Total posts: 4,140
Fear and paranoia bring a false sense of entitlement
Pretend we're persecuted, love the sound or our own voice
Media fear-mongering is just a paper tiger
Because don't you know that misery is oftentimes a choice?
Caught up in our drama, we pretend that we have problems
While across the world our brothers are beheaded in the streets
Malcontents and dissonance uncover our indifference
Wolf's cry obsolete
Theocracy - Paper Tiger
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
All I am saying is that we should not go into Ukraine and fight when I and most conservatives probably have more in common with Russians as opposed to the people running our current government.
As a conservative, I have much more in common with Joe Biden than with Vladimir Putin. To be clear, I don't have much in common with Biden. But for all his flaws - and he has many - Biden believes in democracy and doesn't believe in unprovoked invasions. Putin actively suppresses democracy and invades without provocation. That is entirely antithetical to my values.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Geez, where do we even begin with this one. For starters, they think I am a domestic terrorist
Are you one of the 12 Oath Keepers charged with seditious conspiracy? If not, then this is nothing more than partisan hyperbole. That one kooky school board in Virginia and a few blue checks on Twitter might call you a domestic terrorist, but the federal government wouldn't.
I don't care about liberty because it's an empty word with virtually no meaning anymore. What is "liberty" in the American sense? Being "free", how on earth are we free?
This is a nonargument. Things don't lose their value because the words used to describe them lose their meaning. Would the concept of order cease to be important if the word "order" lost its meaning? No. The same is true of liberty. Liberty - the concept, not the word - doesn't lose its luster because the word loses its meaning. And if we are not truly free, then pursuing freedom becomes more important, not less.
I am a White American. I care about White Americans.
Do you care about black Americans? Hispanic? Asian? Why should a person's immutable characteristics limit who they care about?
I have no interest in centuries old slavic conflicts. It is a shame that Ukraine is being invaded and people are dying, I get that 100%.
At least you admit it's a shame. That's something. But what starts in Europe seldom stays there. If we only care about ourselves, we may soon find ourselves alone. Where will we be then?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
The same government that hates my guts getting humiliated?? Couldnt be a bad thing
I don't see how the US government hates you (or anyone other than itself, really), but at least you're honest.
Order>Liberty
I disagree, but even if that were the case, there is a significant difference between believing that order is more important than liberty and simply not caring about liberty.
Regarding caring about Russia:
It is quite possible that the whole Russian-Ukraine war will finish without directly impacting the lives of those who don't live in either country. So why care? Because it's the right thing to do. Murder is wrong. Unprovoked invasion is murder on a grand scale. It's true that there is little that you and I can do about it. However, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't care. It is often tempting to sacrifice our principles to our self-interest, but if we do, we will find ourselves on a dangerous path. We may not see it at first, but we won't like where we end up.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
why? America getting humiliated on the world stage is good for me, my family, and my people. Why do you want me to care about Russia?
I have a question to ask about this, and I promise that I am being sincere here. I'm not being snarky or sarcastic.
You say that America getting humiliated is good for you. Are you anti-American?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Oh for sure. I am not interested in liberty
That explains a lot.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@thett3
I don't think anyone knows how well Ukraine is fighting back. It's always hard to get good information about a war while it is going on, especially at the beginning. Unless something major happens, like Kyiv falling or Russia withdrawing, we probably won't know much for at least a few days, likely longer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
I'm not sure that Ukraine 'isn't a threat to Russia,Certainly it's closeness, ties to other nations makes it a potential threat to Russia, I'd figure,
Just because Ukraine is close to Russia and has ties with other nations doesn't make it a threat. By that logic, every country is a threat to its neighbors.
Possible it has strategic resources, that benefit Russia, if claimed.
Yes, Ukraine has resources. "I want your resources" is a genuine motivation - for a thief.
It's the mere 'existence of others, you see,Competitors, equal, greater, or potential threats, within arms reach even.From the view of a 'leader, as I see it,Conflict is now inevitable.
Yes, but it is only inevitable because of people like Putin. Death is also inevitable. So is plague, famine, and natural disaster. Just because something is inevitable doesn't make it good or right.
Maybe it's too many games of Civilization,But the map has a way of sorting out into bigger factions,I always preferred playing, where I'd only attack if attacked, since the AI 'would eventually attack,But other times they'd attack late, only after they'd eaten others up.
Civilization isn't reality. If it were, I would make Putin look like a tree-hugging pacifist hippy. Maps do often get sorted out into bigger factions. But again, being inevitable doesn't make it right.
The point I'm trying to make though, is that from my view, all countries survival 'are in question,But it's highly likely my view is warped,So I'm not 'certain on the idea.
That's a very general statement that doesn't really apply here. Yes, in an abstract, overarching sense, all countries' survival are in question. They rise, they fall, they rise again. However, barring the occasional unexpected disaster, they are not in constant danger of rising or falling. Russia is in no danger of falling because of Ukraine.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
It 'sounds, though I am unsure, that Crimea, wants to be part of Russia,Though that was in 2014.
I don't really trust the results of referendums or polls conducted in areas dominated by Putin's thugs. However, Crimea is beside the point. Russia already controls Crimea, and they are now invading the rest of Ukraine. Their stated motives are the denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine. Denazification is beyond absurd. Demilitarization is also ridiculous. Ukraine does have a decent military, but they aren't threatening anyone with it, least of all Russia.
Justification. . .I'm not sure I can call it conventionally good,But I 'can understand conquest for self survival,Mastery of one's surroundings, that one's tribe does not falter.It's a reasonable justification, though it may not match up to one's 'morals.
Conquest for self-survival is only a valid motive if a country's survival is actually being threatened. There is absolutely no one threatening Russia's survival, especially not Ukraine. Some of Putin's parrots claim that NATO is a threat to Russia, but that is baseless propaganda. NATO is a purely defensive alliance; no one believes they are going to invade Russia. Furthermore, they are only an economic threat to Russia when Russia is attacking its neighbors. The one and only thing that Putin has to do to neutralize the threat of NATO is to not invade other countries.
I understand that you're trying to be fair and balanced here, but Putin has no justification for what he's doing. Ukraine is a threat to exactly nobody. There is no cause to invade them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Agreed. There is no justification for supporting Russia in this situation.
Created:
Posted in:
Well, Putin has finally done it. He is invading a sovereign nation for no reason other than greed and conquest. He is a villain of history. Anyone who says "But America has done bad things too" is completely missing the point. Invading foreign countries without provocation is wrong, no matter who does it. There are no moral equivalencies or equivocations. What Putin has done is evil. No ifs, buts, or whataboutisms. Unprovoked* invasions are evil. Period.
*And no, NATO expanding is NOT a provocation. Defensive alliances are only a threat to an aggressor.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Incel-chud
I don't think I've met you before.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
More of a visit than a return. Good to see you though!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Happened to log on and see this. Congrats, man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Good to see you too. I've been hanging around for a few weeks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
It does say hero. I understood it in the sense that it was a known hero in the land rather than the hero of the poem.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
@Theweakeredge
Also, what theweakeredge said.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Usually, the knight saves the damsel, rather than the damsel saving the knight. I have no issues with either format, but the knight saving the damsel is so common it's cliche and harder to make interesting. But just give Hollywood 20 more years to make more female empowerment movies so both formats will be equally cliche. (Not that I have a problem with heroines. I just think it would be better for the pendulum to be close to the middle rather than swinging to the opposite extreme.)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
That was very entertaining and well done, as always. Thanks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Accurate in many respects. The self-doubt and paranoia are exaggerated, but I do have them. I'm not a sad individual, although I can be very passive and neutral. I do tend to quit things; I've started many more things than I've finished. However, if I'm really dedicated to something, I'll stick to it, or at least come back to it frequently.
I do think I have at least a little talent for writing. However, I'm a perfectionist, so I don't really enjoy writing because I'm always trying to get it perfect. That makes it really hard for me to write anything creative. The Bard was the big exception to that. I genuinely enjoyed writing that. I may get back to it someday.
- Observant of others, his knowledge of other users could be very great for all we know.
Uhh...guilty as charged. (Nothing remotely doxxing, of course.)
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
This sort of thing is always entertaining. Go ahead. I'd prefer a non-anime character, if possible, since I don't watch anime and am unfamiliar with the characters.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
That already exists. It's called the moderation log.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Thanks for the detailed answer! It's really encouraging to hear.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
@Sum1hugme
I'm curious about that as well. What led you to this decision?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@MisterChris
Your recent posts on the religion forum were making me wonder about that. Glad to hear it.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
That was pretty interesting. Thanks.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Oh lol ya I put that as a joke
I knew it was a joke. It's just a joke that I would have expected an atheist to make, not a Hindu.
You probably thought I was white you racist
Erm, no, definitely not, not at all...whatever gave you that idea?
On an unrelated note, it's mighty hot in here, yes sirree, yes it is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Our favorite knight has returned. God bless
I'm just visiting, but thanks.
I knew Pie was Hindu even before I knew him. I recall him telling me about an Indian dish he made for DARTvivor and also knew he said once he was vegetarian and looking at the philosophies of Hinduism, the dots lined up
A triumph of deduction, Detective Supa. Well done.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
@Rational-Empiricist
I'm pretty surprised at that as well. Never would have guessed it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
Probably because your profile says pastafarianism?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
Indeed you are. I'm a knight with internet access, obviously.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
I don't give out my username because I didn't really know what I was doing at the time and it was a bit embarrassing, looking back on it. Of course, I was only there for ten days (it didn't take long to realize it was dead), so no one would recognize it anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
Your guess isn't nearly as entertaining as Wylted's. In the DARTvivor S2 game, he suggested that I might be Mike, our favorite Russian programmer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
Fair enough. You seem like a high school debater. From Texas.
How interesting.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
While I'm not at all offended by your question, I try to avoid answering questions that reveal much about my personal life.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
I've always liked surveys, so I'll have a go.
Politics:
1. Generally, how do you identify politically?
Conservative.
2. Given the following 6 political identities, which do you most closely relate to? (Anarchist, Liberal, Centrist, Libertarian, Conservative, Authoratarian)
Conservatism, though I often feel like a centrist because I opposed Trump.
3. If you were to choose 4 political identities as the most common - which four would they be?
In America: Liberal, Centrist, Libertarian, Conservative. Worldwide: Liberal, Centrist, Conservative, Authoratarian
4. If you were to briefly describe your general political identity - how would you?
Economically, I'm a free-market capitalist. Socially, my values are most strongly influenced by Christianity and libertarianism.
5. If you were to briefly describe your closest-relative political identity - how would you?
Fairly similar to mine.
6. If you were to briefly describe the political identity which is directly opposed to yours - how would you?
Communism, because it promotes authoritarianism, state-controlled economy, and frequently conquest, all of which are antithetical to my values.
7. If you were to list the positions most integral to your political identity - what would they be? (listed from least to most important)
Limited government. free-market capitalism, pro-freedom of religion and speech, pro-life.
8. If you were to list the top 4 positions which you most agree with, what four would they be?
Aside from limiting me to four options, this seems really similar to the previous question.
9. Do you consider your political identity widely represented in your respective government?
It has some representation, but it's been gradually decreasing, especially since Trump took over the Republican Party.
10. What questions, if any, would you add to this section of the survey?
I'll answer my own questions, since it seems silly to propose them without answering them.
Are you generally in favor of legal immigration?
Absolutely. I'd be fine with increasing it. I also support increasing the number of refugees America accepts.
Are you in favor of allowing illegal immigrants to stay in the country?
No.
Social:
1. What do you believe to be the biggest social problem of today's era?
The cultural acceptance of abortion and the increasing acceptance of physician-assisted suicide. Pretending that death isn't really death or that suicide of any form is okay is not going to end well.
2. How do you think this problem could be solved generally?
I don't see much hope that it will be solved, to be honest. If it can be solved, then it will have to happen from the bottom up. Changing laws won't change minds.
3. What do you think of these sexual/gender identities; Homosexual, Bisexual, Transgender, or Asexual?
I'll answer this in two parts. I'll start with my opinions of the identities, then of the people identify as such.
Homosexual and Bisexual: I don't think that there's anything immoral about feeling attracted to people of the same sex. People can't really control what they're attracted to. However, that doesn't make acting on those desires right. I do think that sexual acts between people of the same sex is immoral.
Transgender: Gender dysphoria is a real thing. However, I think that the transgender movement is proposing the wrong solution. Irreversible surgery that sterilizes people is not helpful. Telling people that their feelings overrule their biology is exceptionally misguided.
Asexual: Frankly, I don't see what could be wrong about not having sexual desires.
Regarding the people who identify as such, I don't think they are in any way inferior to me. They're broken people in a broken world, same as me. You can call me a bigot or homophobic or transphobic or whatever you like for my views on this issue. However, if I am a bigot, I must be a strange bigot indeed, because I don't hate or fear any of these people. Just because I think that something is immoral doesn't mean that I'm bigoted against people who do that thing. If it did, I would be bigoted against everyone, myself included.
4. What do you think of cultural labels such as "cultural marxists" or "TERFs"? (though not limited to those labels specifically)
I suppose they can communicate how people think or behave regarding an issue. However, they often tend to be derogatory, so I'm not a big fan of them.
5. Which, if any, circumstances do you believe justifies abortion?
It's only justified if the mother's life is in danger.
6. What do you believe to be the ideal home environment?
Two parents, neither of whom are abusive and both of whom are striving to do their best to raise their children.
7. What do you believe to be the most important value to instill in young individuals?
A love for God, although that's something that I would not want to be taught by a public school. If you're looking for a non-religious answer, probably self-discipline. It's hard to live up to your full potential without that.
8. What do you think of cultural movements such as BLM or Feminism?
Those two in particular? Their stated goals of racial and gender equality are commendable. However, I think that BLM and the current wave of feminism do an extremely poor job of advancing those goals. An argument could be made that they're actually counterproductive.
9. Should taxpayer money be used to support policies such as Universal Healthcare and Universal Secondary Education?
No.
10. What questions, if any, would you add to this section of the survey?
Do you agree that the DART Bard was the greatest thing to ever happen on DART, and that 9sk news is a worthy successor? Because, you know, it would really unfortunate if you didn't. Not that anything would ever happen because of it, but, you know, it would be a mighty shame if something were to happen.
Religion:
1. Generally, which religion do you identify with?
Protestant Christianity.
2. Generally, do you believe religion to be important to society - how so or how not?
Yes. I believe Christianity is the only way to salvation, which makes it pretty important.
3. Do you believe the religion you identify with is being persucted or bigoted against?
I defy you to find a single religion, worldview, or opinion of any kind that is even remotely popular that hasn't faced persecution or bigotry. As for Christianity in particular, I don't think it faces much persecution or bigotry in the US, although there is a little and anti-Christian sentiment seems to be slowly rising. Worldwide, there are a lot of places where Christians face severe persecution.
4. Do you believe that its important for education to instill relgious values into children?
If you're asking about public education, absolutely not. The government shouldn't be promoting (or denigrating) religion.
5. Aside from the god of your religion, do you believe that religion is the most important aspect of life?
What's that supposed to mean?
6. Do you believe that everyone else, or the majority of people, should be of your religion?
As I said earlier, I think Christianity is the only way to salvation, so yes. However, I want to be extremely clear that the government shouldn't promote it, that no one should be forced or manipulated into being a Christian, and that I condemn any attempts to do those things. People are completely free to reject Christianity.
7. What do you think of indivudals who do not affilate with your religion?
They are broken people in a broken world, same as me. Christians are not superior to non-Christians.
8. Do you believe that the church and government should be seperated?
For the most part. I don't think things like putting "In God We Trust" on coins really violate that, though. That being said, I actually support removing that anyway, because it's pretty obvious that, as a nation, we don't trust in God.
9. Do you believe that individuals have a freedom from religion as well as a freedom to religion?
No. People don't have a freedom from religion any more than they have a freedom from speech or a freedom from the press. They are, of course, free to limit their exposure to such things.
10. What questions, if any, would you add to this section of the survey?
Can't think of any right now.
Science:
1. Generally, do you believe science to be an accurate way of interpreting and describing our reality?
So far as the natural world goes, sure.
2. Do you believe that the theory of natural selection and evolution is how the current species of the earth developed?
This is multiple questions in one. Natural selection is real. Microevolution is real. I don't think macroevolution is possible.
3. Do you believe that creationism is how the current species of the earth developed?
Yes.
4. Do you believe that the big bang and cosmologic evolution is how our current universe "began"?
No.
5. Do you believe that the oblate spheroid model of the earth is accurate in regards to the shape of the earth?
Yes.
6. Do you believe that climate change is happening at an increased rate?
I don't think so, but maybe. I don't think humans are a significant contributor if it is.
7. Do you believe that there are genetic differences between different ethnicities aside from melalin content?
Yes. None of them are remotely significant, though. RM (or was it coal?) pointed out a few of them. Again, none of them are significant. Scientific racism is load of racist rubbish.
8. Do you believe that IQ tests are accurate ways of measuring an individual's intelligence?
They measure some aspects of intelligence, but have severe flaws. I don't think they are accurate as a measurement of overall intelligence.
9. Do you believe that the current scientific consensus is accurate in regards to the description of reality?
I don't think that scientific consensus = truth like some people seem to. (Never end a sentence a preposition with!) That being said, I think the scientific consensus is accurate about most things. In fact, I think your previous questions listed the only places where I really disagree with it.
10. What questions, if any, would you add to this section of the survey
Do you think modern medicine is effective?
Yes.
Do you think alternative medicine is effective?
Rarely. Alternative medicine that works is called medicine.
Do you think vaccines are safe and effective?
Yes.
Misc.
1. Would you be interested in a general interview, conducted by Theweakeredge?
2. Would you be interested in a specific interview, conducted by Theweakeedge?
Not sure what the difference between these questions are, but sure. I'm down for an interview.
3. Do you think the questions presented above are effective in collecting the general positions of individuals?
To a certain extent. It's always possible to make it better, though.
4. What categories, if any, would you add or take away from the survey above?
None.
5. On a scale of 1-10 (1 being lowest, 10 being highest) how would you rate the bias of this test?
3 or 4. While it's obviously written to be as unbiased as possible, and I credit you for that, it wasn't hard to tell that it was written by a progressive atheist who has some recently controversial topics on DART fresh on his mind (absolutely no offense intended).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Beta Delta was a logical answer. The problem with anagrams is that they often have multiple solutions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
@zedvictor4
I have a guess as to why the answer is eta.
Firstly Ethang5 - First letter of Ethang5 is E.
Secondly Athias - Second letter of Athias is T.
Lastly seldiora - Last letter of seldiora is A.
This gives us ETA, which is the seventh letter of the Greek alphabet.
Of course, I could be wrong and it's just a coincidence the letters lined up like this. It's all I can think of, though.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
Okay, looking at what oro provided, I misinterpreted your comment. I though you were talking about the GDP of the average blue county vs. the GDP of the average red county, when it was actually the GDP of all blue counties vs. the GDP of all red counties. In that case, what I said doesn't apply.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
well, on a state level, blue states are worth over twice as much on a GDP basis too.i dont know how "gdp per capita" is broken down between the two groups.
Didn't see this until after I already posted. So it was just straight up GDP and not GDP per capita, then. See above.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
I avoid posting because I know I'll start wasting too much time here again, but this one is too much.
Go back to the source you got that statistic from and check to see if it was GDP or GDP per capita. If it's GDP per capita and you just mistyped, you can ignore everything I'm about to say. I rather doubt it is, given the magnitude of the disparity, but you never know.
If it legitimately is GDP, then I have to break to you that whoever came up with that statistic took you for a ride. Straight-up GDP - again, not GDP per capita, which is why you need to check which it is - is just a measurement of how much economic output that county has. However, it isn't adjusted for population. A great example of this is China. They have the highest GDP in the world; however, the average Chinese citizen is poorer than the average American citizen. Their high GDP comes from the fact that they have the world's largest population, so they inevitably have a really high GDP. Now, relating to the statistic you cited, large cities lean blue and rural areas lean red. As a result of this, the average blue county is going to have a much higher population than your average red county. Consequently, the average blue county is going to have a higher GDP than the average red county - not because of politics, but because of population. If that statistic really is just straight-up GDP, then it's borderline meaningless. All it tells you is that blue counties have more people on average than red counties, which everyone already knew.
To be fair, it would be possible to take that statistic and do some studies to figure out if population was the only reason for it, or if there were other factors as well. However, given the nature of the claim, I kind of doubt that the originator of the statistic has actually done that.
Created: