handy, too, and your forge. Science works great with that kind of thing, and it reminds you to be aware of enemies.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

Jesus Was Not a Crackhead
Jesus was a man of overly developed sensitivity. Son of a carpenter? Must have been an abusive one.

In those days, one either had the societal privilege of natural endorfin, serotonin, etc. highs or just absolute fucking misery. Until Jesus came along, a strongest of hobos, and decided that yeah, fuck it, we’ll be miserable and love it. Eat shit.

For a looong time, that meant going to church, doing magik thinking directed at enduring misery, etc.

Today, Jesus would never have happened.

To understand this, we must ask: is the crack user really a wretch?

It seems to moi that they were wretches before the crack. With it, they begin to experience living again, living beyond misery. They become active nihilists, believing in nothing with fire and lust, often rising above into believing in everything with calm expectation of the fire and lust, accepting the lacks of their existances as “well, that’s just fucking life.”

Today, I sold the little bit of weed I was able to buy to get crack for one such person. I did it because I wanted to see what a man so wise and beautiful could want to seek in crack. I watched him toke it, feel it, and instantly turn all the brainburst into the most unbelievable star-gazing and surfing of happiness. He brought joyus laughs to people, not just smiles.

Jesus wasn’t a crackhead, and that is as good of an over-simplification of Nietzsche’s “The Antichrist” Christ as I can come up with.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-13-2013, 06:10 AM Post: #2
Art3mis Offline
Student
Posts: 1
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 0
RE: Jesus Was Not a Crackhead
I think that over time Jesus was a…man who attempted to give some sense of discipline and decency to a culture that was completely savage.

He gave dignity to women, lepers, severly sick people, so called ‘possessed’ people and so on which I suppsoe was also a great thing, considereing culture had a totally different ethics and moral code embedded within them.

Though let’s fully admit it, if I were Jesus and had to look back , from then till now just to see the changes since when I would have actually tried to knock sense into those hypocrtes…I would be bashing my head against the wall ages ago in despair.

I suppose Jesus was one of those rare people who one could define as ‘over-sensitve and too caring’ which by the way, eventually led him to his own death.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-13-2013, 09:15 PM (This post was last modified: 05-13-2013 09:16 PM by pezer.) Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Jesus Was Not a Crackhead
Indeed, I would argue that Jesus was the savage in a world descending fast. He was a descendnt, not an element of discipline! Do as you want! Just stay poor. This is what matters, god loves misery. Jesus is the prophet of the god of misery.

You are talking about the hight of the Roman empire, to talk about some kind of primitive system…
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-14-2013, 09:06 AM Post: #4
W.C. Away
Calathumpian
Posts: 152
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Jesus Was Not a Crackhead
So I’ve come across something which explained that Jesus was a son of Julius Caesar and Cleopatra. After Caesar’s death, the King of Kings was somehow given by Cleopatra to Mary and Joseph, who were kind of adoptive parents for the boy. The boy eventually grew up, visiting Egypt, India, etc, picking up what would become his teachings.

It resonated on some level. The sense of entitlement from being the son of the self proclaimed Gods, Caesar and Cleopatra, would have helped a good deal with his confidence in his stance against authority. So the strongest of hobos descended from the strongest of hobos of two rather large nations from their time.

History seems very different in the above vein. Different, but somehow more reasonable and logical… for the glory of Rome, Egypt? I don’t know, but the Vatican made its way to Rome. Jesus posthumously conquered one of his ancestors’ homelands through the Vatican, along with much of the world.
— W.C.

‘Through the dark decades of your pain, this will seem like a memory of Heaven.’
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-14-2013, 08:37 PM Post: #5
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Jesus Was Not a Crackhead
I don’t buy it. First of all, Peter was the real conqueror. Jesus was just a model. Some suggest that there were many such personalities as Jesus, like you might imagine the future theorizing about end-of-the-world street yellers.

A priest’s art is to shift attention to an imaginary something. There is a shift… Once it is done, calling it the son of the Kings of the time just seems logical.

The actual logic is realizing that the person Jesus might even be some fucked up, non-person composite.

The anarchist challenge in Caracas is: how do you introduce new kinds of alliance between the two worlds?


" The strong do what they can do and the weak accept what they have to accept. "

  • Thucydides
    Back to top Go down
    View user profile Send private message Send e-mail Online
    Fixed Cross
    Tower
    Tower

Posts : 1237
Join date : 2011-11-09

PostSubject: Re: Natural World Ashes Thu Aug 01, 2013 2:21 pm Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post Delete this post View IP address of poster
Two Forms of Action
For humans, there are two forms of action, or two levels of freedom. If we understand freedom as not being held or manipulated by another human against your desires, as deciding upon the direction of one’s own actions, then freedom can be:

The intuitive freedom, which includes the freedom from the self and soul, to do as one can figure one’s self to do at any moment without input. This freedom is the physical freedom of bodily control in contrast to bodily surrender. This freedom is predictable, it does not go beyond the confines of what evolutionary pressures there be. In this way, one can do crime, do whatever, but one cannot escape sheepleness, it is within the Matrix through the Blue Pill. This I call freedom through approach.

The other is the distance freedom, which ChainOfBeing has elaborated on to all of our enlightenments. In short, it is the nihilist freedom, the freedom to say “no,” to avoid the immediate relaities that allow one to be intuitively free. This freedom determines evolutionary pressures itself, it participates on higher levels of life processes and cycles, so to speak. All recognizable things become clearer and smaller, one is free from the very possibility of enslavement as long as one can suceed in one’s “no’s”, one’s freedom is not proactive action but retroactive recognition.

What you see is what you don’t have, and what you have you don’t see. If I see future only and no past, I must be avoiding the future and living in the past. If I see the past only and no future, I must be some kind of pioneer. I can also seem to be focusing on the future when teasing out the past, and the past also can be teased out by the future in this way. If all I can see and think about is my drug of choice, I must not have whatever I seek in it (in many cases, the actual physichal thing). When one is stoned, drugs are the last thing on one’s mind.

Any clues? I remember in high school it was mostly about trying to make people just feel bad. Mostly among themselves!

In this sense, they really don’t have much power…
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 01:41 AM Post: #2
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
…What?
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 01:48 AM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Well, it sucks to feel bad, yeah.

But it’s very easy to overcome, especially from a girl you never met. Whereas a guy can do equal and lasting damage to strangers and close friends. Their vindictiveness is direct and continuous until the opponent breaks or he.

Psychology tricks… They only work on philosophers for limited amounts of time (though I would guess that they probably work on more occasions in general than normal).

I guess I should have elaborated more, though. My investigation here is this one: war is inevitable. Womyn inevitably have to participate.

How do womyn enjoy war? What is the romanticism in your bloodlust?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 01:52 AM Post: #4
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
I have to say, I think women are much more inclined to be vindictive than men are. In my experience, a man is more likely to punch a stranger in the face and buy him a drink ten minutes later, whereas a woman will just mess with your head and destroy your fucking life.

Romanticism in our bloodlust…

Pardon me for being such a girl, but I don’t think there’s anything romantic about bloodlust.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 02:01 AM Post: #5
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
It’s like I thought then… Women have no real understanding for battle.

It makes me sad that you are so often dragged into it.

I say it because vindictiveness itself does not battle make. A man may buy you a beer after the punch, but he was relentless between moment of enmity and moment of victory or defeat.

For a woman, it’s not about doing anything, exactly, I don’t think. It’s about carrying an active (in the physical sense) hate that only grows as it attacks, like a Buddhist tricked into getting angry.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 02:07 AM (This post was last modified: 04-04-2013 02:07 AM by Blurry.) Post: #6
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Women have no real understanding for battle because I don’t see anything romantic about bloodlust?

Or am I missing something?

I can see romantic ideals behind war - the reasons for it. But the act of killing that soldiers engage in, in and of itself? Not “romantic bloodlust”. Just bloody.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 02:09 AM (This post was last modified: 04-04-2013 02:10 AM by Blurry.) Post: #7
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
And don’t be fooled into thinking that a woman will shy away from physically attacking you just because it’s not her first choice of conflict resolution.

I’ve certainly punched a motherfucker in the face before. I’ve twisted a ballsack or two in my time, as well.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 02:24 AM Post: #8
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
I have been punched, kicked and slapped enough by girls myself growing up. I don’t doubt that you will battle, you are still noble humans.

But the fact that you don’t understand that battle is about much more than killing, that romanticism is felt and not theorized (or theorized in the moment, so to speak), speaks to your will for it to simply end A.S.A.P…
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 02:31 AM Post: #9
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Of course battle is about more than killing. It’s about fulfilling the goals of whatever fucktard in charge made the decision to go to war in the first place. Human lives being thrown away at the whim of a jackass who just wants money and power, what’s romantic about that? It’s a waste.

I’m not saying there’s never a noble, romantic reason for battle, but I’m afraid it’s harder for women to see it that way when, for centuries, we’ve sent our men off to war and waited for the return that never came. It’s poetic to think about, sure. Certainly some beautiful songs have been written about waiting for the soldier who never comes home, but when all you have to face is the rest of your life without that person, it sure doesn’t seem very romantic.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 02:33 AM (This post was last modified: 04-04-2013 02:35 AM by Blurry.) Post: #10
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Historically, men and women experience war in very different ways. Women sit at home and wait, or they go into nursing and deal with the blood and missing limbs and gore and men dying all around them, all the time. Women and children are victims of rape and outright murder by invading forces, and even by their own soldiers. I mean, it’s just a completely different perspective when you’re not the one marching off to war, but the one left behind.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
That’s actually a fantastic bit of insight. It never ocurred to me that womyn might have a harder time at war than men when thy’re not allowed to participate (and when they are, as well, it seems).

Maybe some guys have realized this already, though. I would guess that if any of them had the inclination to swallow glue and stuff, they might also want to check out what it means to be stuck at home, with all sorts of anxieties, depending on others for food and sustenance when you feel superior to most people getting it.

I’m sure there are more womyn alcoholics than we imagine.

Now, about the romance, two things. First, I guess I was thinking more Samurai romance, the love of the sword and the moment of fighting itself. Second, I can’t really imagine enjoying hurting anybody with anything other than my own body. Romantic love is decieved love always. But it’s a healthy kind of deciet when the world around it is boring. It ain’t coincidence that they made such a splash in the XVIII and XIX centuries.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 03:56 AM Post: #12
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
What is Evil in man is what is strong in him, but that’s only after we had to distill aggressiveness from Jehovain’t.

In any case, strength is not a point in itself. Men become obssessed with it sometimes, like Maslow describes when you are forced to fight way too hard for something and then become kind of dependent on fighting life like that.

Other times, philosophers steal all of those elements and rework them to their will. Of course, will is far from limitless.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 06:33 AM Post: #13
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
It was brought up on ILP one time that women have no sense of honor, basically because of their lack of ‘battle’ experience. I don’t know if I agree, but I do think about it from time to time.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 07:00 AM Post: #14
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
So battle is the only thing that can bring honor to a person? I don’t know about that…

What is “honor”, do you think?
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 07:06 AM Post: #15
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
An old term for handling all things without shying away.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 07:51 AM Post: #16
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
In that case, I’d say women have and have always had more honor than men. If you compare the two, the woman has the more noble job, and does it with more honor - rather than take life, she gives it, and then she nurtures it.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 09:05 AM Post: #17
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
I agree with all that. I love women.

It was in the sense of women not really having that sense of military loyalty. Which is to say women are usually loyal to their men or themselves, and then maybe other women. Whereas men have the military, gangs, and in general the bros before hoes approach.

I think the point, if there even is one, has to do with basic environmental and sociological trends. Not so much any innate thing.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 09:28 AM (This post was last modified: 04-04-2013 09:30 AM by Blurry.) Post: #18
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Well I think you’re correct, it’s a rare woman who has a sense of military loyalty. I think part of this is because we have other things to worry about - the whole being a vessel for new life thing - and also because women in the military, though not completely nonexistent throughout history, is a fairly recent thing, and even now here in the States there’s still debate over whether or not to allow women into active fighting. The way that women (in general) have developed throughout the history of the human race has, sadly, been influenced far too much by men. The fact of the matter is, we are physically weaker in the vast majority of cases, and that has allowed men to control us for centuries. You see it happen every day, men use physical intimidation to prevent women from seeking education, health care, they use to tell women what to wear, how and when to speak, where they can go and when, the list goes on and on. Men use and have used physical intimidation to control every aspect of women’s lives right down to whether they have a right to their life or not.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 09:34 AM Post: #19
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
For argument’s sake, forget I said military loyalty. Lets disregard it completely from the discussion, actually. Just looking at sports, and generally overall, do you agree that overall men are loyal to each other than women are to each other?

It is tempting to say yes, but women can be shown to be more loyal in some ways. For instance, women tend to band together if they see another women being abused. Men are a bit more likely to be indifferent. Or in the context of looking good - buying clothes, makeup, etc - women have this sort of ‘we’re all in it together’ type of attitude when it comes to attracting men.

I wonder if loyalty/honor actually exists.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 09:57 AM Post: #20
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
I don’t know if men are more loyal. I think the relationships between men and the relationships between women are vastly different, almost too much so to be comparable. Women tend to have complex relationships with one another, and there are varying levels of friendship. Of course this is probably also true for men, but I think it’s radically more so for women, from what I’ve observed of people. Our loyalty is doled out more selectively, though the basis of selection isn’t always rational, I’ll admit.

RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Talking sports, though, women are absolutely loyal to their teams. LoL women are highly competitive creatures, so when success depends on banding together with a team to beat another team, we’ll do that.

Also, and this has nothing to do with the conversation, I wish every man could experience one high school girl’s gym class on floor hockey day. Men think they have the violent sport market cornered? HA! Teenage girls with hockey sticks and a gym floor make professional hockey players look like walking vagina’s.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 10:07 AM Post: #22
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Quote:
I don’t know if men are more loyal.

I don’t think anyone is claiming to know. We’re just talking about what ifs.

I think the relationships between men and the relationships between women are vastly different, almost too much so to be comparable.

How so?

Quote:
Women tend to have complex relationships with one another, and there are varying levels of friendship.

I find it interesting that women describe their behavior as complex. Men label it as contradictory. Regardless, we really going to say that women have more complex relationships? That sounds like feminist nonsense to me. How are we even defining complexity?

Quote:
Of course this is probably also true for men, but I think it’s radically more so for women, from what I’ve observed of people.

That was just a big loop around back to you thinking women have more complex relationships than men.

Quote:
Our loyalty is doled out more selectively, though the basis of selection isn’t always rational, I’ll admit.

If I dole out cookies selectively, the end result is that people are getting less cookies. Anyway, are you saying that when women are loyal, it’s stronger than the sort of blanket approach men have?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 10:18 AM (This post was last modified: 04-04-2013 10:20 AM by Blurry.) Post: #23
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Contradictory behavior is human behavior. We all contradict ourselves, and if you say you don’t you’re either lying or you don’t know yourself very well at all. The reason I say that women have more “complex” relationships is because women tend to over-think. This pretty much complicates every single decision we make, every relationship we have, everything about our lives. This would also be why women are more prone to contradictory behavior - we are far more likely to approach people and things in general on a situation-to-situation basis, over-analyzing the details, letting our emotions and prior experiences color our perception, and making decisions in the moment with little thought of our actual decision-making process in previous similar situations, rather than having a preconceived approach, or taking the “logical” path. Men are just more straightforward than women are, I believe.

In no way did I imply that a woman’s loyalty is stronger than a man’s, by the way.

(I edited this)
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 01:06 PM Post: #24
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
I guess the question is: does over thinking equate to complexity?

One of the criticisms I would wage against myself is generally that I am over thinking, but not really being that complex.

This raises an interesting point. I mean I feel like we have been content to say what you are saying, myself included. But as I get older and society continues to evolve in terms of gender, I find myself less satisfied.

Looking to the occult we find a certain sense if sexual positioning. This needs to be made more palpable to the masses. But then there is the sense in which that is the most ultimate guarded secret of all.

This is actually a crazy subject. I always forget how this goes until I remember that, for me at least, this thinking comes and goes.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 02:25 PM Post: #25
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Well complexity is really about how many parts make up the whole and how they interact with one another, yes? The more parts, the more complex. Over thinking is complexity.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 02:47 PM Post: #26
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
Over thinking… over-…

Cloaked figuers in the darkness:

There to witness the flame of jezebel.

I like the womanly night. I think night is power of woman, and it is good we have begun to worship like that. The spaces between stars… They are just more and more stars! Stars as far as the imadjinery eye can see. We men can point them out, they can see without looking there.

Worship the end of worship, the night and the sky and the stars that are… so far. So very, very real.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 02:56 PM Post: #27
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: How do Womyn fight Men?
I am criptic because I am stoned that the builder refused.

Will always be, a heckuva stoned.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

When advice is given, a person’s thought process is brought to an end, and the end is lent to the advicee. Many times, the thought is “if I am to take this advice with honesty, I must publicly wear the (end) thought as my own.” This is admirable, and as such false (as it is based on unscientific emotion). Indeed, as soon as you wear the end-thought as your own, other people might just take it as your own! And then suddenly you begin to realize that they will also begin to ascribe the preceding and necessary thought process to you as well. Horrified, rejecting it, you instantaneously make a fool of both yourself and the person who took you at your (honestly felt) word.

Advice… If you will not ascribe it to the advisor, at least don’t wear it as an originator. Knowledge is historical.

Bill Willtrack, do you believe in souls?
Now we are in an appropriate thread. Tell us about what it is that is enslaved to addictions, if you were not indeed insinuating souls. You are an almost clever fuck, is that of your soul or of your addiction?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-28-2013, 11:12 AM Post: #2
Bill Wiltrack Offline
Probationer
Posts: 86
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Bill Willtrack, do you believe in souls?
.

…[Image: SlJ1NAn.gif]

…What do you mean when you use the word soul?

.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-28-2013, 01:01 PM Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bill Willtrack, do you believe in souls?
(05-27-2013 07:48 AM)pezer Wrote:
Tell us about what it is that is enslaved to addictions
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bill Willtrack, do you believe in souls?
Fine.

It hurts me that you are a Christian, and are preaching in my forum; that you seek to retard human. It offends me that you will not recognize that you have been recognized. I fear that your preaching still holds sway among my brothers.

Defend your God, or begone. Defend the Soul given by your God, or accept your own cowardice.

RE: Lern yer science!
learntoprogrammotherfucker is a good one too.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?

RE: Look in the Mirror
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4DtOhe2LfQ[/youtube]

RE: Look in the Mirror
Yes. Capitalism at its best.

Humans as diseased slaves beholden to their “benefactors” for the many “cures” to what ails them.

Capitalism has eviscerated the soul, carved it up and chucked the pulp into the waste basket. A few of us remain, surviving off the sustenance of the past. But the shoe has already dropped.

Now we see if the inherent force of the past is strong enough to produce counter-alternative pressure sufficient to move the system into a more circuitous position, into an orbit around the black hole. Such an orbit may, just may be capable of sustaining something profound, beautiful, and living. But that remains to be seen.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 07:34 AM (This post was last modified: 05-27-2013 07:35 AM by JSS.) Post: #3
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Look in the Mirror
Don’t confuse Capitalism with Industrialism.
Capitalism is the right to pursue gains, but never presumed to be without governing limits placed on it.

There hasn’t been any actual, real capitalism on any large scale since WW1. What you see today is governing bodies using capitalism as a mask and scape goat for their God wannabe manipulations and profiteering.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-27-2013, 07:43 AM Post: #4
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Look in the Mirror
No man. Capitalism is the process described in Das Kapital.

Namely: the production of shit through the process of the accumulation of the means of production in the hands of a few people.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-30-2013, 10:45 AM (This post was last modified: 05-30-2013 10:46 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #5
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Look in the Mirror
Yes. This mindset that wants to see capitalism without its natural detrimental effects, that wants to blame these consequences on a “corruption” of “real capitalism” by forces not fundamentally tied into capitalism itself, is a very dangerous ignorance.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 08:50 AM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 08:50 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #6
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Look in the Mirror
It is all too easy to hang it all up on that one name, capitalism, which only indicates the frame work of the timetable.
What of the people, the actual minds, who come up with the specific strategies which are now being employed?

Capitalism is a question of securing resources. Government might be a question of allocating resources.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 08:52 AM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 08:53 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #7
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Look in the Mirror
‘supply and demand’ is the causal context. ‘profiteering and plundering’ is not exclusive to capitalism. What, more difficult, questions can we ask?

Have we exhaustively defined the nature of ‘value’ within capitalism?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 09:52 AM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 09:52 AM by pezer.) Post: #8
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Look in the Mirror
Capitalism is a framework. Supply and demand are two things, and they can both exist without capitalism. Capital. Capital city. Capital importance. I lack the capital for that project. Where can we get capital? We need more capital. If we have enough capital, we won’t have enough for tomorrow. Enough capital is not enough capital. There is not enough capital in the world for everybody. For many bodies. Every body that has capital has my capital.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 10:13 AM (This post was last modified: 05-31-2013 10:15 AM by ChainOfBeing.) Post: #9
ChainOfBeing Offline
Probationer
Posts: 178
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 4
RE: Look in the Mirror
Capitalism is a philosophical concept that means to group a loose set of values and idea(l)s together under one flag. People define the term differently because a person’s values/etc will be different from one another, also they have been raised/conditioned to think in some ways and to not think in some other ways. This is the problem with abstract categorical terms like capitalism/socialism.

So we move to the core- yes, supply and demand, product and producer, money and exchange, profit and loss, distribution and consumption, personal and collective property. Etc. Basically what economics needs to do is create an exhaustive list of concrete specific terms referring to actual entities and relations having to do with “economics” (this will include a lot more than just rote economics, for instance it will brush heavily into politics, philosophy, psychology and technology) and then subject this plane of meaning to a broader values-interpretation, to both derive the underlying implicit spectrums of values from within the plane as well as to set a higher moral-rational standard above it.

But it’s not that easy. People would rather think within easy abstractions, simple categories and emotional responses. Even scientists, economists, politicians, industrialists, educators, they would almost always rather play on the surface than swim in the deeper waters.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 12:22 PM Post: #10
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Look in the Mirror
Fuck no.
Capitalism is not an abstract, un-attainable term.

Capital means something. Capital.

Capitalism means of capital.

Think about that.

RE: Look in the Mirror
(05-31-2013 12:22 PM)pezer Wrote:
Fuck no.
Capitalism is not an abstract, un-attainable term.

Capital means something. Capital.

Capitalism means of capital.

Think about that.

Know that my perspective here is highly informed by tectonics. I am not degrading or putting down anything “abstract” as un-attainable or anything like that. My point is in how people think about these things, what is going on at the psychological level and all that informs it, and all that flows directly from it.

Yes, capitalism means something, absolutely. Ideas mean something, they are very fucking real. But I want to avoid getting bogged down in categorical terms which tend to avoid any sort of realizable common ground, when it comes to different people holding their own definitions of the concepts.

Capitalism is real because it points to something real. I want to focus on this “something” toward which the term points, rather than the term itself.
Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-31-2013, 02:11 PM Post: #12
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Look in the Mirror
It points to capital. Capitalism as a political tendency is like Rat Jew Fuck as a political tendency. It isn’t, it is just accepted propaganda.

Capitalism is the use of capital. Capital is historical. People can be wrong about how they use words. It matters because you can then have geniouses like Fixed Cross falling into the trap of equating supply and demand economics with capitalism.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-05-2013, 11:04 PM (This post was last modified: 06-05-2013 11:12 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #13
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Look in the Mirror
I do not equate Capitalism with supply and demand economy, but I choose to view it in that causal framework. I think that Capital is dependent on supply and demand, and supply and demand is not dependent on Capital.

Exploitation of (human) resources is of course historically very intimately related to supply and demand, and when the bridge is crossed from mere clever trade to forceful exploitation (and this is not a point but a bridge, a grey area) then we arrive at Capitalism as the disease that we know it to be now - where all sound powers of state (which to be would be human-individual based legislation) succumb to the ‘rights’ of corporations, which are purely the result of bribery and coercion, the antithesis of ‘lawfulness’ in the rational sense.

Since bribery and coercion far precede capitalism, so we can not blame the state of affairs in trade entirely on Capital. Disproportionate Capital is the problem, we should aim not for anarchy but for proportionalism.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-06-2013, 07:33 AM Post: #14
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Look in the Mirror
“Sustenance of the past.” I like that one.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-06-2013, 10:32 AM Post: #15
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Look in the Mirror
Capital could work, perhaps, if respected in the Adam Smith sense of absolute non-legislation of economy. A. Smith was an anarchist, really. Capital adventurers need to be able to run the risk of getting whacked for overstepping.

You know what I heard on my taxi ride today? My driver had been a construction overseer, whatever you call those, and had quit because the government communist shenanigans were not allowing materials to flow, and there was not enough work.

More interestingly, he told me that he no longer could boss his employees around. He had to ask them “please” before doing anything.

How can this be? How can such respect for the worker come about?

They are all strapped. All of them.

beforethelight.forumotion.com/t3 … orld-ashes

[strike][/strike]
[quote=“BigTom”
I’m going to put together a thread on some of the spy material I’ve most enjoyed in my various probings into this. In trying to spot the spooks running around today I’ve drawn on a lot of real life sources about agents throughout the late 19th and 20th centuries. In particular, whenever an intelligence agent ends up in court as part of some limited hangout co-operation deal it leaves a trace, there’s always a couple of comments that hint at bigger goings-on.

One such example is Mohammed Junaid Babar, a guy who ran a training camp in Pakistan in 2003-4. He provided explosives and weapons training, helped the recruits film jihadi videos, that sort of thing. Pretty much everyone who passed through the camp later ended up in court on terrorism charges, usually with Babar as the key prosecution witness. According to the official story this is because in March 2004 he returned to the US and a month later was approached by the FBI whereupon he instantly became the world’s most co-operative terrorist. I say that ‘pretty much everyone’ he trained ended up in court with him testifying against them - there is a notable exception. Mohammed Sidique Khan, the alleged ringleader of the 7/7 bombers also attended Babar’s camp in mid-2003. Though all of the others in that group were rounded up just as Babar was being ‘turned’ by the FBI, Khan and his friends weren’t touched. A little over a year later they were dead, blamed for the worst terrorist attack in London’s history.

So the natural suspicion I’d except any rational person to have is that this guy Babar wasn’t just some international terrorist trainer who became a supergrass, but was in fact an agent provocateur/sting operator. His job was to provide the means for people to do things that could later be used to make them look like terrorists, either in court or the popular media, or both. There is some evidence for this. When a criminal is sentenced in the US the court receives a letter from the US government detailing their co-operation and recommendations for leniency where appropriate. Babar could have got between 30 and 70 years for his crimes. He actually served little over 4, then 2 more on supervised release before being set completely free. The 5K1 letter from the government requesting leniency set out Babar’s extraordinary co-operation.
[a.abcnews.go.com/images/Blotter/ … TE=ABCNEWS]
(http://a.abcnews.go.com/images/Blotter/ht_leniency_request_ll_110307.pdf?SITE=ABCNEWS)

It also notes that Babar first came to the attention of the US authorities in the year 2000, even before 9/11, when he joined Al Mujahiroun in New York. Al Muhajiroun is riddled with spies so it’s highly likely Babar was at least under some surveillance at this time. Then 9/11 happens. Babar’s mother worked as a cleaner at the WTC and was there at the time but managed to escape. Babar then almost immediately sets out for Pakistan. When he gets there he links up with Al Muhajiroun again, and works for a year for the Pakistan government’s Software Export Board. He then sets up his training camp, flies in and out of Britain liaising with various people who would later wind in court on terrorism charges (most prosecuted, some not). The Foreign Office refuse to release any records they have on Babar from this period on privacy grounds.

When Babar first got to Pakistan in late 2001 he gave interviews to international TV news saying ‘I will kill every American that I see in Afghanistan, and every American I see in Pakistan.’
guardian.co.uk/uk/video/2011 … rass-video

Even if he wasn’t already on the intelligence services radar by that point, which he almost certainly was, his rather overt statements (strange for a bona fide radical, but about right for a provocateur) should have rung some alarm bells. In short, everything about this story says that he was working with the intelligence services while he was in Pakistan, and didn’t just turn co-operator in April 2004. Even the mainstream media coverage of this story hinted at it, both the BBC and the Times drew attention to the obvious conclusion.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIC_QZJYGYw[/youtube]

This is a BBC documentary from 2007 that aired on the evening of the conviction of 5 men in Britain for the so called ‘Fertiliser Bomb Plot’. Babar was the main witness against them, and they had also been subject to months of surveillance by the British security services. This surveillance had repeatedly led MI5 onto Mohammed Sidique Khan, who would later be blamed for 7/7, yet mysteriously MI5 repeatedly failed to follow up on leads, or collate information, or liaise with the Americans properly over the product of the co-operating Babar.

I’ve been working on the Babar case for years, and both of my 7/7 films (2010 and 2011) showed that his story is that of a likely intelligence agent. When he was finally sentenced in late 2010 even the relatives of 7/7 victims spoke of how it pointed to complicity with the US security services in what was going on in Pakistan.
guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/feb/1 … -questions

Finally, in 2012 the BBC aired a documentary called ‘Modern Spies’ that for the first time featured interviews with currently serving security services officers. All part of the slow, incremental lifting of the veils of secrecy. In the documentary the BBC essentially admitted that Babar had been a spy all along, labelling him 'a human source that intelligence services dream of’, and showing an interview with a senior FBI terrorism dude calling Babar ‘an individual who had both the access and the capability to get into groups that simply would not have existed without him’.

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/0zAHW1MVTP4[/flash]

There are two other significant figures with similar profiles to Babar but I’ll save that for another post. But what this shows is that is possible, through a bit of pro-active research, to spot the spooks not just in the past but in the present day, or at least in the very recent past. In my next post I’ll outline some of the more flagrant use of FBI undercover agents/informers/provocateurs within the US, that provide useful background for understanding the Babar story.

Dannerz Offline
Student
Posts: 45
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: A guide to spies
Taking out a country’s government actually increases the amount of terrorism coming out of the occupied country. The US did things in afganistan and iraq which increased terrorism moreso than fighting it.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-17-2012, 02:02 AM Post: #4
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: A guide to spies
(12-16-2012 06:09 AM)Gobbo Wrote:
That was an awesome post. This is SIATD’s new song.

Thanks, love the song and glad you enjoyed the post.

(12-16-2012 01:02 PM)Dannerz Wrote:
Taking out a country’s government actually increases the amount of terrorism coming out of the occupied country. The US did things in afganistan and iraq which increased terrorism moreso than fighting it.

Naturally. One thing that interests me is that when the Soviet Union collapsed there was an upsurge in terrorist violence in the early 1990s. Some of this is the blowback and ricochets and continuations from Operation Cyclone and the Iran-Contra affair, the two largest covert operations in recent history. But some of it also suggests that the Soviet system actually suppressed (through terrible means, but successfully) quite a lot of violence.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-17-2012, 02:59 AM Post: #5
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: A guide to spies
As I keep saying, the British are very sneaky when it comes to the spying game. Babar, an apparent US intelligence asset for years before he ‘turned’ co-operator, ended up in court, being discussed in depth by the news media, at least in the US and UK.

Babar’s story is similar to that of David Headley, the Mumbai mastermind who was most likely working for the CIA. He also ended up being a prosecution witness against his lifelong friend Tahawwur Rana. Both were due to be sentenced in December but that’s been pushed back to next month. Rana was convicted, almost entirely on Headley’s testimony and email records between the two, of providing support to Lashkar-e-Taiba and of conspiring with Headley to attack the Danish newspaper at the centre of the Mohammed cartoons controversy. The likelihood is that he’ll get a lot more years than Headley will get.

More on that when it happens, today I want to tell you about a very sneaky bit of British spying back in the late 19th century. Like today, mass immigration was a bone of serious contention in Western Europe, in particular Jews fleeing the horrors of Russia at the time. London and Paris became centres for anarchist and related working-class movements made up of immigrants, radicals and those angry at the industrial capitalist exploitation.

In Britain they still hadn’t founded MI5 so the spooks of the day were mostly to be found in the Metropolitan Police’s Special Branch. They were largely run by William Melville, the man who would go on to found MI5 and the origin of the ‘M’ designation as the head of that agency. Note: ‘M’ is the head of MI5, not MI6 as portrayed in the Bond movies. The head of MI5 is codenamed ‘C’, as recorded in one of the Downing Street memos referring to Bilderberger Sir Richard Dearlove.

Melville needed a big success to consolidate political opinion against the anarchists and their brethren. What he and others within Special Branch came up with was the Walsall anarchists - a group of men accused, and mostly convicted of planning a bombing campaign. The evidence against them included bomb casings that had actually been mocked up by the police. Other evidence were letters between some of the men and another guy called Auguste Coulon. Coulon was never arrested, nor did he testify at the trial and when Melville refused to answer questions about Coulon the judge backed him up.

After the convictions in 1892 an anarchist writer and editor of the Commonweal newspaper David Nicholl wrote articles and pamphlets accusing Coulon of being a police spy, and saying that the Walsall anarchists had been set up. Also in the 1890s a sergeant under Melville named Patrick McIntyre fell out with his superiors and was forced out, so he published his memoirs in a newspaper. They were serialised over several weeks in 1895, and I have a full copy of them. They are the earliest whistleblowing book on the British security services that I know of, and are utterly fascinating.

McIntyre outlined how the anarchist movement was riddled with informers, in particular the Autonomie club in London, the hub for radicals. He explained that ‘Most prominent amongst the crowd was the mouchard or agent-provocateur. Had you been able to take away from the club those gentlemen who were thriving on the foolishness of other people, you would have reduced the number of habitués by a third.’

He explicitly accused Melville of conspiring through Coulon to provoke and set up the Walsall Anarchists. This was all but confirmed in the newspaper the following week when they published a letter from Coulon in response to McIntyre’s article about him. Coulon admitted to working for the police, but denied any wrongdoing.

Around a century later several British researchers were trying to get more information on this, and make FOIA requests for the Special Branch ledgers from the period, detailing payments made to informers. These requests were denied using every excuse in the book - they’d lost the files, they’d been destroyed in the war or in a flood or when departments moved around. This went on for some time until in 2002 a Special Ops detective at Scotland Yard named Lindsay Clutterbuck completed his PhD thesis. He studied counter-terrorism methodology from 1829 to 1901 and among the sources cited were the Special Branch ledgers that supposedly didn’t exist anymore.
ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?did=6…hos.247489

Clutterbuck is now working for the RAND corporation:
rand.org/about/people/c/clutt…ndsay.html

Armed with this evidence an author named Alex Butterworth appealed against the rejections of his FOIA requests and obtained copies of the ledgers, using them for his book The World that Never Was. That isn’t available online, but Clutterbuck’s thesis can be downloaded for free via the ETHOS link above. It includes a case study of Coulon that says:
Quote:
Case Study Two - Auguste Coulon aka “Pyatt”
Many of the entries concerning the payment of money to an informant use a pseudonym to identify that informant. This time honoured method of preserving their identity can be seen where the two names are given together, usually (but not exclusively) when the initial payment was recorded.

An entry on July 18th, 1890 introduces for the first time a new informant, using the words “Speciagl ratuityt o Coulon- £2”. There is no further indication of the reason for this. The next entry relating to Coulon is on September 6th of that year when he was paid £1. Evidently his services were appreciated to the extent that his position needed to be regularised and on December 27th, the entry reads “Coulon first regular payment £1”. In recognition of his new responsibilities, the entry for January 9th, 1891 reads “Pyatt(name given Coulon)- £1” and from
then on he is referred to as “Pyatt” in all subsequent entries (1).

Coulon now began to receive regular payments of £1 a week until April 10th. He was then paid the additional sum of eleven shillings and eleven pence halfpenny “for quarterly bill”. This payment of regular bills and expenses is seen in other cases but by no means all of them,
even amongst the medium and long term informants. From January 1891 to January 1892 Coulon was paid a total of £49 in regular wages, a £2 bonus and expenses of £1-3-11. However, the Special Branch investment in Coulon was now about to produce an impressive
result.

The month of January 1892 shows four entries in the ledger: -

January 15th Pyatt £1

January 16th Extra added for Pyatt in connection
with the Walsall bomb case £4

January 22nd Pyatt £1

January 29th Pyatt £1

Whilst January was a lucrative month for Coulon in the short term, the trial mentioned above gave Coulon even greater rewards in the longer term. The months of February, March and April saw his weekly payment raised to £2-10/-. This dropped back to £2 a week from May 6th, 1892 and it remained at this level until October 20th, 1893 when it was reduced to £1 a week. With the exception of two weeks in April 1894 when he was awarded 10/- a week extra, he continued to be paid £1 a week until March 30th, 1904. On that date the entry states “Gratuity to Pyatt by direction of Commissioner. Services dispensed with - £10”.
Coulon worked for MPSB for thirteen years three months. In that time he had been a directed, inside, single event informant and probably, a semi-inside continuous event informant. He received a total of £801 in “wages” and a further relatively small amount in expenses. Whilst the bones of Coulon’s activities have, until now, remained unseen, the flesh,
in the form of information already in the public domain, has been widely speculated upon.

This is typically British - even though a newspaper published a credible whistleblower account in 1895 it was over a century before this information was formally admitted. David Nicholl, the editor and writer who had accused Coulon way back in 1892, was totally vindicated in his allegations. At the time he was arrested and convicted and sentenced to 18 months hard labour. His replacement at the Commonweal was a guy called HB Samuels, who was another police informer. More on him and his brother-in-law in a later post.

What I find particularly interesting about all this is that even back then there was a degree of predictive programming about the actions of the security services. In 1892, just as the Walsall anarchists were being set up, diplomat and author William Le Queux published Strange Tales of a Nihilist, which is a rip-roaring tale of international intrigue in the Victorian anarchist movement. It is chock full of betrayal, double-crossing, second-guessing and quite a lot of shagging. Half a century before Ian Fleming and John Le Carre, this guy had it nailed. Le Queux went on to write The Great War in England and The Invasion of 1910, both German invasion fantasy stories which I admit to not having read (yet). The latter in particular was a huge success, and was part of the reason the government actually started taking the possibility of a German naval invasion seriously. Of course, that never actually happened.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
01-03-2013, 06:22 AM Post: #6
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: A guide to spies
Junaid Babar was a particular type of spy, a deep-cover provocateur/entrapment agent who then masqueraded as a regretful and co-operating former terrorist. The nature of his mission, the length of time it took and the need for him to be comfortable operating in Pakistan for a prolonged period, meant that he had to have certain qualities. Having looked at quite a few of these cases three recurring themes stand out:

  1. Being multi-racial or a multi-national. This is crucial in the contemporary war on terror and was important with the international anarchist movement a century ago. It was less important in Gladio and the Irish thing (a sort of localised Gladio just for Britain). If you can speak more than one language, look natural in more than one context, obviously that’s very useful for a spy.

  2. Having military experience or, failing that, having been educated at a military school. Ali Mohamed, David Headley and Mohammed Junaid Babar all went to military schools. Ali Mohamed served in the Egyptian army until he was thrown out, supposedly because he was an extremist but much more likely because the Egyptians found out he had been recruited by the CIA. Someone having shown they are capable of following orders is important when you’re sending them deep undercover without close monitoring.

  3. Consistently behaving in a manner that should attract the attention of the intelligence agencies. Real terrorists are extremely paranoid people, on the whole, and certainly don’t tend to noisily express extreme views in public and/or on camera. They generally try to avoid doing anything that is likely to arouse suspicion, because the time necessary to plan and carry out a terrorist attack in most parts of the world is quite long. Terrorist spies, on the contrary, are often rather obvious and overt in establishing their extremist credentials, and show no apparent fear of being caught.

When someone ticks all three of these boxes, they are almost always a deep cover agent. However, in the domestic war on terror within the US the use of undercovers and informers and the like is openly admitted. Indeed, the prosecution cases are largely built on the testimony of informants. I will again emphasise that it is very different here in the UK, where secrecy is paramount and so the existence of informers is almost never admitted. The Coulon case, where official confirmation was denied for over a century, is absolutely typical of how the British system operates.

In the US it is different. A large proportion (though not all) of the terrorist plots ‘broken up’ by the FBI in the last decade or so have involved the use of informants. This isn’t a complete list but:
The Virginia Jihad Network - two of the convicted men, Yong Ki Kwon and Khwaja Hasan were informants for the FBI prior to their arrests.
The Brooklyn Bridge Plot - Iyman Faris, who plead guilty to a conspiracy to destroy the Brooklyn Bridge with blowtorches, was an FBI double agent.
Dhiren Barot - ultimately found guilty of a range of ludicrous terrorist plots, including an idea about buying tens of thousands of smoke alarms and extracting the radioactive material for use in a crude dirty bomb. The laptop containing the plans was provided by a double agent working for both the ISI and the CIA called Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan.
The Penn Station Plot - James Elshafay and Shahawar Matin Siraj were convicted after an undercover agent infiltrated their ‘cell’.
The Pakistani Diplomat Plot - Yassin Aref and Mohammed Hossain were convicted after an FBI informant named Shahed Hussein entrapped him into a deal to loan money for the purpose of buying missiles supposedly for the purpose of assassinating the Pakistani ambassador to the UN. The same informant was used several years later in the New York City Synagogues/ U.S. Military Aircraft plot (James Cromitie et al), which also involved plans to purchase missiles. That was the first ‘foiled plot’ of the Obama administration.
Amine El Khalifi - the dude who tried to attack the Capitol with a suicide jacket was surrounded by informants and undercover agents.
The Maryland Army Recruitment Center plot - Antonio Martinez plead guilty after trying to detonate a fake bomb provided to him by the FBI.
The Seattle Army Recruitment Center plot - Abu Khalid Abdul-Latif and Walli Mujahidh both pleaded guilty after extensive interactions with an FBI informant led to their arrests.
NY Fed bomb plot - Quazi Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan Nafis has been charged after attempting to set off a fake bomb outside the NY Fed that had been provided to him by the FBI. He was accompanied by an FBI agent.
The Cleveland Bridge Plot - a bunch of unemployed, homeless dudes who were part of Occupy Cleveland plead guilty to trying to bomb a bridge in Ohio using a fake bomb provided to them by the FBI in exchange for money given to them by FBI informant Shaquille Azar.


  • Separated at birth? Shaquille Azar and Forest Whitaker

There are other examples, but you get the idea. I’ll finish up this post with the words of yet another counter-terrorism FBI informant, Farouk al-Aziz a.k.a. Craig Monteilh:

[video=youtube][youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1ATQHJt84c[/youtube][/video]

In the next post I’ll outline what I think went on in the WTC93 bombing, and why in that case the FBI informant Emad Salem is a red herring.
[/quote]
Pope on a Rope
The Pope has announced he is to resign at the end of the month. Supposedly it’s because he is too old - he’s 85 - but it is the first papal resignation in centuries.

[Image: popeboxb.jpg]
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-11-2013, 11:45 PM Post: #2
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: Pope on a Rope
Interesting. I have no idea why such a thing would happen.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-12-2013, 09:19 PM Post: #3
W.C. Away
Calathumpian
Posts: 152
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Pope on a Rope
Well, with the Vatican being perverted and infiltrated, and with its K2 group, nothing would surprise me. The thing with the Vatican, and many such groups I suppose, is that you’ll more than likely never know.
— W.C.

‘Through the dark decades of your pain, this will seem like a memory of Heaven.’
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-13-2013, 04:14 AM Post: #4
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Pope on a Rope
I did hear an amusing radio snippet at work today, where some religious mouthpiece was praising the previous pope for hanging on until he kicked the bucket, and praising the current one for not doing the same.

It seems this is a huge news story but no one seems to actually know what’s going on.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
02-13-2013, 10:58 AM Post: #5
JSS Offline
Moderator
Posts: 287
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Pope on a Rope
Haha… I just heard that just after he announced his retirement, lightening struck his domicile… hahaha…

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/hrm-k6x3_vk[/flash]

Bank of Dave
You can keep your Ron Pauls and your Austrian school economists making money by spreading fantasies about a ‘free market’, and all your other fake icons promising economic apocalypse or nirvana (or both at the same time). One man from Burnley has done more than all of them put together.

Dave Fishwick is a successful local businessman, a proper Northerner, who founded his own tiny savings and loan in Burnley, a Northern town without much money but with a ‘fuck em’ attitude towards the City, and in general a very kind and friendly nature. Dave’s bank offers savers 5% AER, which is basically unheard of for ordinary savers in this country right now, and he loans out to local businesses who he knows and trusts. The profits go to charity.

In short, he’s probably the best bank manager in the country, and he’s also a very amusing and likeable fellow, if this TV show I watched last night is anything to go by:
channel4.com/programmes/bank-of-dave

In 30 years people are going to look back and say that the revolution started in Burnley. For those of you who want to know why I’m so dogmatically pro-Northern and anti-Southern, and why I have a lot more time for people like this than for asshole politicians who’ve never created anything in their entire lives, watch this show. If you have trouble getting the Channel4 link to work let me know, I’m sure this will be up on youtube at some point today. It’s only an hour long, and you won’t regret a moment of it. A great story, of a man who is indisputably doing the right thing.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-01-2013, 11:48 PM Post: #2
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bank of Dave
This service is not available in my area.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-02-2013, 05:00 AM Post: #3
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Bank of Dave
I can’t find last night’s broadcast anywhere else yet but you can watch the two episodes of the original show he did last year which tells the story of him setting up the bank and figuring out how to make it work here:
watchseries-online.eu/2013/01…01e01.html
Or:
watchtvseries.ch/serie/Bank_of_Dave

Argo
I watched this for the first time last night and I’ll dispense with a few basic criticisms before moving onto the more interesting material.

  1. It’s a very mediocre film, for an oscar-winner.
  2. The traditional Hollywood portrait of angry, shouty Arabs vs civilised white Westerners was not just maintained, but enhanced through the addition of several scenes (the bazaar and most of the airport stuff) that never actually happened.
  3. The help provided by the British and in particular the Canadians was minimised or just written out of the story in a shamefully display of pro-US revisionism.
  4. This film has been censured by the NZ parliament for its inaccuracy.

What I find most interesting about this film is its progeny. While we know, for example, that Zero Dark Thirty was effectively sponsored by the DOD and CIA, less is known about where Argo came from. However, its star and director Ben Affleck, who received his oscar from Mrs Obama, is a curious guy. Aside from a few Pentagon-associated Michael Bay movies his credits are rather light for the last 10 years or so.

He did star in The Sum of All Fears, an adaptation of a Tom Clancy novel that was aided by the CIA through their agent Chase Brandon. Brandon came from a covert ops background in Latin America and was appointed the Agency’s Entertainment Industry Liaison in the mid-90s. He served until 2006/7, when he was replaced by a guy called Paul Barry, who I don’t know much about.

Brandon served as a consultant on numerous TV shows and films portraying the CIA including Sum of All Fears and Alias, the immediate post-9/11 show starring Jennifer Garner. Brandon then convinced Garner to appear in a 2004 CIA recruitment ad. The following year she married Ben Affleck.

Curiously, in a recent Guardian interview he talked about how Hollywood is probably full of secret CIA agents. His reaction when the interviewer asked him if he was CIA has to be seen to be believed:
guardian.co.uk/film/video/201…-interview

So, have any of you seen Argo and if so, what did you make of it?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-22-2013, 12:52 PM Post: #2
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Argo
I went to watch it in a sort of 'Oh, I should check this movie out," way but then I realized that it seemed to be about some zany attempt to make a fake movie or something and I got less interested.

Is it worth watching just for the sake of it?
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-22-2013, 06:22 PM Post: #3
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Argo
Probably not, unless you like two hours of arabs shouting and Ben Affleck looking slightly confused and morose. It is much easier to watch than Zero Dark Thirty, which is a horrible movie.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-22-2013, 09:52 PM (This post was last modified: 03-22-2013 10:01 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #4
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Argo
I thought the most unlikely thing about the whole movie was it winning the Oscar. I was disturbed by the three seconds I caught of Afflects acceptance “speech”. The film was mediocre and okay, would have been nothing at all if it wasn’t for that old producer guy and his “it means Argo fuck yourself”, which was funny to me.

I disagree with the whole it’s anti-Iranian propaganda criticism strongly actually. Given the opening of the film which made a point of showing how much the Iranians suffered at the hands of Brits and Americans and their puppet Shah. Down the line you hear a bunch of characters commenting along the lines of “these Iranians hate us and they should, for what we’ve done”.

A side note, Persians aren’t Arabs but indo-European, “Aryan”. That makes the bazaar cliche not racist but culturalist, and I don’t think it was all that damning. The only reason I identified with Affleck and his people is because he was set up as the protagonist in the narrative, not because he held superior values. He didn’t, he was an flake, and John Goodman was boring, which is the real crime.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-23-2013, 04:26 AM Post: #5
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Argo
Do you think it’s fair to say that our woes are largely an on-going war between the Aryan and Semite religious spirits?
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-23-2013, 04:46 AM Post: #6
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Argo
No one said anything about Iran, or it being anti-Iranian propaganda. As you note, the film’s portrayal of Iranians as Arabs is yet another of its inaccuracies.

The fact that the film opened with a relatively truthful summary of the coup of 53 and its impact, which then got lost amid the shouty Arab scenes and all the film company shenanigans, only makes it all the more worrying to me. Normalising the unthinkable.

The ‘Argo fuck yourself’ was apparently a real joke and is one of the reasons the pseudo-film was called Argo, according to the CIA internal history of the operation. It was the best thing about an otherwise weak movie.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-23-2013, 05:10 AM (This post was last modified: 03-23-2013 05:11 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #7
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Argo
Oh really? That was the best thing, funny it was real. As I said though, I don’t think the film itself was of any (negative or positive) political significance. Though I’ll readily admit that it winning the award says otherwise.

P - No , as Iranian (thus a type of Aryan) ideology is Islamic and thus Semitic. But by all means give your (contemporary) arguments for that thesis.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-23-2013, 07:20 AM (This post was last modified: 03-23-2013 07:24 AM by pezer.) Post: #8
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Argo
It occurred to me as you pointed out the truly vast difference between Aryan and Semitic (another of those little hidden facts of modern day white man / black man / brown man paradigms) roots, and thus religious spirits. The Semitics; Akkadian, Aramaic, Hebrew, Arab, etc; had that moment of religious fervor, perhaps also philosophical fervor as Contra-Nietzsche once pointed out to me with this poem. They were powerful imperial peoples. From there comes that very specific kind of patriarchal, red clay, cryptic and somewhat prostrated flavour of societal power. Their Gods like to keep things meek, unilateral, pastoralry. In short, very anti-pagan.

On the other hand, you have the Aryans, further North, in tune with changing seasons and multiplicity in life, intrinsically pagan and polytheistic. When they say “civilized,” they mean a balance of inmence forces in sophisticated webs of unities, as opposed to a single sophisticated unit that seeks to replace all other forces.

Two Great Imperial peoples, two massively shifted propulsive forces. The Semitic are obviously more warry in that genocidal sense, but the Aryans enjoy battle and are prepared for it in a different way. So both survived, both still fight.

Yet “Imperial” means “only 1,” and the battling forces have merged in political unities that have spawned their own paradigms. Despite common belief, however, those forces are way stronger than the Empires have you believe and no new imperial paradigms have been able to outcry the battle.

Most of us, I would guess, have blood-lines from both sides of that coin. Our ideologies show it.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-23-2013, 08:19 PM Post: #9
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Argo
(03-23-2013 05:10 AM)Fixed Cross Wrote:
Oh really? That was the best thing, funny it was real. As I said though, I don’t think the film itself was of any (negative or positive) political significance. Though I’ll readily admit that it winning the award says otherwise.

spyculture.com/cia-history-argo/
Quote:
Argo
Jerome and I then set about picking a
name for our movie. We needed
something catchy from Eastern
culture or mythology. After several
tries, we hit on it! During our 10year
association, he had proven to be
a great Story and joke teller. He once
-told a group of us a profane “knockknock”
joke, with the word “Argo” in
the punch line.

This word became an in-house disguise-
team recognition signal and
battle cry. We used it to break the
tension that often built up when we
were working long hours under difficult
circumstances preparing for an
important operation. Jerome remembered
this. He also recalled that the
name stemmed from mythology. He
looked up the definition of Argo and
confirmed it as the name of the ship
on which Jason and the Argonauts
sailed to rescue the Golden Fleece
from the many-headed dragon holding
it captive in the sacred garden.
Perfect! This precisely described the
situation in Iran.

I agree that the film was not particularly political in the sense of being distinctly or overly anti-Iranian. It was shamelessly pro-US in that it left out the British and NZ roles and reduced the importance of the Canadians to about half a dozen lines of script.

All in all, I felt that the film was more a celebration of the CIA’s cushy relationship with Hollywood than anything else, particularly given that the star/director is married to someone who is in effect a CIA asset, and he himself could be considered to be the same. It is very much in keeping with spook humour, to get a modern day CIA asset in Hollywood to make a film recounting a largely untrue story about the CIA collaborating with some Hollywood dudes as part of a covert op.

his view really lightens the load. What Kubrick seems to be saying is that this is all out of our hands. I’m not sure how I feel about it, but for me it resolves somewhat the question of ‘why does violence happen?’

Or religiously, why God has to allow death and certain things that we don’t like to occur.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-30-2013, 05:02 PM (This post was last modified: 03-30-2013 05:02 PM by pezer.) Post: #3
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Starchild
But before you can understand that this is all our of our hands,

you have to go through 20 minutes of the best goddamn trippyness ever imagined into strips of light-sensitive paper.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-02-2013, 05:11 PM Post: #4
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: The Starchild
The point I am trying to make here is this: Without killing animals/nature and in many cases humans, we wouldn’t have civilization.

And it seems like we’re supposed to have civilization.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-02-2013, 09:08 PM Post: #5
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: The Starchild
(03-30-2013 03:17 PM)Q Wrote:
Basically the rest of the movie has to do with the AI showing more human characteristics than the humans, until finally the showdown where that one guy kills HAL and proceed to become the Starchild.
If the monolith is alien tech and it raises intelligence, it seems too much of a coincidence that right after a homo sapien kills something that was smarter than him that humans made, somethign like a spiritual transformation is set in motion by the alien tech. Time to make them good little smart creatures. I mean this on a symbolic level not on a literal level, that the aliens saw him kill Hal.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-03-2013, 08:16 AM Post: #6
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: The Starchild
I didn’t quite follow that. The Monolith doesn’t make the monkey smarter for killing the other monkey. It kills it -because- it’s smarter. The one leader ape actually touches the monolith and undergoes the transformation.

The whole point of this thread is that violence exits as a part of humanity. It’s woven into the wonder of creation.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 01:14 AM Unread post Post: #7
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: The Starchild
I didn’t mean that the Monolith had that motive. I assume the monolith made the monkey smarter, so the next skirmish it had a tool. The violence was already there. But I realized that the monolith intervenes with a human not long after he kills what may very well have been a greater intelligence than his own and one that he created.

As far as violence being a permanent part of the wonder of creation, I disagree, but that’s a whole nothing thing.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-04-2013, 04:36 AM Unread post Post: #8
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: The Starchild
That is what Kubrick is saying. Without the death of that monkey the human race doesn’t exist.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 10:12 AM Unread post Post: #9
Heathen Offline
Probationer
Posts: 64
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: The Starchild
Sure, the monolith speeded up evolution, or caused a specific line.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 10:27 AM Unread post Post: #10
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: The Starchild
What exactly does the Monolith represent?

The author of the original novels said aliens. Me, I always thought it represented that moment when our ancestors began to extract patterns of characteristics from instinct and memory, creating abstract realities like unnatural looking rectangles in the middle of a cave.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”

You know, I find it amazing that people across the ‘truth’ movement see this guy as a hero. He’s basically an unreconstructed fascist, presented as anti-establishment when he is so pro-establishment he wants a return to the 18th century.

Just to give an example, yesterday there was a by-election here in Britain that saw the Liberals (3rd party, junior party in govt. coalition) hold on to the seat and the Conservatives (senior party in govt. coalition) beaten into third place by UKIP, Nigel Farage fringe party that in the last few years has moved more and more towards the mainstream.

UKIP are particularly good at stealing voters from the Tories, because they are so classically right-wing. Their entire platform is about scapegoating and complaining, and so all those whinging pessimistic assholes who just want to blame someone else for the fact that getting drunk in front of the TV hasn’t magically led to fame and fortune. Since the by-election result Farage was in good cheer, saying that the reason UKIP were gaining Tory voters is because PM David Cameron ‘isn’t a proper conservative’. He said:
Quote:
Whilst our effect on the Conservatives is psychological – and that is huge and that is undeniable – the arithmetic does not say the Conservatives failed because of Ukip. The Conservatives failed here because traditional Tory voters look at Cameron and ask themselves: is he a Conservative? And they conclude, no, he is not. He is talking about gay marriage, wind turbines, unlimited immigration from India, he wants Turkey to join the EU.

Now, ask yourself, what kind of a man lumps in gay marriage with wind turbines and Turkey joining the EU? This is a party for bigoted pessimists, for people who harken back to some golden era when Britain was a great empire nation, everyone in the country was rich and there weren’t so many damn brown-skinned people about the place. Of course, that time never really existed, just like every nostalgic politics it is a delusion designed to make people unhappy and think that voting for regressive, fascistic politicians is somehow the answer.

It dismays me that
a) People vote for this absolute cunt
b) People can so easily be made to feel resentful so that they vote for this absolute cunt
c) The ‘truth movement’ and ‘radical politics’ of the present day heroises Farage and UKIP because they pay lip service to being anti-EU when in fact their only electoral success came in getting Farage elected as an MEP. He has his snout in the trough while making political hay out of slagging off the system that supports him, provides him with a job and a platform and therefore makes it possible for such a disgusting party to enter the mainstream.

Bit of a rant, I know, and I’m not expecting much in the way of responses. Just felt it needed to be said.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-01-2013, 10:38 PM Post: #2
W.C. Away
Calathumpian
Posts: 152
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Nigel Farage
Its nice they’re not voting mainstream. I mean, in comparison, what can he do, really? Why does it dismay you people vote for him considering the general alternative? So he’s big now… Comes and goes. The votes that should count, don’t generally count. Locally though, I see how it could be an issue to those opposed, but whatever a cunt he may be, the UKIP policies seem a good alternative to the present ones.
— W.C.

‘Through the dark decades of your pain, this will seem like a memory of Heaven.’
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-02-2013, 04:29 AM Post: #3
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Nigel Farage
(03-01-2013 10:38 PM)W.C. Wrote:
Its nice they’re not voting mainstream.

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/mN1VG1TmQAw[/flash]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mN1VG1TmQAw[/youtube]

  1. Tell me, if they were voting Communist then would you be saying the same? I’m genuinely asking here.
  2. Bearing in mind I think voting and political parties are a waste of time, I disagree that it is nice.
  3. UKIP are mainstream - they are pro-monarchy, pro-Bank of England, pro- all the other things that all mainstream parties share.

Quote:
I mean, in comparison, what can he do, really?

He could do something along the lines of the Bank of Dave, maybe set up a business or charity or something that actually did something other than took money and votes from idiots by telling them what they want to hear.

Basically, anything but be a professional politician. I am struggling to think of a more vacuous, ego-driven occupation.

Quote:
Why does it dismay you people vote for him considering the general alternative?

Because if people must vote I’d rather they didn’t vote for closeted fascists. I’d rather they voted because they believed in something, rather than voted because someone appeared to express their anger at the state of affairs.

Quote:
So he’s big now… Comes and goes.

UKIP are in with a shot of being the 3rd most popular party at the next election. Given that a few years ago they didn’t even exist that’s not a simple political cycle, that’s the rise of a new phenomenon.

Quote:
The votes that should count, don’t generally count.

Dunno what you mean by this.

Quote:
Locally though, I see how it could be an issue to those opposed, but whatever a cunt he may be, the UKIP policies seem a good alternative to the present ones.

You see, I hear that a lot from people from within the sorts of circles we move, and I don’t understand it at all. UKIP are very nationalistic and authoritarian - for example they want to double the number of prisons in the UK and long up more people for longer periods of time. That’s not usually the sort of thing those with respect for individual rights (or at least those who pay lip service to the notion of individual rights) are usually in favour of, yet they are pretty much all at least superficially pro-UKIP.

What usually emerges is that the only thing these people know about UKIP is that they are anti-EU and anti-mass immigration. That this is part of an extremely authoritarian, pro-police, pro-monarchy, pro-military, pro-NATO political philosophy can be found by simply reading their website but it turns out none of the people I speak to who are pro-UKIP have ever done even that much. They’ve relied entirely on the alt media’s presentation of UKIP, which like this RT piece is exceptionally biased and one-dimensional in its coverage:

So you tell me, did you know UKIP were extremely pro-NATO and in favour of doubling the number of prisons in the UK to enable locking up more people for longer periods of time? Have you read their website? Are you in fact in favour of these policies?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-03-2013, 09:14 AM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2013 09:18 AM by W.C…) Post: #4
W.C. Away
Calathumpian
Posts: 152
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Nigel Farage
I did know, and of course I’m not in favour of these policies – but these policies do seem to be typical mainstream, outside of say, the rejection of the EU, the general push for individual rights, and the strange focus on increasing incarceration time considering the state of the UK’s prisons at present. I understand Cameron is very anti-EU as well, so in me saying mainstream I suppose I should clarify I mean more globally.

The Bank of Dave thing – I think politicians generally aren’t that smart business-wise or aware as people regarding ingenuity unless its thrust in their faces to the point they cannot ignore it. I do tend to have a soft-spot for the rare few though, like the Doctor-Politician in that small European country I forgot the name of at this second, who has steered the country to legalizing pot and pot-research in his country, and being a Doctor, he researches it.

As I’ve seen a few Farage videos in the past, I did venture to the website for more information, and I must say that outside of what you listed and a bit more, I do tend to agree with their general aim. To me they seem like a good ‘gateway’ party towards a more individual-focused and less mainstream-based one, but I also supported Ron Paul in a similar regard, and I know you seem to generally dislike him as well, so it probably doesn’t mean much me saying that.

Thanks for starting this thread though. I had wondered about Farage in his home country, considering I had mainly only seen his stints at the EU. I understand he survived a plane crash in ambiguous circumstances. That made made me curious too. But with the state of things in Australia right now, and with global focus now turning to the Asia-Pacific, I’ve not really been looking into things more globally as much as I’d like.
— W.C.

‘Through the dark decades of your pain, this will seem like a memory of Heaven.’
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
03-03-2013, 08:44 PM Post: #5
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Nigel Farage
(03-03-2013 09:14 AM)W.C. Wrote:
I did know, and of course I’m not in favour of these policies – but these policies do seem to be typical mainstream, outside of say, the rejection of the EU, the general push for individual rights, and the strange focus on increasing incarceration time considering the state of the UK’s prisons at present. I understand Cameron is very anti-EU as well, so in me saying mainstream I suppose I should clarify I mean more globally.

In what ways are UKIP pushing for individual rights? I just don’t see it, I see closet fascism.

Quote:
The Bank of Dave thing – I think politicians generally aren’t that smart business-wise or aware as people regarding ingenuity unless its thrust in their faces to the point they cannot ignore it. I do tend to have a soft-spot for the rare few though, like the Doctor-Politician in that small European country I forgot the name of at this second, who has steered the country to legalizing pot and pot-research in his country, and being a Doctor, he researches it.

It doesn’t have to be a Bank of Nigel, it just has to be something that isn’t encourage people to be angry and fearful as a means of gaining their support. All that does is drag this country backwards, regardless of any global political spectrum you might allude to.

Quote:
As I’ve seen a few Farage videos in the past, I did venture to the website for more information, and I must say that outside of what you listed and a bit more, I do tend to agree with their general aim. To me they seem like a good ‘gateway’ party towards a more individual-focused and less mainstream-based one, but I also supported Ron Paul in a similar regard, and I know you seem to generally dislike him as well, so it probably doesn’t mean much me saying that.

Ron Paul is another closet fascist, extremely pro-military but largely based around people scapegoating a particular designated group within society and turning the government against them as a means to produce change (and supposedly, an improved society). With Hitler it was the Jews, with UKIP it is basically all immigrants, with Ron Paul it is the working class poor.

I don’t see how any of them can sincerely be claimed to be champions of individual rights, no matter how much lip service they might pay to such ideas in speeches. It isn’t about you saying it, it’s about it just not being true in any demonstrable fashion. When I challenged you over this in the Ron Paul thread you just told me to ignore his policies and budgets and listen to his speeches. People said the same about Hitler, and say the same about Farage.

Can you see the parallels, and why they worry me given that I actually live in the same country as this man?

Quote:
Thanks for starting this thread though. I had wondered about Farage in his home country, considering I had mainly only seen his stints at the EU. I understand he survived a plane crash in ambiguous circumstances. That made made me curious too. But with the state of things in Australia right now, and with global focus now turning to the Asia-Pacific, I’ve not really been looking into things more globally as much as I’d like.

Are you familiar with APPerspective?
ap-perspective.blogspot.co.uk/

I like this guy a lot, and he’s recently started doing a monthly video series with Corbett. You see, to my mind even this dude, who has no money to put into what he’s doing because he spreads no hate and fear and therefore people don’t just give him their money because he says he will take the fear away, is doing a lot more good than Farage ever has or will.

The plane crash was just a plane crash. I know a lot of crashes aren’t just crashes, and I know certain fear and hate-based ‘alt’ media types got a lot of mileage out of this one (while continuing to overlook Farage’s policies and real agenda) but there’s really nothing to it. If anything, it was the best thing that ever happened to Farage because it helped cement his fake status as a threat to the establishment.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
05-15-2013, 08:44 AM (This post was last modified: 05-15-2013 08:45 AM by Lars.) Post: #6
Lars Offline
Student
Posts: 5
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 1
RE: Nigel Farage
(03-01-2013 09:32 PM)BigTom Wrote:
You know, I find it amazing that people across the ‘truth’ movement see this guy as a hero. He’s basically an unreconstructed fascist, presented as anti-establishment when he is so pro-establishment he wants a return to the 18th century.

Hey BigTom!

It is very interesting you bring this up, with your acute vision. I have a French FB contact who is typically dissing out on Libertarians, notably Farage and Paul. She used to be involved in French politics, and as teacher has a lot to say on so-called “Libertarian” and “Atlantist” educational policies, like lifelong learning, in view of transforming the French education and corporate systems.

The Libertarians are basically those invovlved in the Freedom movements. You might get a whif of what she is on about on her blog (even if in French).

orianeborja.hautetfort.com/archiv…-cras.html

What You feel in Your Heart
I tend to follow my heart, and my gut.

So far it has left me alone and abandoned, and in some cases exploited.

Starting to question whether or not this will ever pay off.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-10-2013, 04:22 AM (This post was last modified: 06-10-2013 04:23 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #2
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: What You feel in Your Heart
I know how that is.
In fact the only times where I made lasting progress that I still feel, solid as rock, is when I let my mind play around with what my gut and heart were driving towards, and create something higher from it.

It’s not either the heart or the mind, it’s the mind designing to secure what the heart wants, by applying it in intelligent and creative ways.

This is also the key to tantra. Let the energies rise, and then as they are in full force, begin to shape them in sophisticated, functional patterns.
The only problem is that this requires patience and concentration. And that’s not always easy when there are gut-energies at stake.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
06-10-2013, 04:28 AM Post: #3
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: What You feel in Your Heart
No, it’s not always easy, but what you said helped.

Thanks.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?

Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
It’s looking like these will end up being gold/silver/copper/whatever

Currently Bitcoin is trading at ~150 USD
Litecoin and NMC/PPS are yet to really stabalize, but are around 3.5 and 0.01 respectively.

I have heard rumors that it’s being intentionally popularized and bloated by the government so they can crash it and destroy any momentum is has going.

It crashed in 2011 and came back, though. So I am wanting to say that the cryptocurrency is here to stay.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 12:12 PM (This post was last modified: 04-07-2013 08:40 PM by Q.) Post: #2
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
We could start a NWO fund and ride this wave if anyone has any extra cash. I plan to jump into Lite and NMC as soon as I can figure out to get my Canadian dollars into this thing. It’s… hard. Lately all the banks are cutting ties to any money exchangers that you could use to buy up CryptoCoins.

The war has started.
[quote=“Q”
[video=youtube[youtube]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fazu1rgr9k[/youtube]/video]

I fucking sat and watched this way back when, and didn’t think so myself, “I should throw $300 into this thing.”

Literally 2 years before that I had my computer ready to actually mine but then I sort of was like “fuck this.”

Things could been different, boys and girls. But then again, ain’t nobody got time for the shoulda coulda wouldas.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 08:12 PM (This post was last modified: 04-06-2013 09:30 PM by BigTom.) Post: #4
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
I’ve gotta be honest, I only know about bitcoin and I am deeply, deeply suspicious. For one thing, no one has been able to give me a simple answer to how it works. It seems they’ve invented a whole load of terms that mean something in the bitcoin world but are meaningless to anyone who isn’t using them. This smacks of a tree house kind of mentality, to me.

Second, how is it that there is a limited supply of them? I appreciate that having a limited supply creates a kind of built in deflation so as an investment they may (just may) make sense. But it means they are rubbish as an everyday transactional tool. Who limits the supply, and what happens if someone goes over the total designated number? How is forgery combated and thus the limit enforced? Given that most of the people using bitcoins don’t even understand it well enough to explain it to a non-user that’s a worry.

Third, it seems the only way you can use a bitcoin in the real world to buy something is either off another bitcoin user (which the limited supply means is very limited in number) or by cashing them out into dollars or pounds or Euros or whatnot. Thus, they haven’t really subverted anything, they are just a kind of digital tag along to real money.

Fourth, given that one of the obvious aims of the centralised banking and financial structure is a cashless society, this all strikes me as pre-conditioning.

Fifth, the recent spike in bitcoin prices has made the mainstream news. That doesn’t happen unless it has been done deliberately. You think the mainstream news talks about an alternative currency in a positive light without it having been co-opted? I remember just before the spike that several of my online friends who previously didn’t seem to know about Bitcoin were suddenly embracing it like it was the new sliced bread. Do you think that happens without a buzz (and thus a bubble) being deliberately generated? Now that the prices has gone up that makes bitcoin owners feel like they are smart, part of an elite who gets what’s going on, when of course they aren’t any fucking richer than they were yesterday. They can’t use those bitcoins to buy food or pay their electricity bill. They are being put in the exact same position as all those traders in the City and on Wall Street who thought at the top of the bubble that they were the kings of the world. If a big crash does happen (rather than a gradual managed decline) then those bits of encrypted code aren’t going to be worth anything.

All that said, I am not opposed to investing in a different digital currency if you wanted to pool a few bucks and take a punt. If nothing else it would be an interesting experiment.

Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
Quote:
I have heard rumors that it’s being intentionally popularized and bloated by the government so they can crash it and destroy any momentum is has going.

I’m definitely suspicious too. I mean… it was on the Good Wife.

However, the answers to your questions as to how cryptocurrency works are out there. It’s basically just an algorithm that releases bits in relation to the number of people solving the problems. So if more people mine, the “difficulty” goes up.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 09:29 PM Post: #6
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
That seems to me like a reckless faith in what’s basically a made-up bunch of symbols with no inherent value.

And they are asking me to trade real things for this? In relative terms, I can see how the paper money that’s accepted everywhere for everything even with its built-in inflation is more attractive to a lot of people. But I suppose it’s about exploring what’s possible.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-06-2013, 11:20 PM Post: #7
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
Well, an algorithm is hardly a bunch of made-up symbols to any extent beyond any other linguistic or logistic formation.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 01:33 AM Post: #8
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
And if I were backing my entire currency with syllogisms then I’d expect the same resistance.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 06:14 AM Post: #9
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
BigTom, is paper money really any more made up? Using your criteria for calling the bitcoins made up bs, what saves paper moneyz?
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 06:24 AM Post: #10
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
The physical backbone is the mining structures. It scales with technology as it advances.

Where this differs from what I would expect TPTB would want in a world currency, is everyone can mine if they want to and feel like it.

The Russians have these big rigs. So do hacking groups. There is a certain open lawlessness here that many people, myself included, seem to like in comparison to the current alternative.

They might have seeded it; we might have thought it up.

Apparently the head crypto is very mysterious. Often/sometimes people get into that field to avoid b&, but also the people in that field are sometimes the ones comiting the acts that the viewers need to encrypt. That is, that dark ritual stuff overlap between the government, corporation, and elite occult - the sex slavery ring I’m not saying this guy is anything other than the inventor, just that the whole encryption field is ostensibly a little bit shady so that is something to consider.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?

RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
Of course, obviously he would want to hide his identity, so I might be over thinking this.

The question is this: now that it is out in the open, can it be made viable by -us-? I mean, even if they gave it to us that doesn’t mean we can guerrilla warfare this thing.

When I go on these boards it’s like the Wild West, as I said. Shit is happening right now. This is a moment of flux. We should pay attention. I have to go to my parent’s house today, I plan to do some more research into investing. Stay tuned.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 06:59 PM Post: #12
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
(04-07-2013 06:14 AM)pezer Wrote:
BigTom, is paper money really any more made up? Using your criteria for calling the bitcoins made up bs, what saves paper moneyz?

The fact that everyone, everywhere, accepts it in exchange for things. That’s what gives it value.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 07:32 PM Post: #13
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
That wasn’t the criteria you used to dismiss bitcoins.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 08:05 PM Post: #14
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
Quote:
Bitcoin will be the biggest transfer of wealth in human history and it’s all going to the most technologically advanced, visionary thinking and intelligent demographic. Just think of what they will do. It wasn’t about connections, nepotism or being born to the right family, it was about seeing what others couldn’t and being technologically advanced enough to participate. This is history in the making.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 08:09 PM Post: #15
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
Quote:

No advantages over dollars.
You mean besides the fact that you can send money to anyone in the world, immediately, without an intermediary that stipulates whether you may or may not do so? One of the reasons people have problems exchanging Dollars for Bitcoins highlights this fact: Payment processors like Paypal and Google Checkout have terms of service dictating what you’re allowed to buy. Bitcoins are not on the list. If anything you should be pushing for a currency that cuts out a middleman like that for your own sake, since those same payment processors present you with restrictions that are unneeded.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 08:11 PM Post: #16
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
Quote:
I’ve been trading currencies of all kinds as a hobby for over seven years. You want some free advice, /g/? Stay FAR away from BTC right now, either as accepted payment or a currency to hold. I’m actually trying to weigh some short options on this. When the currency implodes, and it will very soon, the fallout is going to be EPIC. If you haven’t sold your holdings, now is the time if you haven’t done so already. The first leg down is going to move very fast.

This time next year, you’ll be able to buy BTC for pennies on the dollar. Those of you who know how markets work probably know what I’m talking about already.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 08:12 PM Post: #17
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
Quote:
That’s what people have been saying for YEARS. It has only appreciated in value since then. There have been a few crashes, but if you didn’t panic you would have gotten your money back with massive interest every single time.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 08:15 PM Post: #18
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE FUCK TO DO
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-07-2013, 08:24 PM Post: #19
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NWA
Other than build a fucking time machine so I can go back and put some money on the cubbies.

Some of these stories are making me sick to my stomach.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 12:06 AM Post: #20
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
(04-07-2013 07:32 PM)pezer Wrote:
That wasn’t the criteria you used to dismiss bitcoins.

I didn’t dismiss them. I expressed suspicion.

(04-06-2013 09:29 PM)BigTom Wrote:
That seems to me like a reckless faith in what’s basically a made-up bunch of symbols with no inherent value.

And they are asking me to trade real things for this? In relative terms, I can see how the paper money that’s accepted everywhere for everything even with its built-in inflation is more attractive to a lot of people. But I suppose it’s about exploring what’s possible.

See, when it’s a choice between a currency backed by symbols with no inherent value, and a currency backed by nothing but accepted everywhere, the fact of it being accepted gives it a provisional value that is worth more than the provisional value of bitcoin. If you don’t believe me then feel free to trade all your ‘worthless’ paper money for bitcoins, see how far you get.

If you make it work and prove me wrong then I’ll be the first to admit it.
[quote=“BigTom”
[quote=“Q”
Other than build a fucking time machine so I can go back and put some money on the cubbies.

Some of these stories are making me sick to my stomach.
[/quote]
You won’t like this then:

[video=youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bem-MNh5g_c[/video]
[/quote]
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
You’re turning I to a bit of a Corbet zealot.

This same thing happened in 2011 and Bitcoin bounced back. One of the wallets being hacked at this point is an inevitability that has now transpired. Moving forward the right amount of security will be present.

Bitcoins have many flaws that Litecoins don’t. It may not prevail as the leader.

Anyway, none of this has to do with goin back and putting some money on the cubbies. Whether or not this is a viable longterm currency is irrelevant to making money.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 03:05 AM Post: #23
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=ADXs2C4Vm…DXs2C4Vmho

Look at all that syntactical garbage. Fuckin mobile. And I can’t embed on my phone. Blep.

Anyway, this the cubbies thing I keep referencing. Great movie. Probably seen it like 50 times with my sister.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 03:07 AM (This post was last modified: 04-08-2013 03:09 AM by Q.) Post: #24
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
Remember the dot.com bubble? How money was simply up for grabs? It’s like that. I need to throw $50 into this just in case before Wednesday. If I lose it I at least won’t be kicking myself for not trying.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 03:20 AM Post: #25
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
K I’ve watched the Corbet thing twice:

All he really says is two sites have been hacked. It’s been more than two, but in a Wild West scenario that is going to happen. Without question. And like I said it will drive security to the levels it should be at.

Instead of suggesting caution but interest, Corbet is just taking the same old conspiracy stance of not really saying anything and injecting fear of ‘the master plan’ into the dialogue.

I’m kinda tired of it. For a guy who has been ‘following this since 2011’ he seems to have little to no knowledge of the technical side of it.

You could be right that this will not last, but seriously. What a completely useless report.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 03:57 AM Post: #26
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
(04-08-2013 02:18 AM)Q Wrote:
You’re turning I to a bit of a Corbet zealot.

This same thing happened in 2011 and Bitcoin bounced back. One of the wallets being hacked at this point is an inevitability that has now transpired. Moving forward the right amount of security will be present.

Bitcoins have many flaws that Litecoins don’t. It may not prevail as the leader.

Anyway, none of this has to do with goin back and putting some money on the cubbies. Whether or not this is a viable longterm currency is irrelevant to making money.
(04-08-2013 03:20 AM)Q Wrote:
K I’ve watched the Corbet thing twice:

All he really says is two sites have been hacked. It’s been more than two, but in a Wild West scenario that is going to happen. Without question. And like I said it will drive security to the levels it should be at.

Instead of suggesting caution but interest, Corbet is just taking the same old conspiracy stance of not really saying anything and injecting fear of ‘the master plan’ into the dialogue.

I’m kinda tired of it. For a guy who has been ‘following this since 2011’ he seems to have little to no knowledge of the technical side of it.

You could be right that this will not last, but seriously. What a completely useless report.

I hate to break this to you but that isn’t Corbett, it’s some guy on youtube who buys and sells silver.

Nonetheless, I accept that the report is extremely biased, I wasn’t posting it because I found it particularly credible, more because it kinda fitted with one of your comments. Clearly the guy’s agenda is to shit on bitcoin, but he does raise the perfectly fair point that bitcoin has no real answer to this. It’s like watching a brand new anarchistic society realise that getting rid of government doesn’t mean people won’t get raped.

That said, I am not opposed to people buying bitcoins or similar, I’m just saying that there’s a long way to go from bitcoin to a proper monetary revolution.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 06:05 AM (This post was last modified: 04-08-2013 06:15 AM by Q.) Post: #27
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
The thing about the order from chaos thing is that once the chaos stage begins, anything can happen. We’ll have to watch this carefully this week.

Lol that is funny I totally thought that was Corbet. My bad.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 08:32 AM Post: #28
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
Damn dude, I am getting infected with your bitcoin desire. I’ll see what I can do.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-08-2013, 07:16 PM Post: #29
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
THE CUBBIES!
[quote=“Q”
[video=youtube]
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADXs2C4Vmho[/youtube][/video]

Mining either LTC or NMC starting tomorrow. Gonna try to buy some if I can sort out this bank shit in Canada.
[/quote]

RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
Right, it’s almost perfect. What we need is an algorithm that can produce an unlimited amount of bitcoins, yet which complexity would regulate the flow by the same peer-to-peer logic.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-09-2013, 11:50 AM Post: #33
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
Bitcoin is one part of this thread.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-09-2013, 12:16 PM Post: #34
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
Interesting, yes… It’s much more than a currency, it’s a system of currency.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-09-2013, 12:17 PM Post: #35
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
You nailed it.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-09-2013, 12:17 PM Post: #36
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
And, to finally answer BigTom’s question, the final unit of value is hardware.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-09-2013, 01:06 PM Post: #37
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
Money is weird.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-11-2013, 05:18 AM Post: #38
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
A friend of mine who invests in bitcoin showed me that bitcoin’s own data indicates that there were periods of extremely high buying and selling immediately prior to the major fluctuations in recent days.

Naked short selling isn’t really possible with bitcoin so they are having to do it the old-fashioned way. I say don’t put any money on the Cubbies that you can’t afford to lose. But then, I don’t bet on sports even when I know I’m going to get the result right. That’s because I’m sometimes horribly wrong, like when I predicted Alonso would win this year’s Malaysian Grand Prix.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-11-2013, 08:01 AM Post: #39
pezer Offline
Pothead Saruman
Posts: 800
Joined: Jan 2013
Reputation: 8
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
Gambling is only for those that can be masochistic if needed, true enough. Anyway, don-t bet more than you can afford to loose is good advice for this and any new gambling enterprise.
Science is found in the question “how do you know?”
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-11-2013, 08:11 AM Post: #40
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
Thanks guys.
How bout getting off all these antibiotics?
How bout stopping eating when I’m full up?

RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
So how are you getting along? Has your algorithmic prospecting resulted in a stack of digital coins that are worth more in fiat currency than they were this morning?

I don’t mean that question anywhere near as cynically and sarcastically as it probably comes across. I’m genuinely interested.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
04-13-2013, 04:16 AM Post: #42
Q Offline
5151
Posts: 469
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 5
RE: Bitcoins/Litecoins/NMC/PPA
No. It’s like impossible to get any money online in Canada. There is one bank that allows it, and the friend I have with that bank is in Vegas.

The bitcoin stuff is likely done. It might go a bit higher. I am just watching Litecoins. It’ll prob go from 5 where it’s at now to 25-50. I’m gonna throw some money on there when I can.

I consider the psychedelic experience one of the most occult subjects that exists. Basically what the West has in the way of well-known shamanism even remotely broaching the academic/intellectual sphere is Carlos Castaneda, and Terrence McKenna.

Somewhere, many of the Egyptian Mystery School occult ‘sciences’ are written down, and can be used (imo) to shape reality to the will of the user. I mean that’s really what most of that stuff seems to be about. When you read seminal people like Crowley, Regardie, it’s clear it’s all about intention. Even people who diverge from classical occult systems - like Gurdieff - still stress the immense importance of intention and willpower. … and then transformation occurs.

When it comes to the dealing of and dialogue with the ‘entities’ found in the mushroom and DMT experience, it is entirely different. As someone who has gone deep enough into this world, and someone who has read and listened to a lot of Mckenna, I can confidently state that intention has less to do with what is going on. It is a primarily a process of gnosis. A ‘download’ if you will, from a consciousness that is old, powerful, and not really of this reality. In fact, the intention part of all this is basically just an initial offering. “Hey, I would like to experience [this].” Then away you go. … and then the transformation occurs.

Just to put the above into perspective: psilocybin is one molecule from being DMT. In high doses, it effectively is DMT, and as most of us (should know at this point), DMT is released in large doses when we dream, meditate, and when we die. In fact, it’s the catalyst for dreaming. Put in my own words, it’s the master key for the dimensional doorway.

This is one of those areas where we know, publically, next to nothing. I know the government has played around with joint dreaming and basically Inception type stuff. So obviously that would include (oral) DMT, shrooms, and I would imagine every other drug as well. That DMT is a schedule 1 drug that could land you in federal prison - something found in the human body and almost all plants - then it might give an indication as to what they found, and why they don’t want us playing around with it.

Have you ever had a hardcore hallucinogenic experience? What is your take on it?

/OP

[hr]

MCKENNA’s Evolution

[hr]

McKenna proposes an interesting theory:

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/LFQh4jhQFWc[/flash]

Basically he cites a study where infants are successfully taught sign language before they are successfully taught to talk. For him, this points to language being much more ingrained in our DNA at the level of body movements and basic grunts - not unlike apes and chimps.

In actuality, ‘speech’ is only about 35,000-45,000 years old. Fucking fire is 6x as old as talking is. McKenna makes a very Wittgensteinian distinction between the syntactical representation of nature itself - after all, DNA is basically a language - and ‘speech.’ For him it’s a technology. An invention. But who developed this tool? Or more importantly, how did we move from pointing to symbols and and emoting through gestures to using phonetics to do the same thing through representation.

The answer is drugs obviously:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia

He thinks that mushroom imparted the ability in someone to basically spasm out a sound for a gesture while tripping. Synesthesia of language.

Now, this sounds pretty out there, and McKenna himself admitted freely they a lot of them were simply entertainments. However, let’s continue. It gets better.

[hr]

EVIDENCE

[hr]

All right so time for some evidence.

[vyoutube]KsZbxRzWYLc[/youtube]

What he’s saying here is simple: the great embarrassment for evolutionary theory is the human neocortex. It is the most dramatic transformation of an organ of a mammal in the entire fossil record, so since the human neocortex is the organ that thought up the theory of evolution, it has to account for this its own rapid emergence in the human evolution. In about 2 million we went from being higher primates… to humans. That is a very short window of time in the evolutionary context - what the hell happened? At this point the earth was already extremely old. Life was everywhere, but the fire of intelligence had not found the conditions to spark - what the hell happened?

He thinks it’s shrooms. A group of humans wandered into a pack of shrooms, started using them, and basically profited from it.

Shrooms in low doses actually greatly enhance, for example, eyesight, and could theoretically cause a pack to become much better hunters. More in tune with the land. etc. The type of dose you might get just nibbling on forage. Chemical binoculars.

Shrooms in higher doses causes arousal. Chemical outbreeding of non-shroom users in the same area.

Shrooms in the highest doses nail you to the ground in hallucinagenic ecstasy. As we explored above, this can lead to spontaneous bursts of vocalized ‘internal’ syntax. Chemical Glossolalia

And boom… the neocortex, and humanity as we know it, is born.

This seems like a longer version.

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/bjxkgseWeyo[/flash]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjxkgseWeyo[/youtube]

A bit of background. Sheldrake is the guy who philosophized about morphogenic fields. I don’t feel like explaining that again, so just google him and that. Not sure who Ralph Abraham is.

[hr]

HEFTER.ORG

heffter.org/
[/quote]
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Psychdelic Drugs
What McKenna says about DNA is extremely interesting…
Symbolic representation is perhaps a requirement for reproduction -
in other words, life = language…

I can see that. It explains the rapid nature of evolution quite well -
as all mutations would already carry ‘meaning’ on a symbolic level, even if randomly arranged, the arranging-tools are not random

That in turn explains why art, as the use of an instrument, is so quickly more real, more alive, than ‘prosaic’ life.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-16-2012, 11:53 AM Post: #3
Dannerz Offline
Student
Posts: 45
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Psychdelic Drugs
I want to try shrooms someday but I don’t know any drug dealers. Not a single one.

The main reason why I want to try it is to see one of my spiritual specie. They come in many forms, but I wish I could fully physically see one.

I think if we could fully disable the filter that is on our mind, temporarily, it would expand our consciousness so much.
I wish psychadelics were all legal.

Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: Hermeticism
I hadn’t listened to this video before. It’s really good. It’s just T-Ken talking at some… talk he gave. I don’t know many people I’ve listened to who are more well-read. It’s like any book or subject is a breeze for him. Oh T-Ken. He’s missed.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-14-2012, 12:09 PM Post: #3
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Hermeticism
30 minutes… that’s a great talk so far.
The book he talks about where I was just at.

" Modern science is an incredibly demonic enterprise. "
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-14-2012, 12:24 PM (This post was last modified: 12-14-2012 12:49 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #4
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Hermeticism
“He could cast the best Horoscope of Europe.” -

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dee

An angel dictates political advice in reversed latin.
ROMA
AMOR
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-14-2012, 12:33 PM (This post was last modified: 12-14-2012 12:47 PM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #5
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: Hermeticism
" Alcibiades was arrested for possession and distribution of the Eleusinian mysteries. "
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-15-2012, 11:22 AM Post: #6
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: Hermeticism
Yeah I listened to the whole thing, as I assume you did.

Fuck I wish he was still alive. He’s such a treasure trove of knowledge. It’s just him droning on - only audio - and I was just sitting there staring at the screen captivated.

That reversed latin thing was a nice tidbit of information. I want a Whey Stone…
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-16-2012, 12:49 PM Post: #7
Dannerz Offline
Student
Posts: 45
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Hermeticism
I understand hermeticism as a mix of many old forms of knowledge and magic.
I am not as well versed as I’d like to be. I’m mainly focused on the mental and astral plane, and on my inner reality. I have limited download amounts on my present internet plan, so I can’t check out a 4 hour video. One of my old friends spent allot of time reading about magic and occult things. But I lost contact with him.

Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
Proximity Ethics
I am looking for theories of proximity ethics for a new article I’m writing.

I remember in one of my ethics classes there was a scenario:

Quote:
A person is walking by a river, late for some important thing, and they see a stranger drowning in a river. Do they save them? If they could simply pay a couple dollars to save them, would they do it right then and there?

I figure, like in my ethics class, we could at least look at different approaches to this issue. It seems pretty straightforward, but the issue becomes expansive.

This is one that is pertinent in today’s interconnected, but still starving world. Part of the reason why more people don’t give in strategic ways is because the ethical problem is mostly undefined, and only through illumination of the issue, can a strategy be formed.

But if anyone knows of any specific academic resources for proximity ethics that is what I am looking for primarily.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-11-2012, 02:22 AM Post: #2
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Proximity Ethics
(12-06-2012 01:32 PM)Gobbo Wrote:
A person is walking by a river, late for some important thing, and they see a stranger drowning in a river. Do they save them? If they could simply pay a couple dollars to save them, would they do it right then and there?

I was hoping someone else would start a discussion on this, because I found it interesting, but to me it seems mostly straight-forward. If I’m supposed to be the “a person” when considering this, then yes. I’d try to save someone if I saw them drowning. I’d pay a couple of dollars to save them as well. If someone was standing there saying, “Well, you can go save them yourself or pay me a couple of dollars to do it for you” I’d probably pay a couple of dollars.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-11-2012, 05:29 AM Post: #3
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: Proximity Ethics
I probably would to, and I think most people, because you’re close to another human being and it’s just an instinctual thing.

However, say you were walking by a television set that showed you a person that would otherwise die in some other country.

I guess basically what I’m trying to explore is the disconnect between an interconnected global culture, but a lack of interconnected global ethics.

Or do we want that?
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-11-2012, 06:46 AM (This post was last modified: 12-11-2012 06:57 AM by Blurry.) Post: #4
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Proximity Ethics
Well along with the disconnect is a matter of trust.

Of course it’s easier to walk away from a situation that you see on television than it is to walk away from something that is happening before your very eyes. I’m sure we could have an entire conversation about that, but anyway yeah, that’s the basic disconnect - it’s not reality if it’s not happening in front of me. In my opinion, this is mostly a comfort/survival thing. I’m sure you’ve experienced what happens when you spend too much time thinking about all of the horrible stuff going on in the world. I kind of talked about that over on ILP, when talking about politics and the recent election, and the hopeless feeling I get when I think about how screwed we really are. I can’t be productive in my daily life with that kind of mindset. I have to block it out the majority of the time, otherwise I’d end up feeling hopeless about everything and I’d probably become a nihilist and end up committing suicide. It’s a matter of practicality - turning a blind eye to horrors in the world allows them to continue, but there’s still the matter of having our own day-to-day lives, our own little dramas and troubles that we have to deal with.

But about the trust thing, I don’t know if this happens to you, but when I see those commercials for organizations that are trying to get people to donate money to help put some starving child in Africa into clothes, feed them, and get them an education, I’m always wary. How much of my money is actually going to help these children? My mom and I once decided to sponsor a little boy in Africa. We were at what basically amounted to a teen-oriented revival for our church, and there was some organization that had an entire set-up there and they were roping people in left and right. We gave a bunch of money, and were supposed to get further information, along with pictures of the child we were sponsoring and letters from him, but we never heard anything again. I think that’s probably an issue for more people than just myself. I mean, how much proof do we actually have that the money we give is doing what we intend it to do?

In your scenario the expectation is that you would see the result of your money immediately, at least that’s how I read it, so I don’t know if “drowning” is the best example, but I suppose that’s neither here nor there.
btw ^^ all of that makes me feel stupid.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-11-2012, 02:12 PM Post: #5
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: Proximity Ethics
Well I’m just trying to get at, fundamentally, the nature in which we decide that a stranger we don’t know needs help over a stranger we don’t know, who lives further away.

You’re right: a lot of those supposed charities are scams, but I’m just talking hypothetically. If it was guaranteed, many people still wouldn’t do it.

I’m kind of perturbed over the responses my Slave Labor App article received at ILP (and hence why I left for good). I kind of just assumed that people had reached the point where they were looking for ways to actively help the world, but many pages later all that’s been revealed is that people are largely looking for excuses not to. Are these excuses justified?

I guess I just want to explore the issue. Am I being overly idealistic here? Is Kristwest right that we should leave these people to govern themselves? Does that stand at odds with the globalizing nature of the world?

Quote:
I’m sure you’ve experienced what happens when you spend too much time thinking about all of the horrible stuff going on in the world.

I am one of the most sensitive people I know. For a while this used to weigh on me and threatened to drive me insane. I don’t really have an answer, but the one I do have is found in instances just like the above.

Whenever I get depressed I tell myself that I’m still pretty much one of the luckiest people to live in the upper 5% of wealth on the planet. I worked in a factory type environment once. It was fucking INSANE. I cannot even put into words how much I hated it. Always working. No breaks ever. All this illegal stuff that you can’t complain about because you never stop working. I was only there for like 5 or 6 months or something and It’s almost like it’s scarred me for life. When I think about it now I like… shudder. And that was nothing compared to this.

Waxing philosophical on a forum is super easy. We really should try and have thicker skin. Me, you, everyone here. There are people in the world who deserve it.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-12-2012, 02:55 AM Post: #6
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Proximity Ethics
I didn’t read the thread on ILP, and maybe I should do that.

What was Kris talking about, leaving people to govern themselves?

I have more thoughts on this, but I want to get them in order, and maybe also check out that thread on ILP. I’ll get back.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-14-2012, 01:20 AM Post: #7
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: Proximity Ethics
Her view was basically just excuses as to why she shouldn’t have to act differently.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-14-2012, 01:22 AM Post: #8
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Proximity Ethics
I’ve read part of that thread. It turned into a bunch of bickering fairly early on, so I lost interest.

I do have some things to say, though. I just don’t have time while I’m at work, but I’ll get on it tonight.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-14-2012, 01:51 PM Post: #9
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Proximity Ethics
Okay so I read more of the ILP thread, I read your article, and I read the links in your article.

I remember once getting into an argument with you because you were trying to spread awareness about some issue or another, and I demanded that you come up with some kind of working plan, or stfu. I do still see the value in that, but I think I have a more clear idea now of just how ignorant people really are, and that educating them is a battle in and of itself. Then, of course, you have to keep their attention, which I think is what “proximity ethics” is really all about. How do you stop people from turning the channel mentally, how do you motivate them to do something about the issue.

In your article, you brought up social media and how this can be used to both spread awareness and effect change. I thought it was an excellent point. We see examples of what the internet can do every day, how it can bring us together, on a large scale, to focus on a common goal. Computers are changing the world, and I feel that, if the internet can remain in the hands of the people, there is a chance that more good will be done than bad, in the long run.

As for Kriswest’s argument that people need to stand up for themselves and we would somehow be doing them a disservice to speak out and try to change things, I’m a little bit conflicted. I agree with her, but I don’t think everything is quite that cut and dried. There are times when it is appropriate to…well, to ditch someone. To let them suffer with the consequences of their actions, to let them learn a lesson from their circumstances. However, I don’t think it’s quite right to let a downtrodden and desperate person drown in the shit while you kindly step over them. I also saw a lot of clouding the issue by pointing to the “bigger picture” in the responses in the ILP thread, and that bothers me. I tend to look at the world fairly practically, which is why the argument I mentioned before happened between you and I. If there’s a problem, the practical thing to do is find a solution, not sit around waxing philosophical about whether or not the self-sufficient tribes in the Amazon are more or less disadvantaged than the exploited Cambodian garment workers.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-15-2012, 11:20 AM Post: #10
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: Proximity Ethics
See, I liked my slave labor app solution more: if you don’t want to do it for the justice of the people in the world getting slave fucked, then do it for future society’s perception of you. But ultimately I came up with 2 solutions/reasons. I think that is not bad.

Did you read all the links? Because these people -are- trying to make their voices heard. They formed a union and the police came and skull kicked everyone into the hospital, presumably because they were paid off. Keep in mind they’re going up against one of the biggest corporations in the world.

So… are you suggesting that they need to ‘do it on their own?’ These people obviously need outside help. Kriswest thinks these people just need to ‘work really hard,’ when they’re working harder than any of us ever have in our lives…

RE: Proximity Ethics
I don’t think they need to “do it on their own,” no. I think they need help. A lot of the things that Kris probably thinks can be accomplished through hard work are possible because she’s had advantages in her life because of where she was born.

The Cambodian garment workers would be who I was referring to when I said what I said about stepping over people who are in the shit. While I do firmly believe that many things in life need to be learned on one’s own, I don’t think this situation applies. Everyone needs a hand sometimes.

My brain is not all here right now (long day) and I’m afraid I’m not making sense, and I know I’m not able to say all the things I really want to say right now, but I will say this – the attitude that Kris displayed in that thread is a very American one, and I’m not proud of that.
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

-Dr. Seuss
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-19-2012, 11:53 AM Post: #12
Blurry Offline
Wannabe Intellectual
Posts: 85
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: Proximity Ethics
(12-15-2012 11:20 AM)Gobbo Wrote:
See, I liked my slave labor app solution more: if you don’t want to do it for the justice of the people in the world getting slave fucked, then do it for future society’s perception of you. But ultimately I came up with 2 solutions/reasons. I think that is not bad.

Did you read all the links? Because these people -are- trying to make their voices heard. They formed a union and the police came and skull kicked everyone into the hospital, presumably because they were paid off. Keep in mind they’re going up against one of the biggest corporations in the world.

So… are you suggesting that they need to ‘do it on their own?’ These people obviously need outside help. Kriswest thinks these people just need to ‘work really hard,’ when they’re working harder than any of us ever have in our lives…

Okay, my mind is a bit more calm now, but I thought about this again and got kind of pissed off…

Fuck me, Kris’ point is really short-sighted. I did read all the links, and I’m saying…like, obviously, these people are working hard. As you said, they’re working harder than any of us ever have. Clearly, hard work isn’t the answer. They’re trying to stand up for themselves using the means the people in my country employ every day, that isn’t working either, so…what are they supposed to do? I’m wondering if the next step shouldn’t be rioting, so they can all lose their jobs and some of them, probably, their lives. That would be a lot easier on this end, you know?
“Think left and think right and think low and think high. Oh, the thinks you can think up if only you try!”

  • Dr. Seuss

William Blake and his Red Dragon Pictures
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_…_Paintings

I need to know once and for all what the triple 6 trinity means, and why, like Francis Dolarhyde, I have become obsessed with these paintings.

More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Every example I’ve looked at categorically states this is the case.

What does everyone think about guns?
naturalworldorder.org/gazing-into…andy-hook/
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-25-2012, 09:27 PM Unread post Post: #2
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-25-2012 07:44 AM)Gobbo Wrote:
Every example I’ve looked at categorically states this is the case.

What does everyone think about guns?
naturalworldorder.org/gazing-into…andy-hook/

As I said on ILP at great length, I think the US fascination with guns is driven by pop culture and that the constitution is meaningless. I think the idea of resisting government tyranny through owning guns is ludicrous, both in principle and in practice, and that this myth about ‘every despot disarms the population’ is the sort of lie you could only get away with spreading in a country like the US where 99% of people are completely idiotic.

Furthermore, I think the US government wants the population to own guns rather than the opposite. After all, they do sod all to enforce gun laws and massively subsidise the companies that make the guns, no to mention overtly encourage black markets like drugs which provide a means, motive and opportunity for a huge black market in guns.

I think your claim of ‘every example’ is disingenuous because look at the US compared to the UK - far more guns in the US, far more deaths, far less guns in the UK, no greater government tyranny.

In short, I think the kneejerk conspiracy theorist attitude of some on the ‘Right’ towards mass shootings is just as exploitative and just as moronic and just as massively untrue as the kneejerk ‘ban the guns’ attitude of some on the ‘Left’. I think it’s an utterly stupid discussion in its present format that has nothing to do with facts, nothing to do with reality, and everything to do with encouraging Americans to ultimately destroy themselves and each other.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-26-2012, 05:52 AM Unread post Post: #3
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Yeah but government aside, there is something sort of mutually assured about guns. I don’t use them. I use my mind, but still - people don’t act like stupid fuckers when they have some fear of the other person.

I kind of look at the Wild West as an example of what I’m talking about.

I’m not sure what I’m saying, exactly. ‘Guns’ is pretty new to me. I didn’t really think about them before, but now I am. So that alone is noteworthy. Clearly all this propaganda is working to some degree.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-26-2012, 02:59 PM (This post was last modified: 12-26-2012 03:04 PM by W.C…) Unread post Post: #4
W.C. Away
Calathumpian
Posts: 152
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Anyone saying I’ll take your guns to ensure your security is well and good, but when they simply can’t ensure it, what are they working towards? The question of whether we should have guns or not isn’t a question of guns or disarmament for the time being, it’s a question of power.

If you have the power to defend yourself, you are thus empowered. With great power comes great responsibility – through responsibility you are likely to learn a greater level of respect. If only cars were held to the same account guns are, we’d have had them banned a while ago. But what does this achieve? We can respect cars and not even think of banning them, but guns! If there is a 100 car pile up with 60 child deaths, we don’t talk about cars… because why, the motive isn’t as discernible?

So are we to have select groups have select tools in order to ensure we supposedly harm ourselves as little as possible?

At a time when Police kill us more than the overblown terrorists, why aren’t we at war against the police as opposed to the terrorists?

You have these psychos, these sane men, taking cars, trucks, and god knows, killing God knows how many everyday, and we have to worry about guns, because they don’t get us to work like cars do, to let us feed the animals that cause most of our problems with the fruits of our labour.
— W.C.

‘Through the dark decades of your pain, this will seem like a memory of Heaven.’
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-28-2012, 02:52 AM Unread post Post: #5
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-26-2012 05:52 AM)Gobbo Wrote:
Yeah but government aside, there is something sort of mutually assured about guns. I don’t use them. I use my mind, but still - people don’t act like stupid fuckers when they have some fear of the other person.

I kind of look at the Wild West as an example of what I’m talking about.

Most people in the Wild West weren’t armed all the time. But I know what you mean about the rationale, and I’m not fundamentally opposed to that, I just think the notion that today’s Americans, with today’s attitudes, being allowed even more guns will only result in more mutual destruction.

Quote:
I’m not sure what I’m saying, exactly. ‘Guns’ is pretty new to me. I didn’t really think about them before, but now I am. So that alone is noteworthy. Clearly all this propaganda is working to some degree.

Which propaganda are we talking about? I see in the US gun debate the same polarisation, the same strategy of tension, as in so many domestic counter-insurgency programs. Over here in the UK, I’ve heard both the pro-gun and anti-gun celebrity-endorsed propaganda, I’ve heard both sides seeking to exploit this event to advance seemingly contradictory policies and values.

Because ultimately what’s it a choice between? Either banning guns in some way, thus affirming the notion that the state has a righteous monopoly on the use of violence, or giving Americans the means to kill each other at even higher rates. Either extreme plays into the same people’s hands, just like in pretty much every mainstream political debate.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-28-2012, 03:03 AM Unread post Post: #6
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-26-2012 02:59 PM)W.C. Wrote:
Anyone saying I’ll take your guns to ensure your security is well and good, but when they simply can’t ensure it, what are they working towards? The question of whether we should have guns or not isn’t a question of guns or disarmament for the time being, it’s a question of power.

If you have the power to defend yourself, you are thus empowered. With great power comes great responsibility – through responsibility you are likely to learn a greater level of respect. If only cars were held to the same account guns are, we’d have had them banned a while ago. But what does this achieve? We can respect cars and not even think of banning them, but guns! If there is a 100 car pile up with 60 child deaths, we don’t talk about cars… because why, the motive isn’t as discernible?

Because most cars, most of the time, are used peacefully to accomplish useful things. Guns are solely designed to kill things in an efficient manner.

It’s a ludicrous, and massively over-used analogy. In fact, it isn’t an analogy, it’s just gun-loving bullshit.

Quote:
So are we to have select groups have select tools in order to ensure we supposedly harm ourselves as little as possible?

I’m against the general population being armed on a continuous basis, that doesn’t mean I’m in favour of the police shooting people and getting away with it. It isn’t an either/or choice, however much they (the mainstream) try to make it into one.

Quote:
At a time when Police kill us more than the overblown terrorists, why aren’t we at war against the police as opposed to the terrorists?

A good question, that has little to do with the gun debate. Fight the police all you like, they’re a shower of bastards. In fact, to borrow a phrase from my brother, they are a power shower of bastards.

Quote:
You have these psychos, these sane men, taking cars, trucks, and god knows, killing God knows how many everyday, and we have to worry about guns, because they don’t get us to work like cars do, to let us feed the animals that cause most of our problems with the fruits of our labour.

We have invested HUGE amounts of time, money and effort in making vehicles harder to steal and safer when they do crash. No amount of time, money or effort will turn a gun into a tool of peace.

Seriously, it’s an absolutely ridiculous analogy if you stop and think about it for a moment - the sort of thing hick gun-lovers will lap up, but the sort of thing intelligent people should view with the same scepticism as those who say that the government should be the only people who are allowed to use violence to accomplish things.

Did someone say the age of Horus was coming?

By the way I think Gobbo’s article on the main page does well to explain that the guns issue is not the main issue. The main issue is the psychology of the killer, and this is linked convincingly to antidepressant-type drugs. I do not think that more guns means more violence - look indeed at Switzerland and Russia - but I will believe in a second that more antidepressants means more violence, more chaos, less judgments by acting agents.

But then unfortunately any strong motive is capable of sending people over the edge - only three or four generations ago, a nation would gladly send its whole male population to a near certain death. Perhaps it is only that we do not any longer have any motives left that the killing is happening inside rather than outside.

Nihilism…

W.C. Away
Calathumpian
Posts: 152
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-28-2012 03:03 AM)BigTom Wrote:
Because most cars, most of the time, are used peacefully to accomplish useful things. Guns are solely designed to kill things in an efficient manner.

It’s a ludicrous, and massively over-used analogy. In fact, it isn’t an analogy, it’s just gun-loving bullshit.

At the same time, most guns in public, most of the time, are not used to kill as much as bows and arrows are not used to kill (if say bows and arrows had equal ownership rates). The highest uses for public guns are target practice, private collections or self defence.

Quote:
I’m against the general population being armed on a continuous basis, that doesn’t mean I’m in favour of the police shooting people and getting away with it. It isn’t an either/or choice, however much they (the mainstream) try to make it into one.

I agree. I mean, this whole thing has arisen again as a result of the Newtown affair – in which an assault rifle was used in a state where assault rifles already have tougher laws. It appears they’re now pushing for other states to adopt similar measures, apparently because it worked so well in Newtown.

Why they do not look to education and training as the Swiss do becomes apparent in the fact that they simply don’t want the people armed.

An old thing I like to do is to watch what isn’t being and hasn’t really been reported on, which is related to events like this. What I found is that in instances where armed citizens have stopped a potential massacre or crime, it is almost seldom reported.

Quote:
A good question, that has little to do with the gun debate. Fight the police all you like, they’re a shower of bastards. In fact, to borrow a phrase from my brother, they are a power shower of bastards.

True enough, but they’re a difficult bunch to go to war with. Not all are bad, but all have a vast array of protection against law, etc.

Quote:
We have invested HUGE amounts of time, money and effort in making vehicles harder to steal and safer when they do crash. No amount of time, money or effort will turn a gun into a tool of peace.

No amount of time, money or effort will turn cars into safety machines either. We’re not going to live in a totally safe society. Ever. As this is the case, I would prefer to be able to defend myself and my property rather than having to rely solely on those Police.

I agree with some regulations, and I agree with education. I disagree with banning practically anything wholely, as any ban simply sends the object of the ban to the black markets and creates gangs, etc, to maintain the same. I understand higher availability will inevitably place some guns in the hands of those that otherwise wouldn’t have them. Thats life.

I do wonder why we don’t invest more time, money and effort into education in general – Why we don’t stop disecting human emotions and labeling them psychological conditions to be sold as worthy of drugging oneself up for. But I don’t wonder why this is the case for long.

In Australia, we had the Port Arthur Massacre as the flase flag justification to take away our guns. The UN is actively pursuing gun bans worldwide. I think I’m with the ‘gun nuts’ on this one. You disarm the world and only Governments will really be able to use violence to accomplish things – more things against disarmed populations.

That said, I don’t think you can ever really ban something like a gun, so long as you have people who can make or smuggle guns – you can only reduce a quantity and a chance of any real backlash from those public groups/militias, who are being painted as terrorists because they’re not government owned.

You know, and you probably can do this too, I can walk down the street today and buy a gun if I so desired. It is not safer. But I would say the time of guns as we know them, is coming to a close soon enough anyway – to be replaced and enhanced over time with technological advancement. But again, this isn’t about guns and never has been, it’s about power. They want to have it, and they don’t want us to because, in my understanding of what they’re selling, ‘we’re a danger to them and to ourselves.’
— W.C.

‘Through the dark decades of your pain, this will seem like a memory of Heaven.’
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-28-2012, 02:01 PM Unread post Post: #9
sorege
Unregistered

RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Guns are an equalizer. You take a human with some potentially negative physical traits - specifically size and strength - and give that human a gun, those traits become poisonous. An intelligent human understands that a society which permits the relatively weak to carry guns is not one in which physical superiority or mental agility is a means to a positive end, since even mental overpowerment can reisult in the death of the non-aggresive mentally fit person. Guns bring us all down to the same level. The level of a reptile with venomous spray.

There’s nothing inherently wrong with the reptile. And we can live with it. We may prefer not to, but we do need to learn how.

Sometimes we stick them in prison. Or a mental health hospital. Or shove them in an orphanage. Or kill them outright. The human and its reptile equivalent. It doesn’t matter how we attempt to rid the world of dangers, they will continue to exist. I believe it is incumbent upon us as individuals to prevent the venemous from harming us by eliminating the need for the attack.
Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-28-2012, 07:15 PM Unread post Post: #10
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Quote:
There’s nothing inherently wrong with the reptile. And we can live with it. We may prefer not to, but we do need to learn how.

Well said.

Something I feel is kind of pertinent here is the concept of that person who can talk their way out of anything. This doesn’t apply to all gun cases, but it shows the power of the mind, and how it could potentially be applied to the social case in question here.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”

RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-28-2012 09:43 AM)W.C. Wrote:
(12-28-2012 03:03 AM)BigTom Wrote:
Because most cars, most of the time, are used peacefully to accomplish useful things. Guns are solely designed to kill things in an efficient manner.

It’s a ludicrous, and massively over-used analogy. In fact, it isn’t an analogy, it’s just gun-loving bullshit.

At the same time, most guns in public, most of the time, are not used to kill as much as bows and arrows are not used to kill (if say bows and arrows had equal ownership rates). The highest uses for public guns are target practice, private collections or self defence.

This is irrelevant. They are designed to kill. Cars aren’t. Very few people are deliberately killed with a car. Loads of people are deliberately killed with guns.

It’s a bullshit analogy.

Quote:
Quote:
I’m against the general population being armed on a continuous basis, that doesn’t mean I’m in favour of the police shooting people and getting away with it. It isn’t an either/or choice, however much they (the mainstream) try to make it into one.

I agree. I mean, this whole thing has arisen again as a result of the Newtown affair – in which an assault rifle was used in a state where assault rifles already have tougher laws. It appears they’re now pushing for other states to adopt similar measures, apparently because it worked so well in Newtown.

Had the restrictions been properly enforced then the Newtown massacre would not have happened. The argument that different legislation or improved enforcement might be the solution is perfectly reasonable. Yet it’s this sort of mocking ‘because regulation worked so well in Newtown’ that we here from the gun-lovers, and which for some reason you’re repeating word for word without considering whether or not it is bollocks. Because it’s obviously bollocks - one drunk driver killing a group of children is not a reason to get rid of all laws governing cars, or driving, or drink driving, or to get everyone drink driving so that they are all equally dangerous to one another.

Quote:
Why they do not look to education and training as the Swiss do becomes apparent in the fact that they simply don’t want the people armed.

They clearly do want the people armed - they subsidise the weapons manufacturers who make the weapons, they pass crappy regulations which help create a black market and then systemically fail to enforce those regulations, in particular failing to enforce them against the black market they helped to create. They also subsidise the film and TV industries who glamourise guns, gun violence and gun ownership, while also portraying the world as horrible and scary, thus giving people the ready made ‘it’s just for self-defence’ excuse for buying a gun.

Set against all that evidence that they do, in fact, want US citizens to have guns and invest huge amounts of time, money and effort in encouraging them to buy guns, your argument is that they don’t ‘look to education and training like the Swiss do’. As someone else pointed out in this same debate on ILP - the Swiss have state-mandated, conscripted military service. Can you see how quickly the ‘everyone owns a gun’ becomes ‘everyone is part of the state military’, i.e. how quickly the Libertarianism becomes Fascism?

Seriously, the ‘they want our guns’ position is just as ridiculous as the ‘they take our jobs’ position regarding immigration. It’s just a tabloid-style rallying cry for the mob. I cannot express to you in strong enough terms (without being very rude) how dimwitted the whole guns debate is, and the extent to which it is a waste of your time believing in either of the two apparently polar-opposite positions we are offered by the mainstream media. The gun nuts love pointing out that Switzerland has lots of guns but little violence.

Quote:
An old thing I like to do is to watch what isn’t being and hasn’t really been reported on, which is related to events like this. What I found is that in instances where armed citizens have stopped a potential massacre or crime, it is almost seldom reported.

Give me some examples, because I can think of literally dozens of mass shootings in countries where gun ownership is quite widespread but none of the supposedly self-defending population lifted a finger to stop the person or persons perpetrating the mass murder. Look at the Breivik attack in Norway - Norwegians are gun owners, they like to hunt and like shooting-based sports and despite being a socialist country with a massive public sector they don’t have particularly strict gun control regulations. Certainly it’s a lot easier to get a gun in Norway than it is here in the UK. Funny how you never hear the gun-lovers using Norway as an example, possibly because it doesn’t fit their tobacco-chewing right-winged worldview whereby ‘socialism’ is equivalent to Satanism.

Anyway, Breivik was tramping about on that island, shooting people and phoning the police to tell them he was on the island shooting people, and all around the lake were people who owned guns and had boats who could have tried to stop him. They did nothing. Now, that’s partly due to the national character of the Norwegians, somewhat applicable to Scandinavians in general, that they are an essentially peaceful bunch who weren’t prepared for something like this. Norway has no history of mass-casualty terrorism, even though guns are quite widely available. But even in the US, where this kind of thing happens on a regular basis, and where they have a supposedly gung-ho national character, it is almost never a member of the public who stops the mass-killer. If they are shot, they usually shoot themselves or are killed by the police. If you’ve got counter-examples then lay them on me.

Quote:
Quote:
A good question, that has little to do with the gun debate. Fight the police all you like, they’re a shower of bastards. In fact, to borrow a phrase from my brother, they are a power shower of bastards.

True enough, but they’re a difficult bunch to go to war with. Not all are bad, but all have a vast array of protection against law, etc.

I don’t really mean going to war with them, I mean holding them to account as a means of persuading them to change. Having police of some sort isn’t necessarily a bad idea, in fact they are sometimes useful and competent. That can be encouraged.

Quote:
Quote:
We have invested HUGE amounts of time, money and effort in making vehicles harder to steal and safer when they do crash. No amount of time, money or effort will turn a gun into a tool of peace.

No amount of time, money or effort will turn cars into safety machines either.

And yet, they are used safely most of the time. Guns are not.

Quote:
We’re not going to live in a totally safe society. Ever. As this is the case, I would prefer to be able to defend myself and my property rather than having to rely solely on those Police.

Again, it isn’t a choice between one or the other.

Quote:
I agree with some regulations, and I agree with education. I disagree with banning practically anything wholely, as any ban simply sends the object of the ban to the black markets and creates gangs, etc, to maintain the same. I understand higher availability will inevitably place some guns in the hands of those that otherwise wouldn’t have them. Thats life.

That isn’t my argument against gun ownership.

Quote:
I do wonder why we don’t invest more time, money and effort into education in general – Why we don’t stop disecting human emotions and labeling them psychological conditions to be sold as worthy of drugging oneself up for. But I don’t wonder why this is the case for long.

In Australia, we had the Port Arthur Massacre as the flase flag justification to take away our guns. The UN is actively pursuing gun bans worldwide. I think I’m with the ‘gun nuts’ on this one. You disarm the world and only Governments will really be able to use violence to accomplish things – more things against disarmed populations.

All over the world we see the covert agencies of Western governments arming insurgent populations. Methinks they are quite happy for people to run around on the ground with guns killing each other while they fly about in their spy satellites and supersonic bomber jets. As above, I’m looking at their actual behaviour rather than their rhetoric.

Quote:
That said, I don’t think you can ever really ban something like a gun, so long as you have people who can make or smuggle guns – you can only reduce a quantity and a chance of any real backlash from those public groups/militias, who are being painted as terrorists because they’re not government owned.

You know, and you probably can do this too, I can walk down the street today and buy a gun if I so desired. It is not safer. But I would say the time of guns as we know them, is coming to a close soon enough anyway – to be replaced and enhanced over time with technological advancement. But again, this isn’t about guns and never has been, it’s about power. They want to have it, and they don’t want us to because, in my understanding of what they’re selling, ‘we’re a danger to them and to ourselves.’

Us having guns gives them a lot of excuses for a lot of things. They want us to have guns, 95% of their behaviour shows this. I think that adopting anything from either side of this poisoned and poisonous debate is extremely foolhardy. I’m not trying to insult you here, but as I say I can’t express this in strong enough terms. It’s an utterly stupid debate, and no basis for arguing about degrees of regulatory control vs. the relevance of individual rights. The debate as it currently stands misconstrues EVERYTHING it discusses.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-28-2012, 11:55 PM Post: #12
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Quote:
I cannot express to you in strong enough terms (without being very rude) how dimwitted the whole guns debate is, and the extent to which it is a waste of your time believing in either of the two apparently polar-opposite positions we are offered by the mainstream media.

To be fair, though, you are presenting this argument where you’re envisioning fighter pilots nuking civilians mobs of people with their ‘guns.’

It’s not so much about how a literal war would play out. It’s about the symbolism behind this. If the Americans give up their guns, then it’s basically admitting defeat.

This is all in the context of obliterating the constitution, which is a cleverly genius piece of literature I might add.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-29-2012, 02:26 AM (This post was last modified: 12-29-2012 02:35 AM by Fixed Cross.) Post: #13
Fixed Cross Offline
Neophyte
Posts: 466
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 8
Warning Level: 0%
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
I agree with Gobbo here. It’s the symbolism, the constitution, the ‘spirit’ of the US that is at stake. We are talking about a country where the violent nature of man is relatively un-repressed, accepted. This has disadvantages and advantages. The disadvantages are obvious, the advantage is that it makes for a very dynamic environment, the American psyche is exceptionally powerful. The second amendment creates the idea (whether it’s illusory or not is of no practical significance) that people are truly free, that they have the right to resist government. This is unheard of in other nations, and I think that it is a massive improvement over the past ten millennia or so.

My sentiment is equal to what Gobbo expressed: if Americans hand over their guns, they’re admitting defeat, failure of their project. The project was based on trust in the self-regulating power of the human being, and for this reason it is important to focus on this anti-depressant issue. Antidepressants are a direct attack on mans capacity to self-regulate - they eliminate mans responsibility for his own state of mind, thus for his acts. Antidepressants form a direct attack on mans ‘soul’, his self-governing capacity. Guns only form a danger when this capacity has been overruled.

Essentially the 2nd amendment speaks of a tremendous optimism, an unprecedented faith in mankind. Whether this faith is justified or not, to scrap the right would be a huge step backward, leading Americans to submit to the ancient and still wide spread idea of Faraoic rulership which they had successfully challenged for a while.

Government prescribing the right to resist government is enlightened, even if the right is only symbolic.
Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Edit this post Delete this post Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-29-2012, 06:02 AM Post: #14
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-28-2012 11:55 PM)Gobbo Wrote:
Quote:
I cannot express to you in strong enough terms (without being very rude) how dimwitted the whole guns debate is, and the extent to which it is a waste of your time believing in either of the two apparently polar-opposite positions we are offered by the mainstream media.

To be fair, though, you are presenting this argument where you’re envisioning fighter pilots nuking civilians mobs of people with their ‘guns.’

That is the military model of the future I’m working with, derived largely from US military counterinsurgency manuals, CIA trends reports and the Command and Conquer computer game series, yes, you’d be right about that.

Quote:
It’s not so much about how a literal war would play out. It’s about the symbolism behind this. If the Americans give up their guns, then it’s basically admitting defeat.

Sure, which is one of the main reasons I’m not in favour of banning guns. I think people should voluntarily choose not to own guns.

Quote:
This is all in the context of obliterating the constitution, which is a cleverly genius piece of literature I might add.

An awful lot depends on whether the rights and freedoms outlined in the constitution are supposed to apply to everyone, or to a select few. The select few who wrote it appear to have been mainly concerned with according themselves such rights (to bear arms or own property or whatever) rather than people at large. After all, they didn’t want their slaves bearing arms, did they?

There is a lot of stuff in the constitution which is outmoded gibberish, though of course it isn’t those bits that are being dissolved, it’s the bits about not kidnapping and imprisoning people because you feel like it.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-29-2012, 10:52 PM (This post was last modified: 12-29-2012 11:09 PM by BigTom.) Post: #15
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-29-2012 02:26 AM)Bran Wrote:
I agree with Gobbo here. It’s the symbolism, the constitution, the ‘spirit’ of the US that is at stake. We are talking about a country where the violent nature of man is relatively un-repressed, accepted. This has disadvantages and advantages. The disadvantages are obvious, the advantage is that it makes for a very dynamic environment, the American psyche is exceptionally powerful.

I think this is extremely one-sided and simplistic. There’s no such thing as ‘the American psyche’. Almost all of the Americans I’ve met have been weak-minded, lazy, nasty idiots. That’s nothing to be proud of or for the rest of the world to emulate.

Quote:
The second amendment creates the idea (whether it’s illusory or not is of no practical significance) that people are truly free, that they have the right to resist government. This is unheard of in other nations, and I think that it is a massive improvement over the past ten millennia or so.

Yeah, because no other nation has any history of resisting their government. Only Americans, and look how well they’ve done at it! It’s not like the US government is the largest, most destructive institution the world has ever seen.

Oh, wait a second…

Quote:
My sentiment is equal to what Gobbo expressed: if Americans hand over their guns, they’re admitting defeat, failure of their project. The project was based on trust in the self-regulating power of the human being, and for this reason it is important to focus on this anti-depressant issue. Antidepressants are a direct attack on mans capacity to self-regulate - they eliminate mans responsibility for his own state of mind, thus for his acts. Antidepressants form a direct attack on mans ‘soul’, his self-governing capacity. Guns only form a danger when this capacity has been overruled.

Or when they get into the hands of kids who’ve been bred on a diet of poverty and glamourisation of gun violence.

Leaving aside this myth of the American project being something other than the same old story of white colonisation, I do agree with you - there is a logic to a large number of people owning and carrying guns that breeds a certain mutual respect. You would see a lot less of the glib cynicism that has come to dominate American youth culture because that passive-aggressive, put everything else down and then pretend you don’t care about it attitude is hard to maintain towards someone carrying a gun.

Quote:
Essentially the 2nd amendment speaks of a tremendous optimism, an unprecedented faith in mankind. Whether this faith is justified or not, to scrap the right would be a huge step backward, leading Americans to submit to the ancient and still wide spread idea of Faraoic rulership which they had successfully challenged for a while.

Government prescribing the right to resist government is enlightened, even if the right is only symbolic.

Government prescribing the right to resist government is absurd because it means the government can simply take that right away as and when it pleases. A people trying to form a government from a starting point that includes the right to resist government is enlightened. And I’m sure that some of the people who went to America way back when weren’t doing it with colonisation in mind, but had more enlightened ideals. Praise those people and those ideals all you want, but that alone does not to my mind defend the Constitution as a whole, let alone the American Project as a whole. If it fails, I think it will fail because those ideals weren’t applied to everyone, and were never intended to be applied to everyone. I’m open to being persuaded otherwise on that.

To be clear, I’m not in favour of banning guns, and I agree it would be a huge symbolic step in the US that would not be positive for them. But likewise I’m not in favour of this ‘everyone should be armed to the teeth’ idea. I think the existing gun debate in the US is exceptionally stupid, but then every political debate in the US is the same way. The notion that there is anything in that debate that the rest of the world should admire and emulate appalls me. I think that there are far better arguments for gun ownership (without descending into gun fetishism) and I am glad to see some of those arguments on this thread.

Indeed, both yours and Gobbos posts remind me of this:

[flash(0,0)]http://www.youtube.com/v/r38-yj8wqiw[/flash]

Had the shopkeeper not owned a rifle then his subsequent act of kindness would not have been possible. This is an example of the threat of force being used for good which both entertained me and I think embodies the kinds of values you’re talking about. I’m not going to labour the point that the man in question was a Muslim American, a curious mixture to consider when picking apart this tiny but symbolically important event.

I’m kind of with you, I just have utter contempt for mainstream US political discussion, and see no reason to revise that regarding the gun debate. All this roundabout bollocks about ‘every dictator in history has disarmed the population’ is the sort of thing you could only get away with in a country where people know no history, where they genuinely don’t realise that there have been dictators, Faraoic rulership, the divine right of Kings etc. for millenia before their country, as they conceive of it, ever existed. Not all of those dictators, kings, Pharaohs sought to disarm their populations - plenty of them either didn’t give a toss because they had other things to worry about or actively sought to arm the population for various reasons. The principle of resisting government is very important, and American gun ownership is a symbol of that, I do get it, but that doesn’t excuse the sheer crap spouted in defence of that gun ownership. Having the right conclusion for a hundred wrong reasons is not something that the rest of the world should be admiring or emulating.
[/quote]
Had the shopkeeper not owned a rifle then his subsequent act of kindness would not have been possible. This is an example of the threat of force being used for good which both entertained me and I think embodies the kinds of values you’re talking about. I’m not going to labour the point that the man in question was a Muslim American, a curious mixture to consider when picking apart this tiny but symbolically important event.

I’m kind of with you, I just have utter contempt for mainstream US political discussion, and see no reason to revise that regarding the gun debate. All this roundabout bollocks about ‘every dictator in history has disarmed the population’ is the sort of thing you could only get away with in a country where people know no history, where they genuinely don’t realise that there have been dictators, Faraoic rulership, the divine right of Kings etc. for millenia before their country, as they conceive of it, ever existed. Not all of those dictators, kings, Pharaohs sought to disarm their populations - plenty of them either didn’t give a toss because they had other things to worry about or actively sought to arm the population for various reasons. The principle of resisting government is very important, and American gun ownership is a symbol of that, I do get it, but that doesn’t excuse the sheer crap spouted in defence of that gun ownership. Having the right conclusion for a hundred wrong reasons is not something that the rest of the world should be admiring or emulating.

Dannerz Offline
Student
Posts: 45
Joined: Dec 2012
Reputation: 2
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Things like knives and base ball bats can be deadly too. A gun is more deadly, but still, people always have the means to a killing or a violent act. Do you want to ban knives and base ball bats?
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-30-2012, 01:00 AM Post: #17
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-30-2012 12:37 AM)Dannerz Wrote:
Things like knives and base ball bats can be deadly too. A gun is more deadly, but still, people always have the means to a killing or a violent act. Do you want to ban knives and base ball bats?

That’s it, try to drag the discussion back to the most basic, moronic level you can…
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-30-2012, 08:11 PM Post: #18
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
He has a point.

Quote:
I think this is extremely one-sided and simplistic. There’s no such thing as ‘the American psyche’. Almost all of the Americans I’ve met have been weak-minded, lazy, nasty idiots. That’s nothing to be proud of or for the rest of the world to emulate.

You’re missing the point. This has nothing to do with whether all of this is ‘smart’ or not.

Britain is the brain, the US is the arm. Before the bankers co-opted the US it was probably the best structure the world has ever seen for realizing the human potential. Britain is completely conquered. No one there could revolt even if they wanted to.

People look to the US because once the guns are handed in there, the arm is free to fist the body into a new world order, but we’re not completely there yet.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-30-2012, 09:00 PM Post: #19
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-30-2012 08:11 PM)Gobbo Wrote:
He has a point.

No, he doesn’t, because that has NOTHING to do with what I said. In particular, I never said guns should be banned, so responding ‘other things are dangerous, why don’t you ban them too?’ is completely stupid. Seriously, if the quality of discussion here is no better than on ILP then I want nothing to do with it, and that post was just like ILP.

Quote:
Quote:
I think this is extremely one-sided and simplistic. There’s no such thing as ‘the American psyche’. Almost all of the Americans I’ve met have been weak-minded, lazy, nasty idiots. That’s nothing to be proud of or for the rest of the world to emulate.

You’re missing the point. This has nothing to do with whether all of this is ‘smart’ or not.

Britain is the brain, the US is the arm. Before the bankers co-opted the US it was probably the best structure the world has ever seen for realizing the human potential. Britain is completely conquered. No one there could revolt even if they wanted to.

Says a person who has never been to Britain and has no idea what’s going on over here. Britain has had plenty of revolts, far more than the US.

Quote:
People look to the US because once the guns are handed in there, the arm is free to fist the body into a new world order, but we’re not completely there yet.

If I truly believed that my future freedom was dependent on Americans owning guns then I’d kill myself. This is a great example of what I mean about simplistic conspiratorial views of the world leading to despair.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
12-30-2012, 11:05 PM (This post was last modified: 12-30-2012 11:09 PM by Gobbo.) Post: #20
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Why are you so mad? This issue clearly has some other element to it I’m not seeing. Did you ban him for the comment a couple posts up? That seems excessive.

I’m going to try and explain this fully, and give it the attention it deserves.

Quote:
I’m kind of with you, I just have utter contempt for mainstream US political discussion, and see no reason to revise that regarding the gun debate.

We’re not asking you to revise your position. We’re asking you to phrase this in the context of the World Stage. You’re right (and I didn’t mean to sound insulting) I’m sure people could revolt in Britain, but in the sense of the World Stage that would be kind of coming from left field. By all means, do that. I hope that happens.

But the spotlight is on the US. Or perhaps it just seems that way living next to it in Canada.

I don’t like it anyone more than you do. Perhaps even less… But the reality is that everyone kind of looks to the United States because they have made a lot of noise. And as I alluded to with the constitution, a lot of that noise has blossomed from the type of intellectual spirit that is shared by Britain, but as someone who lives in a British colony myself, I would say more unchained. Maybe you don’t agree with that, but I just think it is. Or at least has been more so in the past 200 years where such a thing could even be possible.

If that country can somehow… as I said, not fist us the world, then it’s a story that the world can jump on board with. They can’t advance the plan without that arm of theirs. And in the hands of the people, it’s game over. It’s the easiest place for the tipping point to occur. It’s the top of the iceberg. I truly think it matters if the US gives their guns in.

So in that way arguments like Dan’s are somewhat valid. This site is think tank, is it not? It is more kind of a transparent (hopefully fun) steering the masses where we try to provide a clear and concrete solution. When people ask me about these shootings I say: “Don’t give in guns.” I think our work is basically coming up with a coherent answer and saying, 'Here you go." to anyone who wants to read. History has shown it’s something like 6-9% of society is what is needed to basically turn public opinion and change everything entirely.

Addressing Your Response to the OP

Quote:
As I said on ILP at great length, I think the US fascination with guns is driven by pop culture and that the constitution is meaningless.

Sure, but you don’t live there, and the people that are going to supposedly bomb everyone in your scenario are people who do, and who believe in those things so… well let’s move on.

Quote:
I think the idea of resisting government tyranny through owning guns is ludicrous, both in principle and in practice

Sure, but everything in society is ludicrous. Every war call, at first glance, is logically absurd. It’s about the social reaction. Us talking about this is kind of weirdly both very dumbed down and simplified, but also very complex.

Quote:
and that this myth about ‘every despot disarms the population’ is the sort of lie you could only get away with spreading in a country like the US where 99% of people are completely idiotic.

If I was a dictator I would do this. The basic logic behind it makes sense, even if ‘every one’ didn’t do it.

Quote:
Furthermore, I think the US government wants the population to own guns rather than the opposite. After all, they do sod all to enforce gun laws and massively subsidise the companies that make the guns, no to mention overtly encourage black markets like drugs which provide a means, motive and opportunity for a huge black market in guns.

This is a fair point. But in the wake of Sandy Hook, if you say to someone 'Yea man, Let’s hand in our guns and watch some SNL," then, really nothing is accomplished other than in one more instance someone learns to just acquiesce to the government’s demands. Once again, this is about digging our heals in. Finding key instances to do that.

Quote:
I think your claim of ‘every example’ is disingenuous because look at the US compared to the UK - far more guns in the US, far more deaths, far less guns in the UK, no greater government tyranny.

This is kind of another discussion. We can talk about if you want. I’m getting tired of typing and I feel like this will be long.

Quote:
In short, I think the kneejerk conspiracy theorist attitude of some on the ‘Right’ towards mass shootings is just as exploitative and just as moronic and just as massively untrue as the kneejerk ‘ban the guns’ attitude of some on the ‘Left’. I think it’s an utterly stupid discussion in its present format that has nothing to do with facts, nothing to do with reality, and everything to do with encouraging Americans to ultimately destroy themselves and each other.

It’s all kneejerk. We’re down to the final chess moves here. People always say that people who always say the world is going to end are just some part of society that is always there – and maybe so – but we’re approaching the point where revolt will be impossible for a long time, until some like… Harry Potter or something is born 1000 years from now and upsets the system.

What would you say, ultimately, in the face of all this to the public?

“Meh… this discussion is pointless.”
All right I’ll turn my guns in then. Thanks tinfoil.

or

“Well, you shouldn’t but more to the point, you should look at gun ownership and gun violence in this way…”
Oh, interesting… maybe I’ll check out that article you mentioned.

We need to get over seeing the public discussion as intellectually insulting or whatever. You gotta get up in that shit and just roll with it. Have a couple drinks. Get a buzz on and just grin and bear it. We need the public. We also need you.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”

RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
The plot seems to be going like this:

Take the guns - I don’t think we can disagree they want to do this. They keep throwing shooting after shooting at us. They really want it.

So why? - I think it’s so skyrocket the crime rate with riots and Battlefield Los Angeles type stuff so they can bring in Martial Law.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
01-02-2013, 12:12 AM Post: #22
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(12-30-2012 11:05 PM)Gobbo Wrote:
I’m going to try and explain this fully, and give it the attention it deserves.

Quote:
I’m kind of with you, I just have utter contempt for mainstream US political discussion, and see no reason to revise that regarding the gun debate.

We’re not asking you to revise your position. We’re asking you to phrase this in the context of the World Stage. You’re right (and I didn’t mean to sound insulting) I’m sure people could revolt in Britain, but in the sense of the World Stage that would be kind of coming from left field. By all means, do that. I hope that happens.

But the spotlight is on the US. Or perhaps it just seems that way living next to it in Canada.

Of course, a shooting or a presidential election or a new gun law in the US gets reported the world over.

Quote:
I don’t like it anyone more than you do. Perhaps even less… But the reality is that everyone kind of looks to the United States because they have made a lot of noise. And as I alluded to with the constitution, a lot of that noise has blossomed from the type of intellectual spirit that is shared by Britain, but as someone who lives in a British colony myself, I would say more unchained. Maybe you don’t agree with that, but I just think it is. Or at least has been more so in the past 200 years where such a thing could even be possible.

If that country can somehow… as I said, not fist us the world, then it’s a story that the world can jump on board with. They can’t advance the plan without that arm of theirs. And in the hands of the people, it’s game over. It’s the easiest place for the tipping point to occur. It’s the top of the iceberg. I truly think it matters if the US gives their guns in.

I’m not denying it matters, but I don’t see the US as being the place where a tipping point can be encouraged or created. The people are just too stupid and too vain. Look at how the American truth movement has responded to the economic crisis - it just blames ‘the government’ or ‘the elite’ or thinks that sitting in a park or voting for Ron Paul is somehow going to solve things. The simple fact of Americans consuming far more than they produce is never discussed. The simple fact of there being physical limitations on growth and consumption is never discussed. Far easier to just blame ‘the government’ and pretend that if they weren’t keeping us down we’d all be millionaires because we’re Americans and we’re just that damn good.

Quote:
So in that way arguments like Dan’s are somewhat valid. This site is think tank, is it not? It is more kind of a transparent (hopefully fun) steering the masses where we try to provide a clear and concrete solution. When people ask me about these shootings I say: “Don’t give in guns.” I think our work is basically coming up with a coherent answer and saying, 'Here you go." to anyone who wants to read. History has shown it’s something like 6-9% of society is what is needed to basically turn public opinion and change everything entirely.

I’m not disagreeing with any of that except for that arguments like ‘Dan’s’ (by which you mean the same tired old gun-fetishists who say the same thing no matter what happens and which Dan lazily and crudely and uncritically repeated for no apparent reason) are even remotely valid. They may be useful in persuading stupid people of true conclusions because they sound like they are valid and encourage an emotive, tabloid response. Rhetorically, they have force. Logically, they are bullshit.

Call me idealistic if you must, but I think we can find ways to be both logical and rhetorically forceful at the same time.

Quote:
Addressing Your Response to the OP

Quote:
As I said on ILP at great length, I think the US fascination with guns is driven by pop culture and that the constitution is meaningless.

Sure, but you don’t live there, and the people that are going to supposedly bomb everyone in your scenario are people who do, and who believe in those things so… well let’s move on.

Quote:
I think the idea of resisting government tyranny through owning guns is ludicrous, both in principle and in practice

Sure, but everything in society is ludicrous. Every war call, at first glance, is logically absurd. It’s about the social reaction. Us talking about this is kind of weirdly both very dumbed down and simplified, but also very complex.

The social reaction has been ‘they wanna tek ma gurns’, from what I can see. Pretty dim, and not something I feel I can work with.

Quote:
Quote:
and that this myth about ‘every despot disarms the population’ is the sort of lie you could only get away with spreading in a country like the US where 99% of people are completely idiotic.

If I was a dictator I would do this. The basic logic behind it makes sense, even if ‘every one’ didn’t do it.

Whether the logic behind it makes sense or not is irrelevant, only whether dictators actually do this. Look at Saudi Arabia - clearly a dictatorship, yet they have pretty lax gun laws that aren’t really enforced and lots of private gun ownership. That’s the opposite to Britain, an elective democracy. In Russia there’s more private gun ownership than in Britain, but in North Korea there’s far, far less private gun ownership, indeed it is among the lowest in the world.

There’s no simple correlation between dictatorship and banning gun ownership. There just isn’t. Rather than making a judgment on the basis of something sounding right, I actually bothered to look:
gunpolicy.org/

All kinds of information from all over the world on, for example, private gun ownership vs. government gun ownership. There is no simple pattern that would sustain even your moderated position, let alone the ‘every dictatorship in history…’ crap that I objected to.

Quote:
Quote:
Furthermore, I think the US government wants the population to own guns rather than the opposite. After all, they do sod all to enforce gun laws and massively subsidise the companies that make the guns, no to mention overtly encourage black markets like drugs which provide a means, motive and opportunity for a huge black market in guns.

This is a fair point. But in the wake of Sandy Hook, if you say to someone 'Yea man, Let’s hand in our guns and watch some SNL," then, really nothing is accomplished other than in one more instance someone learns to just acquiesce to the government’s demands. Once again, this is about digging our heals in. Finding key instances to do that.

Your argument makes no sense. If the government isn’t trying to disarm people then giving up your guns is not acquiescing to their demands.

Quote:
Quote:
I think your claim of ‘every example’ is disingenuous because look at the US compared to the UK - far more guns in the US, far more deaths, far less guns in the UK, no greater government tyranny.

This is kind of another discussion. We can talk about if you want. I’m getting tired of typing and I feel like this will be long.

I’m not particularly interested in that conversation, save to say the real world does not conform to the fantasies of American conspiracy theorist gun-fetishists. It’s only because they are really fucking stupid and have no history that they believe it. What’s your excuse?

Quote:
Quote:
In short, I think the kneejerk conspiracy theorist attitude of some on the ‘Right’ towards mass shootings is just as exploitative and just as moronic and just as massively untrue as the kneejerk ‘ban the guns’ attitude of some on the ‘Left’. I think it’s an utterly stupid discussion in its present format that has nothing to do with facts, nothing to do with reality, and everything to do with encouraging Americans to ultimately destroy themselves and each other.

It’s all kneejerk. We’re down to the final chess moves here. People always say that people who always say the world is going to end are just some part of society that is always there – and maybe so – but we’re approaching the point where revolt will be impossible for a long time, until some like… Harry Potter or something is born 1000 years from now and upsets the system.

I don’t accept this.

Quote:
What would you say, ultimately, in the face of all this to the public?

“Meh… this discussion is pointless.”
All right I’ll turn my guns in then. Thanks tinfoil.

or

“Well, you shouldn’t but more to the point, you should look at gun ownership and gun violence in this way…”
Oh, interesting… maybe I’ll check out that article you mentioned.

I’d tell them what I’ve told people here - that the mainstream arguments around gun ownership are bullshit and a waste of everyone’s time, but that I’m not in favour of banning guns because of other reasons (some articulated by yourself and others on this thread). Simple enough, and doesn’t involve lying, making up stuff, glorifying guesswork about history and the present day, or acquiescing to stupidity in the name of reaching out to people.

Quote:
We need to get over seeing the public discussion as intellectually insulting or whatever. You gotta get up in that shit and just roll with it. Have a couple drinks. Get a buzz on and just grin and bear it. We need the public. We also need you.

I’m not interested in dumbing down what I have to say in order to reach more people. If you make that compromise then you just end up using the same means as the people you’re fighting against when they have much more money and infrastructure and are much more practiced and established. I’m happy to have a discussion about gun ownership and why it is important and what Americans should do, but I’m not willing to put up with arguments that I know to be untrue just because I agree with their conclusions.

Otherwise, what’s the point of even talking about it?

(12-31-2012 01:42 PM)Gobbo Wrote:
The plot seems to be going like this:

Take the guns - I don’t think we can disagree they want to do this. They keep throwing shooting after shooting at us. They really want it.

So why? - I think it’s so skyrocket the crime rate with riots and Battlefield Los Angeles type stuff so they can bring in Martial Law.

I disagree that they want to do this, for the reasons I have outlined in detail that no one has countered. Perhaps you should watch less movies and read more factual information.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
01-02-2013, 05:05 PM (This post was last modified: 01-02-2013 05:08 PM by Gobbo.) Post: #23
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Quote:
The social reaction has been ‘they wanna tek ma gurns’, from what I can see. Pretty dim, and not something I feel I can work with.

I think we have to try, though. That is to say: it is the reaction. And they do want to take the guns. I’ll come back to this when I address where or not America is being beyond saving.

Quote:
Whether the logic behind it makes sense or not is irrelevant,

Is it? Why? Because factually not every dictator has banned guns? I don’t really care about that. As long as some dictators have, then the story works. Now that I know the truth I’m obviously not going to lie on purpose but… I guess my point is this:

Do we need to be 100% factual about everything we say to a populace that clearly doesn’t give a fuck about facts? I’m comfortable with the high 90’s.

Quote:
I’m not disagreeing with any of that except for that arguments like ‘Dan’s’ (by which you mean the same tired old gun-fetishists who say the same thing no matter what happens and which Dan lazily and crudely and uncritically repeated for no apparent reason) are even remotely valid.

Those types of arguments needs to be injected into this discussions for the public to hear. Again. And Again. That is to say, the whole gun law issue is fucking absurd in the first place and it can be reduced to that one argument.

Quote:
Rhetorically, they have force. Logically, they are bullshit.
Quote:
Call me idealistic if you must, but I think we can find ways to be both logical and rhetorically forceful at the same time.

This will be the main issue with forming our identity here. Probably the smartest thing XZC ever said to me before he became boring was that I/we need to make all of this entertaining because no one will care otherwise. Alex Jones uses fear and craziness to be successful, we need to find our niche. I don’t claim to know what it is. I would like logic to be heavily involved. When I wrote my article I thought it was fairly indicative of what we were trying to achieve. Kind a creative refusal to dumb ourselves down.

Quote:
All kinds of information from all over the world on, for example, private gun ownership vs. government gun ownership. There is no simple pattern that would sustain even your moderated position, let alone the ‘every dictatorship in history…’ crap that I objected to.

What I’m striving for is to be strategic. It’s not persuasive saying to people in a rhetorical war ‘Well, um, technically there is no pattern…’ If I’m basically trying to mess with their plans, I’m trying to educate people - yes - but with facts that will bring them to my side of the debate.

Quote:
If the government isn’t trying to disarm people then giving up your guns is not acquiescing to their demands.

The government is trying to disarm people. I know you think they can just nuke everyone and like I said, that is certainly true…but they want all the guns. The society they want will have no private gun ownership. I’ll explain this more in a second.

Quote:
I’m not particularly interested in that conversation, save to say the real world does not conform to the fantasies of American conspiracy theorist gun-fetishists.

I feel like you think it’s these hicks who can’t use Google. I’ve seen the stats to back all these arguments. Well it’s basically the same stat anyway: the UK has more violent crime than any other nation except Australia. Also, the UK has more cameras pointed at people than (I think) any other nation on earth. And a culture that revolves around subservience to a family.

Quote:
It’s only because they are really fucking stupid and have no history that they believe it. What’s your excuse?

Like I said… the UK is a fountain of violence. I don’t know what you want me to say, every example I looked at reflected what I wrote. Everything I’ve seen about the UK is ‘worst in Europe’ ‘top 5 most violent nations in the world’ etc. I am wrong here, or… is it the case that there are no guns in the UK, and it’s also really violent?

Quote:
I don’t accept this.

Well, it might not be 1000. And I’m thinking more of an Aeon Flux type thing now.

Quote:
I’m not interested in dumbing down what I have to say in order to reach more people.

There is a difference between dumbing a statement down, and making it universally palpable. Actually… I don’t know if there is.

Quote:
I disagree that they want to do this, for the reasons I have outlined in detail that no one has countered. Perhaps you should watch less movies and read more factual information.

This is maybe something for a new thread, but the gun represents the phallus, and the NWO is all about emasculating males. It’s not something they want anyone to have in the new world. What I’m referring to is a form of power beyond the level of a war playing out, and the logistics of how you could drop a nuke on the public. I’ve said that several times now. This is about the symbolism behind owning a gun, and that is especially true in the US, where it’s even more a part of the culture. That culture has to be destroyed.

You disagree because you cited a few historic examples where dictators haven’t taken guns? Please keep going… I require more. Before we continue you should explain, in full detail, why you believe that this envisioned society they have will be one where people are cruising around with conceal and carry.

I’m actually quite surprised you think this.

Quote:
I think this is extremely one-sided and simplistic. There’s no such thing as ‘the American psyche’. Almost all of the Americans I’ve met have been weak-minded, lazy, nasty idiots. That’s nothing to be proud of or for the rest of the world to emulate.

And your reaction here makes me think you’re going about this the wrong way. There is America, the literal place, where you go there and it’s dirty. But then there is the idea of America. Just here in this couple sentences you’re conflating the idea of the society found in the constitution with what has transpired after 100 years (exactly this 2013) of Britain taking over the fed and co-opting the society into a shitty one.

Logistically, America is already dead, and yes, they could just nuke everyone. Taking over the world is more than that. In a way, the people have to accept it, and be somewhat aware that they are themselves fucking themselves over. It cannot be some military takeover. It has to be through crushing the USA into the physical and social chaos that will give rise to the New World.
“I said I was going to get to your calls but…look.”
Send this user a private message Find all posts by this user Give Reputation to this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
01-07-2013, 01:43 AM Post: #24
BigTom Offline
Anarcho-beardist
Posts: 251
Joined: Dec 2012
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
(01-02-2013 05:05 PM)Gobbo Wrote:
Quote:
Whether the logic behind it makes sense or not is irrelevant,

Is it? Why? Because factually not every dictator has banned guns? I don’t really care about that. As long as some dictators have, then the story works. Now that I know the truth I’m obviously not going to lie on purpose but… I guess my point is this:

Do we need to be 100% factual about everything we say to a populace that clearly doesn’t give a fuck about facts? I’m comfortable with the high 90’s.

Sadly, you don’t have facts in the high 90s. Students in the US are taught in civics class that Hitler banned guns. He actually liberalised the existing laws, with the notable exception of gun ownership for Jews (who most of these same gun-loving, civics-class-quoting Americans think were secretly running Nazi Germany).

While we may not need to be 100% factual, repeating inaccurate bullshit will make us look very, very, very stupid. By all means make the argument that in the US, here and now, the effort to reduce or eliminate private gun ownership is a move towards dictatorship, but don’t extrapolate backwards from that and re-invent history.

Quote:
Quote:
I’m not disagreeing with any of that except for that arguments like ‘Dan’s’ (by which you mean the same tired old gun-fetishists who say the same thing no matter what happens and which Dan lazily and crudely and uncritically repeated for no apparent reason) are even remotely valid.

Those types of arguments needs to be injected into this discussions for the public to hear. Again. And Again. That is to say, the whole gun law issue is fucking absurd in the first place and it can be reduced to that one argument.

This trivialises what you are claiming is an issue of fundamental, if symbolic, importance.

Quote:
Quote:
Call me idealistic if you must, but I think we can find ways to be both logical and rhetorically forceful at the same time.

This will be the main issue with forming our identity here. Probably the smartest thing XZC ever said to me before he became boring was that I/we need to make all of this entertaining because no one will care otherwise. Alex Jones uses fear and craziness to be successful, we need to find our niche. I don’t claim to know what it is. I would like logic to be heavily involved. When I wrote my article I thought it was fairly indicative of what we were trying to achieve. Kind a creative refusal to dumb ourselves down.

And it is a strong article. I am coming round to the feeling that drama, the narrative form, is the best way for me. I am good at coming up with stories and writing them. I do keep coming back to the fact that, despite the modest success of my films, I could do so much more with the material at my disposal. What these disagreements do help with is us coming to terms with that particular problem and try to figure out how to solve it.

Quote:
Quote:
All kinds of information from all over the world on, for example, private gun ownership vs. government gun ownership. There is no simple pattern that would sustain even your moderated position, let alone the ‘every dictatorship in history…’ crap that I objected to.

What I’m striving for is to be strategic. It’s not persuasive saying to people in a rhetorical war ‘Well, um, technically there is no pattern…’ If I’m basically trying to mess with their plans, I’m trying to educate people - yes - but with facts that will bring them to my side of the debate.

And I think that if you’re intentionally going to deploy facts that you know do not tell the whole story that you have to be very careful in what you logically deduce from those facts, lest you accidentally contribute to achieving the opposite to your desired effect.

Quote:
Quote:
If the government isn’t trying to disarm people then giving up your guns is not acquiescing to their demands.

The government is trying to disarm people. I know you think they can just nuke everyone and like I said, that is certainly true…but they want all the guns. The society they want will have no private gun ownership. I’ll explain this more in a second.

I’m not really disputing that their ideal society would be one where the state enjoys a total monopoly over the just use of violence. But I’m also aware that if they do want to destroy the US as a superpower, to sacrifice it as a means of bringing out an even more international framework of government than exists already, then letting the people have their guns and shoot each other en masse with them is a very convenient way of doing it. Reminiscent of the French Revolution, in fact.

Quote:
Quote:
I’m not particularly interested in that conversation, save to say the real world does not conform to the fantasies of American conspiracy theorist gun-fetishists.

I feel like you think it’s these hicks who can’t use Google. I’ve seen the stats to back all these arguments. Well it’s basically the same stat anyway: the UK has more violent crime than any other nation except Australia. Also, the UK has more cameras pointed at people than (I think) any other nation on earth. And a culture that revolves around subservience to a family.

It depends on what you mean by violent crime, and how you interpret the statistics. Curiously, when I looked up that thing about being second only to Australia what first came up was a Daily Mail article. The Daily Mail is basically written to agitate people in useful directions. Their fundamental story is ‘it’s all going to hell in a hand basket’, both in the specific article and in general across their coverage of everything. That is the position they occupy with regards to everything.

The Daily Mail is also the chief newspaper devoted to flattering coverage of the Royal Family. Now, why do you think those two things - massive obsession with portraying Britain as falling apart and relentless promotion of the Royals - would go together? I’m sure you already know without me having to articulate it.

Now, the statistics are a decade out of date but the article says:
Quote:
According to the figures released yesterday, 3.6 per cent of the population of England and Wales were victims of violent crime in 1999 - second only to Australia, where the figure was 4.1 per cent.

Scotland had a slightly lower rate of violence, at 3.4 per cent.

In the U.S., only 2 per cent of the population suffered an assault or robbery.

There is no nuance in these stats, it’s simply a percentage of the population who suffered from a specific group of crimes. If, for example, the assaults in Scotland were more savage than those in England then these stats wouldn’t reflect that. Nor would your repeating of them.

Now, there is a problem in this country with young people getting very drunk and getting into fights. It happens in every reasonable sized town and city on every weekend. There are many shows devoted to glamourising this, and in particular glamourising the police response to this whereby the offending parties are treated with total contempt. Obviously they pick the dumbest, drunkest, most noisy examples to put in the broadcast shows. Basically the same thing as the Daily Mail coverage.

As to the CCTV - the study that gets most widely quoted in the sources of news that I know you read is immensely flawed. It took a sample from a busy street in London (where there is fuckloads of CCTV) and assumed the rest of the country was the same, when it really isn’t. My normal day does not include being captured by CCTV, with the possible exception of the privately-owned CCTV in certain shops which I don’t find at all unreasonable. It’s their shop, their stock, if they want to point a camera at it then they can, just as if I want to wear a hat and deliberately take a route through the shop that means I won’t be recognisable then I can.

Quote:
Quote:
It’s only because they are really fucking stupid and have no history that they believe it. What’s your excuse?

Like I said… the UK is a fountain of violence. I don’t know what you want me to say, every example I looked at reflected what I wrote. Everything I’ve seen about the UK is ‘worst in Europe’ ‘top 5 most violent nations in the world’ etc. I am wrong here, or… is it the case that there are no guns in the UK, and it’s also really violent?

It isn’t really violent. Seriously violent crimes are relatively uncommon, though the Daily Mail makes sure to report on as many as possible in as lurid detail as possible. There is a lot of petty drunken fighting. It has nothing to do with banning guns. This is what I mean about having to be careful about what you deduce from partial readings of statistics.

Quote:
Quote:
I disagree that they want to do this, for the reasons I have outlined in detail that no one has countered. Perhaps you should watch less movies and read more factual information.

This is maybe something for a new thread, but the gun represents the phallus, and the NWO is all about emasculating males. It’s not something they want anyone to have in the new world. What I’m referring to is a form of power beyond the level of a war playing out, and the logistics of how you could drop a nuke on the public. I’ve said that several times now. This is about the symbolism behind owning a gun, and that is especially true in the US, where it’s even more a part of the culture. That culture has to be destroyed.

You disagree because you cited a few historic examples where dictators haven’t taken guns? Please keep going… I require more. Before we continue you should explain, in full detail, why you believe that this envisioned society they have will be one where people are cruising around with conceal and carry.

Look at the European monarchies. Every one a dictatorship in the modern sense of the word, and hardly any of them banned guns. It may be a big symbolic issue in the here and now in the US, but that doesn’t mean it was always the same everywhere else, or even most of the time in most other places. I’ve given you examples. Now you give me some examples of how governments have banned gun ownership as a means of promoting, establishing or enhancing dictatorship.

There’s a big distinction to make between their ideal society and their method for getting there. In looking at what they are trying to do in the here and now I look at their actual behaviour, and that tells me they want US citizens to have guns. My guess is that their aim is to induce some kind of violent anarchy that will reduce the population, and thus excuse a massive rearrangement of America’s place in the order of things.

Quote:
Quote:
I think this is extremely one-sided and simplistic. There’s no such thing as ‘the American psyche’. Almost all of the Americans I’ve met have been weak-minded, lazy, nasty idiots. That’s nothing to be proud of or for the rest of the world to emulate.

And your reaction here makes me think you’re going about this the wrong way. There is America, the literal place, where you go there and it’s dirty. But then there is the idea of America. Just here in this couple sentences you’re conflating the idea of the society found in the constitution with what has transpired after 100 years (exactly this 2013) of Britain taking over the fed and co-opting the society into a shitty one.

Britain didn’t take over the Fed. That’s just another simplified myth of the lazy ‘alternative media’.

Quote:
Logistically, America is already dead, and yes, they could just nuke everyone. Taking over the world is more than that. In a way, the people have to accept it, and be somewhat aware that they are themselves fucking themselves over. It cannot be some military takeover. It has to be through crushing the USA into the physical and social chaos that will give rise to the New World.

And people owning guns is a vital part of that chaos. If they didn’t, then how do you get the blood in front of the cameras that shocks people in accepting a more formal dictatorship? What better excuse to ban guns in one fell swoop than widespread shootings? That’s the revolutionary method. The incremental method would be loads of small shootings and steady passing of legislation to limit gun ownership. Indeed, Bush II passed legislation making it easier to get guns, but increasing the profiling of those who were buying them. That could be used as part of either the incremental or the revolutionary strategy.
Send this user an email Send this user a private message Visit this user’s website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply Quote this post Report this post to a moderator
01-13-2013, 07:30 AM Post: #25
Gobbo Offline
.:
Posts: 406
Joined: Nov 2012
Reputation: 6
RE: More Guns Equals Less Deaths.
Quote:
This trivialities what you are claiming is an issue of fundamental, if symbolic, importance.

Yes. Fair enough. I agree that for our purposes we should be as intellectually rigorous as possible, but I’m saying part of our purpose is dissecting what needs to be said to the general population of our friends, and family, etc. I don’t come at them with the complex stuff. Sometimes in simplification obviously there is some minor distortion that occurs.

Quote:
The Daily Mail
Cameras

Look I get your point about sourcing, most of the info I’m basing my opinions on come from the Harvard article I cited in the article. We don’t need to focus on the UK specifically.

Quote:
Now you give me some examples of how governments have banned gun ownership as a means of promoting, establishing or enhancing dictatorship.

That isn’t my point though. My point is that they are clearly trying to do that now. If you do not see that trend in the media then I find that kind of crazy.

Either that, or something else is going on. I think I’m going to start a new thread.