Total posts: 12,563
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Society only works if it is managed
No, society only works if people own their bodies, and as we can see, current societies dont have that, thus they dont work very well.
All current societies are failed societies, since they are built on the premise of slavery being okay.
You wouldnt want for anyone to manage your life for you, so I dont see why pay government to violate other people's bodies.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
I'm not sure how environmentalists, teachers, and feminists are going to defend against nukes.
Lol they probably wont. I am more on the side of Tao anarchy, but in case of defense, every individual can defend himself or they can do it as a group as long as enemy isnt too strong. Sure, it might not work, but if it does, anarchy is upheld and if it does not, you just get government again, so its not really possible to make it worse than it is now. Besides, Tao anarchy, or anarchy in general, is not a system meant for war. It spreads through ideas, not violence. It is supposed to deter attackers by having armed population, abolish governments through disobedience to them, and install anarchy by making each or most of individuals into anarchs. So if most people in the world become anarchs, it would be difficult if not impossible for minority of oppressors to defeat them. But every additional anarch in the world brings benefits to the world.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Then why don’t you commit suicide and end your pain?
Because I dont want to?
The reason is because deep down, you DO care about being alive.
If I cared about being alive that much to make it my number one priority, then I would be vegan or vegetarian, and I wouldnt eat junk food. And of course, I wouldnt argue for map.
Its not "do everything to stay alive or commit suicide".
Thats just a false dichotomy.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
DART is not a free speech absolutist site.
It has lots of free speech.
I see people arguing all kinds of views.
I got banned before for arguing for map, but maybe now something changed so I dont get banned anymore. I dont know.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
I guess society can murder me for my speech, but its not like I care that much about if I live or die. All humans die sooner or later.
Delaying death by living a life you dont want to live isnt exactly a benefit.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
i'm not sure what the "problem" is
Society imposed a rule that boys have short hair and girls long hair.
Thats why most parents act like boys need to have short hair and they give them such hair cuts.
Its mostly a nonsense rule, but I guess its fun when some boy violates it and grows his hair long.
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Freedom of speech lets me debate and argue for map.
Now, if society doesnt believe in freedom of speech, thats more of a problem in them, not in me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Your pedophille mind is inferior and you should change it so it's more like a sane and normal person.
Its not pedophile.
Its map (minor attracted person).
Created:
Posted in:
I have been thinking about what system is the best, and I am certain its anarchy.
From basics, doing whatever you want with your body is the most desirable state of things you can possibly have while not attacking others.
You dont want the government to be vaccinating you against your will, or telling you what you are allowed to say.
Basically, almost everyone wants to own their own body.
The only difference between an anarch and someone else is that anarch only claims ownership of his own body, where others feel the need to own other people as well.
Thus, government in its current form violates person's body in several ways:
1. Through laws which force vaccinations and circumcision, as well as forced education, and other forms of body violation, as well as limiting free speech and limiting what person can do with their own property, buisness and body.
2. Through taxes which forcefully take from those who work and gives it to those who dont, thus diminishing wealth of those who are taxed.
3. Through copyright - person cannot use some idea or make a copy of a product simply because someone claims "intellectual ownership".
4. Through element of force - government can use force against you if you do anything government claims to be illegal, and government determines what is illegal.
5. Through teaching of force - government sets the example that force is okay, thus it openly says "force is okay", therefore educating people to use even more force.
6. Through intervention in personal life - government does many interventions in people's personal lives, thus controlling personal lives, but government also teaches that its okay to control other people's lives and sets an example for violators to follow.
All governments are failures simply because they start from a false premise.
Each government starts from the premise that it can own other people's bodies. That is the premise of every government. Thus, every government is essentially slavery.
Yet for person to live a life as he wants, he must own his own body.
So government's premise is in complete contradiction with the condition for person to live a life as he wants.
Clearly, government cannot exist without violating people's bodies and claiming ownership of other person's body.
Every anarch can exist without claiming ownership of someone else's body.
In fact, people dont become anarchs because of selfish purposes, but rather the very basis of anarchy is built on refusing to own other people's bodies.
Anarch merely respects that which government doesnt: your absolute ownership of your own body.
Anarch can exist without violating other person's body, since that is the premise of anarchy.
Government cannot exist without violating other person's body, since its very premise claims right to do so.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
Some people prefer to die rather than give up all their land.
Created:
Posted in:
"a separate seat for one person, typically with a back and four legs"
Created:
Posted in:
So then, here's a serious proposal.#1. Evacuation of Hamas from the Gaza Strip, and total Israeli occupation
Good luck getting Hamas to agree to your serious proposal.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Marxists automatically associate victim hood with skin color
I guess in your world, Ukraine is brown.
Created:
Mandatory military service?
In a country based on "freedom"?
Lol
Created:
-->
@TheUnderdog
So why a bunch of left wingers are cheering on hyper conservative Palestine because the people there are being genocided by a leftist government I don't understand.
Its mostly due to how media presents it. When media shows videos of children being bombed, it probably triggers some feelings on the left and the left reacts.
But looking at "team", yeah Israel is much closer to being left wing than Paestine is.
Created:
Posted in:
I would have moral issues with that. I dont believe killing people is right, even if it saves more people. Kinda like how I dont believe that if 20 people end up on an island with no food, that 19 gets to kill and eat 1 because it saves their lives. Often times, death is preferable to living by violating someone. Same way, I dont believe that women should be in forced marriages, even if those increase birth rates thus save greater number of future generations and enable them to live. I also dont believe person in great pain should be forced to live just because it saves his life.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Because that’s like forcing someone to watch only fans women.
I mean, we are all forced to watch people and things when we go outside. The element of force or consent is very much irrelevant in this example.
I want to control where they do sex. So consensual sex in your bedroom if you want; don’t force others to have to deal with it.
What if they have sex outside, but on the land they own, and you happen to see it? Will your eyes be offended then?
Besides, why does it matter where a person is if he is naked. Its his body. Why do you get to control it? You have a choice to look away, and public space is for everyone equally, so if he can tolerate your clothes, then you can tolerate his nudity.
Kids are present and they should not be forced to see your dick.
Well, are people allowed to be naked on their own property? Because anyone can still see you naked even if you are on your property. If a person is naked or has clothes on, people are forced to see him in either case. So why does "force" exactly matter when it comes to seeing people? Besides, people can look away, so not really forced to stare at a naked person.
There are 2 types of dic pics; those that don’t get spread (I’ve taken several dic pics that I’ve never sent to anybody) and those that get sent to people without their express permission. The first is totally fine; the 2nd is sexual harassment.
People take photos of people in public all the time, especially news reporters. Being in public space pretty much means someone will take a photo of you.
Also, you are committing "is=should" fallacy.
I know it would be illegal in most countries to walk around naked. This is more about should it be illegal, but its also about does it violate body rights.
I can’t think of any time when society forces kids to have their eyes open
In school, you pretty much have to have eyes open to learn how to write. Otherwise, you get hit. Well, they used to hit kids when I was going to school. I dont know what they do now. Besides, if your position is that kids cant consent, then whatever they see, they see non-consensually.
(except for maybe don’t snooze in class, which kids need to learn concepts). Just like it’s not good to snooze in work (which school is prep for). School is preparation for work. You are a worker droid, and worker droids made the iPhone possible. Short term pain brings long term advancement in our society
I am not a bee nor a slave. Unless I dont own my body?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
Words and consequences they cause.
USA protects free speech tho.
Well, at least it claims it does.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
If you go outside without expecting to see anyone, then how come you can be outside and others can't be?
Because you set the standard that if you dont consent to see something, it shouldnt be there.
So if you get to be outside and be seen by me without my consent, why cant my dick do the same?
Being naked in public vs wearing clothes in public aren't equal; clothes are designed to keep us warm
How does my clothes keep you warm? And why do you even have a problem with if I am not warm? What if its normal temperature outside, so I am comfortable?
and (in extreme situations) so people aren't having sex with whomever due to clothes not being there.
Really? Now you even want to control who has sex? But sex in public can still be banned even if clothes are not used as well. But you can wear clothes. Like, its not like clothes should be banned.
You want to see naked people? Then go to PornHub. The rest of us want to see only clothed people.
Appeal to popularity = fallacy
Also, same logic applies to you. If you want to see clothes, you can just google clothes.
You can close your eyes if you want too.
Same applies to you, but as a kid, if I closed my eyes, people would force me to open them.
So don't benefit off of it now.
Why not? It exists now, and I never even claimed to be a good person.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Or I can just leave the house while expecting to not see any dicks.
But I can say too "I can just leave the house while expecting not to see anyone" or "I can just leave the house while expecting not to see anyone with clothes on".
So why is it okay for you to dictate what you will see and prevent other people from doing something just because you would see it, but I dont have same right?
Plus, I was forced to keep my eyes open as a kid, so I was forced to see other people. A terrible violation.
But if we had the, "kids shouldn't be forced to go to school" policy, then technology doesn't exist to the extent it does now.
Then I wouldnt use technology which wouldnt exist.
It wouldn't, but the law still should exist.
I guess it should exist, but I dont see how it would benefit me. Like, unless they come up with some technology to restore dick to the state it would be at if not circumcised, I am pretty much stuck with a circumcised dick, and circumcision is still legal, which means most people still dont respect body rights.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
I find little that has to do with rainbows flags "fun".
There is no I in we.
You said "our support".
Fag youtubers have my support, as they are fun.
And if a YouTuber were genuinely entertaining while they also happened to be gay, then they'd be no less entertaining if they were straight.
I can send you some links to prove you wrong.
Was that supposed to be funny?
Well, I cant judge my own jokes. Other people do that. But yeah, I dont have much respect for veterans who attacked other countries.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
So have public masturbators and people who openly defecate in front of children. What of it?
Sorry, but you previously mentioned something like
"Hardships which people endure make them deserve our support"
So I gave an example of hardships endured by fags.
And now you run away from your own logic while comparing gay people to sex offenders, which I dont think is same, but I guess you do.
Point is, there are norms about how to behave, whether those norms are rationally justified or not. And we know that the norms of the Western world contributed to a stable, civilized society which gradually lifted itself out of extreme poverty (they invented the technologies and institutions to do so without outside help), so to say they're unjustified in this case is questionable.
Correlation for causation. USA had child marriages legal when it won the civil war. So did it win because of child marriages?
You are committing a classical fallacy of "everything which existed at the time contributed to this specific outcome", but thats a poor logic since gay people existed at the time too.
But anyhow, it was always within the power of "gay people" (and nobody was making that a core part of their identity until like 30-40 years ago) to find a member of the opposite sex they found reasonably attractive and shack up with them. And if perchance they were stuck in an arranged marriage with somebody they didn't like, then that was also true of countless straight people at the same time so they weren't special then either.
Sorry, I was talking about 1000 years of oppression, not last 40 years.
But yeah, even 40 years ago, parents used to kick out gay kids from their homes making them homeless, and before that it was punishable by prison and before even by death.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
If someone wants to cut themselves and they are a consenting adult, then that is their choice.
But plenty of people complain about when someone cuts himself. So I guess they dont believe in body rights.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
If you believe that, then don’t go to public places.
Same logic can apply to people's dicks. If you dont want to see people's dicks, dont leave your house. Simple.
Then done use it. Get off of DART.
I can use technology even if it is bad.
The law would protect future infants
So it wouldnt help me unless I am born again.
Created:
Posted in:
Yeah, 77 on bad diet isnt that far from 80.
Plus, Trump is fat, which means he is more likely to have health issues.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Also, I forgot to mention vaccines and those who do self harm. People are very upset when someone practices self harm, unless its smoking. Then its cool. But if person cuts himself, for some reason people are upset about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
I should not be forced to see someone’s dick. My consent matters.
You dont have to look.
Besides, I could say "I shouldnt be forced to see anyone.".
Does that mean anyone I see violates my consent?
Without forced education, technology doesn’t exist
I am not sure about that, but yeah I guess technology is bad then.
Circumsision to infants should be illegal.
Kinda late now. I am already circumcised. Making it illegal now wont uncircumcise me.
Nobody has had 1000 years of oppression because nobody has been alive for 1000 years.
Okay, then 70 years of oppression with 1000 years of group oppression (groups can live longer than people).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
The LGBT community has done nothing virtuous to earn our support
Sure they have. They endured 1000 years of your oppression and still remained cool about it.
Plus, they create fun content on YouTube. Thats better than anything veterans have done.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
In what context?
I could think of many, from circumcision to forced education. You cant even go outside naked because people think it offends their eyes.
Created:
Posted in:
There are people in the world who think that my body doesnt belong to me, but every time I ask them "who does it belong to?", I dont get an answer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I was well informed of the lack of job prospect for a philosophy major the first time I voiced such interest to my parents back in 6th grade.
I wouldnt pick school based on jobs it can give.
I picked a school based on the job it could give me, instead of the one I wanted, because my parents convinced me that the one I wanted wont give me a job.
Now I do a job which is completely irrelevant to the school I went to, which I could have had even if I didnt go to school, and I missed to get education which actually interested me.
Of course, the school which was supposed to "give me a job" ended up being terribly boring, causing me to fail completely at school and when I finished school with minimal success and lowest possible grades which still let you pass, I didnt have knowledge nor interest to do any of the jobs the school actually "educated" me for.
So if you want to go to school for a certain job, first ask yourself if you will have the knowledge and interest to do that job for the rest of your life.
My answer to both was no, but sadly, I didnt think about it well enough when I started school, and I was terribly misinformed by my own parents about what the school actually teaches. By the time I realized, years already passed and it was impossible for me to switch to other school.
I am not giving you advice. I dont know your situation. But lets just say that some people who dream of specific jobs while students dont get to do those jobs. My entire education was literally completely irrelevant to the job I do.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Russia has a population of about 144 million
And Ukraine?
Created:
-->
@Double_R
If you don’t want to die in a car crash, don’t get into a car.
Thats a really good response. We will see what Mall has to say about that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
all these penalties and punishments are a way of silencing these individuals speech
I am pretty sure that murderers are the ones who started silencing free speech first.
Like, it would be absurd to say that if you are pro free speech, that you are to tolerate a murderer who destroys free speech.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Owen_T
What about the whole dictatorship thing?
Dictatorship is bad, yeah.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
Suppose you're a soldier with an artillery piece and a million shells, and you're up against a hundred soldiers (each with an artillery piece) and 10 shells each. You outnumber them 1000-1 in number of shells. Does that mean you'll beat a hundred men?
I dont know why are you making a completely irrelevant example. Ukraine doesnt outnumber Russia 100 to 1. Its the Russia which outnumbers Ukraine. And yes, artillery and rockets are important and even crucial for modern war.
All Ukraine needs is enough shells to cover the battlefield activities of each piece
Sadly, the number of shells and rockets needed is such that more is always better, since it allows more intensive attacks. Besides, neither side has enough to strike entire battlefield every day, so the one with more can naturally strike more.
What matters are the big guns themselves and the number of men adequately trained to fire them.
Big guns? A rocket is pretty much the biggest gun there is, and artillery penetrates defenses more easily than anything else.
If Russian built, say, 2,000 more guns like this, it would either need to redirect 10,000-16,000 of its existing soldiers from other wartime roles or draft 10,000-16,000 more civilians.
Russia has millions of soldiers. 10,000 is less than 1%. Besides, tanks and combat vehicles arent as good as artillery, due to much shorter range and thus more vunerability.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
Hate speech is free speech.
All speech is included in free speech.
Of course, most people dont like freedom of speech, which is why we even have the idea of "hate speech" spreading everywhere.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
Maybe like $200-$300 billion a year if that much.
Thats over 1000$ per every employed American, so naturally, having over 2000$ less per year per family reflects in wages and prices, adds to difficulty.
He was unlucky enough to be president in the year when the literal premise of a dimestore sci-fi novel about a mutant virus spreading across the globe and killing millions became reality
I am pretty sure that saying things like "You dont have to wear a mask, I dont" and not enforcing rules which many other countries enforced about distancing and some other also didnt help his case.
Lets just say that with 200,000 dead Americans from covid, and highest mortality rate, we can say that he disappointed Americans and he obviously handles crisis badly. I am not saying that I disagree with Trump about masks and rules. But American people disagreed with him.
Russia will lose the war because the US is a superpower with the support of an equally impressive military alliance
Sadly, Russia and its allies are outproducing US and its allies in terms of artillery and rockets, and once Ukraine runs out of those, it wont be fun.
By increasing military production, US faces greater inflation since more money and workforce goes to military and not civilian production.
Also, US trade debt which both presidents failed to solve will cause many problems in future.
Created:
Posted in:
Fighting war against Russia isnt free, as many would like to think.
Besides, Trump was voted out because he messed up a country.
If it was so great during Trump, Trump would still be president.
Still, this dichotomy between Biden and Trump is nonsense.
If Trump and Biden are the best America has, then I dont really see how will Russia lose the war.
Created:
-->
@Mall
If you don't want children, don't have sex
False logic, since if both "having sex" and "not having children" are goals, the only way to realize both is to have sex with protection and abort if you get pregnant.
Further, people who dont have sex live shorter and are less happy.
So, while abortion may be somewhat immoral, not having sex is not a solution, and telling people not to have sex is nonsense which never worked.
Also, really? Telling people not to have sex?
No sex = no child
Abortion = no child
The only possible difference is that abortion is an action, not a lack of action.
But I dont see how does "no sex" benefit anyone in the equation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
I believe what you're talking about has been proven to be fiction
Really? Did you search the entire universe and didnt find Slifer the Sky Dragon?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mall
until the scripture can be proven false
Dont forget Slifer the Sky Dragon. Atheists have burden of proof to prove Slifer the Sky Dragon isnt true God.
Good luck disproving 3000 Gods, atheists!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Wankers
Yes, religious people are wankers.
Bible wankers.
Quran wankers.
ALL WANKERS!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheUnderdog
@ADreamOfLiberty
Free speech is the basis for a debate.
Not believing in free speech means not believing in debating either.
Its absurd to want to have a debate while at the same time not even allowing your opponent to talk.
Thus, anyone who wants to debate, must logically support free speech.
If someone stops the other person from talking, then there is no debate nor there can be.
Created: