Recent posts by Frostbringer on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hillary Clinton is paying people to "correct" people's opinions online

Originally posted by Hunter_616:

Isn’t that the Uber Far-Right guy over there? The Right seem to be getting a decent grip on Europe ATM, it’s quite scary.

Yes, I can confirm.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hillary Clinton is paying people to "correct" people's opinions online

Originally posted by karmakoolkid:


It wouldn’t be successful were the targets to not be so easily manipulated.
They wouldn’t be so easily manipulated were EDUCATION to be a real priority in America.
(I wonder what civics education in other nations is like by comparison?)

Today we had the first round of our presidential election here in Austria. With 35% Norbert Hofer reached the first place. That’s the same person, who called Austria a freak state and demanded that it gets deleted from all history books. Of course I could write a wall of text about the exact reason for this result. But I’m not in the right mood and it boils down to bad civics education anyway.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Hillary Clinton is paying people to "correct" people's opinions online

Sock-puppets are a sad part of the Internet since the very beginning. And there is actually a huge industry behind it. Sharp tongues even say, that speaking English became a crime in Russia. As these people can be forced to work as puppets in prison. Although, other countries aren’t any better. There is a reason why the USA has the highest percentage of prisoners in the world. And for sure not, because they are a criminal society. And China and many African countries are also major offenders. The EU-countries don’t use prisoners as sock-puppets, but this don’t mean they don’t employ lots of them. For example I can name the M3 scandal in Austria. M3 provided paid writers for many socialistic companies. And they most likely do the same under a different name right now. Changing the name of a company every 2-3 years is common practice in this industry.

And then there is of course Amazon in Germany. (Or to be exact a dozen of companies with throw-away names working for them.) Unemployed people in Germany have the choice between writing for them or loosing their access to social welfare. With the help of the unions they try to get out of this situation, but this has mixed results. It became a common practice, that people that complain about their situation then have to work for Amazon as a picker in a logistic centre. Which is pretty much the worst job anyone can imagine. So many workers have stopped fighting and are happy with having a relatively nice job. Even if this job is morally questionable.

A rather recent development is, that companies like Twitter, Facebook or Google want to have their share in this business. They now take money for placing comments in a prominent position.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Justice for Boaty McBoatface

Sadly the standards for populist online news outlets in general are really low. They depend on embedded marketing and paid campaigns to make money. And it’s the exception that anything gets ever disclosed.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Justice for Boaty McBoatface

It was not possible, that the winning name is something vulgar. As they approved every single entry by hand and let nothing vulgar (or political or otherwise not desired) trough.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Justice for Boaty McBoatface

First of all I think it would be a great idea to link the site we talk about: https://nameourship.nerc.ac.uk/entries.html . At least now, that this site is actually reachable again. The Huffingtonpost isn’t exactly what can be called a reliable source. Many of their stories are simply made up or are at least heavily “optimised”.

I voted for RSS Insert Name Here . Like at least 150 other people. In the end 4 of these votes got actually counted. So I guess this public voting needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Also, the NERC only asked for suggestions for a name. Which they want to use as inspiration. So I think it’s fair, if they don’t take the first place of this voting.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Germany to arrest a comedian for satire

Germany has a Basic Law. This include Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Art and Protection of Human Dignity. If they conflict, then the Judges must decide which is more important. Which happens in a fairly complex manner, which shall guarantee that everything is deterministic. Because an important part of the German law-system is, that everyone must be able to predict the outcome.

And this is actually not about exercising free speech. As Böhlermann didn’t declare this poem as his opinion. Or in other words: He didn’t made a statement. (As required in Basic Law 5.1.) At least I’m not aware that any lawyer thinks that this count as a statement and because I’m no expert on German law I depend on this kind of information. It’s about freedom of art, because he showed an example of abusive criticism for entertainment and education purposes (Basic Law 5.3). But it conflicts with the basic law of human dignity (As stated in Basic Law 5.2). The Turkish government has the opinion, that the protection of the dignity of one of their citizen weighs more then the right of the German masses to get entertained. (And the Second German Public Television (ZDF) behind Böhlermann thinks entertainment is more important.)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Germany to arrest a comedian for satire

Well, actually not. The short version is, that Böhlermann won’t get arrested. And it’s extremely likely that whatever he said is actually covered by freedom of speech, although he tried his best to cross the line.

The real scandal is, that Germany still has a law for lèse-majesty. And that politicians may decide, if it’s exercisable or not, which defeats the idea of the separation of powers.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Germany to arrest a comedian for satire

First of all, the joke was, that he wanted to explain the difference between a satirical joke (which is covered by the freedom of art) and “abusive criticism”. The main use for abusive criticism in Germany was, that rapists could sue their victims. When this practice was stopped, the number of rape cases went through the roof. But I guess we already had this in another topic. So he said, that what follows is not acceptable in a free and peaceful society and he attacked Erdogan full force.

In this case Erdogan has 2 ways to defend himself against abusive criticism. The first one is a regular lawsuit as a private person. Which is what Erdogan has chosen, as he sees this as an attack against him as a person. But for the president of a country there is also an oddity in the German lawsuit: lèse-majesty. And by the law of Germany, Erdogan actually counts as king of Turkey. (I’m not kidding! This laws is from a time before the USA declared independence. Only the interpretation changed.) But it’s only a crime, if you insult the king of a befriended country. Which gets decided by the German government. For rather obvious reasons Erdogan didn’t want to trigger something like this.

The problems is, that the law of lèse-majesty got a lot of media attention. The arch-conservative chancellor Merkel then did, what she is known for: Nothing. But the newspaper kept up this campaign and it’s not really a secret that the right wing of her party want to see her removed from her position. The socialistic parties joined the campaign, as they want to have this paragraph removed from the law. (Please note, that the liberals aren’t part of the German government at the moment.) This law actually has a symbolic meaning and the socialists try to remove it for decades. But the conservatives so far blocked every effort. And for the Greens it was even one of the “non negotiable” parts of the coalition with the socialists, that this law stay. As the Greens have some rather obvious sympathies with the German monarchy. But this special constellation may bring a fall to this law. Or maybe not. At the moment there is the work order to remove it with 2018, but I suspect that this order will be delayed until the dust has settled and then the order will be silently become void.

But what happened is, that Merkel was pressured into a decision from pretty much everyone in Germany. And this time a running joke of German politics can be applied: Her actions are without any alternative. Seriously, she simply can’t define Turkey as an enemy country and had to allow this lawsuit.

At this point it isn’t clear, what happens next. This will be depend a lot on the chosen judge. But because Erdogan himself don’t see this as an attack against Turkey as a country, but against him personally, there is a good chance that there will be no lawsuit. Also, it’s questionable if this really is a “abusive criticism”. Böhlermann tried hard, but most likely it wasn’t enough anyway. But even if there is an lawsuit (which honestly is highly unlikely) and Böhlermann looses, he won’t get arrested. Because this was part of an satirical show this is for sure a borderline case. (Prison is only possible for serious cases.) And the penalties are a joke compared to the costs for the lawyers Böhlermann has to face.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / More evidence that Autism Speaks is a hate group.

@petesahooligan: These volunteers mainly will talk with the inhabitants of the nursing house. The shiny word for this is psychosomatic medicine and really helps a lot. The training for this kind of work is normally 3 hours. Which should be bearable and mainly includes how the administrative work is done and will talk about the problem of volunteering more time then it’s healthy. There are of course always failed existences that want to volunteer, although they need help themselves. But they get filtered in the first interview.

For the people that get through this “training” I can say, that they are in average more reliable then the professionals. But considering how little a nurse earns, I can’t blame them for taking any other job at the first opportunity. Also, I’m not aware of many problems regarding education. Most volunteers are white collar workers that want to give something back to society. And at least here in Austria about 1/3 of them already have the 260 hour paramedic training or something better. That’s by way the reason why I mentioned the red cross. As they try to teach as many people as possible the skills of a paramedic.

But I also have an idea, why so many charity organisations are reserved when it comes to the topic of volunteers. Because there is always the topic of loyalty. Volunteers normally have high moral standards and are fairly quick with carrying plights towards the public or the authorities. While professional workers fear, that they will loose their job if they aren’t loyal.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / More evidence that Autism Speaks is a hate group.

Personally I’m not a big fan of this kind of charity in general. For my personal taste there are just too many fraudster around and many charities do actually more harm then good. In my opinion it’s better to volunteer time to organisations. Many nursing homes are really low on staff and every extra hand helps a lot. Or if you have the money employ people who do work for you. This way almost 100% of the money has the impact you want and you can be certain that your money isn’t used to finance the third SUV of somebody. Or if you really want to give away money, then I can recommend the Red Cross. Or these half-governmental charities like Volkshilfe or Hilswerk are also legit.

I wasn’t able to do enough research to judge Autism Speaks. And when it comes to charity, then research is extremely difficult. As for these kind of organisations a good name is very important and many of them are very sue-happy. And often legit organisations get attacked for absurd reasons. But I saw that they have Jenny McCarthy among their supporters and this name really makes me aggressive.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tonal Distinctions in Party Politics

Well, I’m happy getting back to the actual topic of this thread. The piece of propaganda petesahooligan has provided is in fact very educational. It begins with a bait and then leads into the actual agenda with a lot of really questionable “facts”. And it’s actually really easy to identify this as being in favour of socialism and it covers the main arguments of this movement pretty well. And the postings below the video also shouldn’t be ignored. Here you have to keep in mind, that Russia Today has a rather strong partnership with both Youtube and Trump. And with such a video it can be assumed, that there is an socialistic audience. So RT (which easily keeps their posts on top) tries to convince a socialistic leaning audience, that Trump is their candidate. I wish the world would be always as simple as in this picture perfect example.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tonal Distinctions in Party Politics

Liberalism is for sure not the move toward communism. As Liberalism is this whole idea of free market, freedom of speech and so on. But Socialism is pretty much the opposite movement, which believes that control of the markets is needed and their idea of criticism and self-criticism directly oppose the idea of everybody should be allowed to say anything. And communism is a special flavour of communism. And Conservatism is completely separated from them.

Feel free to click these links and read the text behind it.

And I also wanted to write almost the same as vikaTae. Thank you for saving me the time to find the correct words.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tonal Distinctions in Party Politics

Well, I don’t think they are a homogeneous bloc. And liberalism for sure isn’t a bloc either. And I don’t even want to get started with socialism.

Here in Austria we have our own presidential election in a few weeks. And as a socialist I for sure won’t vote for Rudolf Hundstorfer, the candidate of the democratic socialists and winner of the Big Brother Award in the category “Lifetime award” for his lifetime achievement.

But I have already produced a wall of text and didn’t want to make things more complicated by explaining the countless tiny fractions. And then I also only spoke about the major political movements. There are also minor ones like for example the Greens, which aren’t homogeneous either.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tonal Distinctions in Party Politics

I have to say, that for someone who can’t see the difference between liberalism and socialism you are cutting conservatism into a lot of pieces.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tonal Distinctions in Party Politics

I wasn’t aware that it was ever disputed, that Burke argued in favour of the British monarchy and earned his money by doing so. Also I so far thought, that he is an important figurehead for conservatism. Like Karl Marx argued in favour of communism. And after doing some research, I found nothing that changed my mind.

The French revolution was actually a huge improvement for the over 90% of the people living in French. As everyone got the status of a citizen and the first national state was founded. For the bourgeoise the outcome was kind of OK. More or less. Only for the formally untouchable monarchy suffered from the revolution. And other monarchies had been shocked, as touching the god chosen royalty was a huge sacrilege. That a huge numbers of people got killed for often minor reasons in very cruel ways before the revolution on the other hand wasn’t considered shocking. As these had been only unimportant peasants. And this don’t even include peasants getting killed by carriages. Which by the way I only mentioned to demonstrate, how little the life of the common folk was worth before the revolution.

After the French revolution the situation developed, that still exist nowadays. There are three major political movements: Conservatism, liberalism and socialism. I think everyone has already noticed, that I side with socialism. VikaTae is an almost stereotypical liberal. Jantonaitis can be considered conservative. There are several different opinions. Just like in the politics of the USA, where there are also several positions that compete with each other. After the French revolution things in fact didn’t really end well, because in the end the conservatives took over with Napoleon and used the huge power of this national state to wage war. But I don’t think this will happen in the USA, even if Trump takes over.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tonal Distinctions in Party Politics

I’m pretty sure that I confuse nothing. The revolutionists have been monarchists, the land lords have been monarchists and the peers for sure have been monarchists. I don’t know how you want to bring democracy into this game. And the French revolution is the textbook example of a clash of the three big political movements. In the beginning, there had been only the conservatives. And considering the low reach of the royal forces, lots of independent cities. And the peers took taxes to build their gigantic projects. Actually a lot more then it was common in other parts of this world. Then the bourgeoisie or landowners or middle class gained power. They haven’t been royal, but controlled trade and the manufactories. And they weren’t willing to pay taxes and considering they could afford mercenaries they couldn’t be forced into doing so. So there was a lot of tension between conservatives and liberals.

This phase shows certain similarities with the current US-politics. On the one side you have Trump, who represents the “old USA” that is ruled by family clans. His goal is to build monuments of the greatness of the USA. On the other side you have the warmonger Clinton, who represents first of all the arms manufacturer. But also the industry in general. Both appeal to the masses in their own way. Trump uses his scapegoat-politics that says, that the USA is perfect and everything bad comes from foreign countries. So if a wall is build around the USA, everything will get better. The campaign of the other side is more complex and don’t treat US-Americans as complete idiots. It’s true, that with Sanders they also try to win the socialists on their side. Which with the internet are a power in the USA, as people are able to get in contact with people in other countries and most socialistic leaning countries are very great. At least from the perspective of the common folk. Although in my humble opinion this is merely an election-gag. The only US-American organisation that represents worker in the USA well is the SDUSA. And they are so weak, that they didn’t even enter the ring and just recommended to vote for Sanders. It’s not that they really believe in him, but they can’t win and in this way think they can strengthen the almost non-existing socialistic movement in the USA.

What happened in the historical French was, that the fight between conservatives and liberals got more intense. And at some point turned into a competition about who can squeeze more out of the common folk. The manufactures controlled by the bourgeoisie made it much more difficult to earn money. Not to forget, that the working conditions there had been the living hell. And the peers increased the taxes to compensate for their lost income to allow them to keep their ludicrous lifestyle. Germany was in a similar situation and reacted by giving the workers more rights and de-escalate the situation. But there the peers had been in a much weaker position to begin with, as Germany was fractioned into countless princedoms. In France they reacted with extremely brutal mass executions. Which by the way isn’t well recorded, because nobody cared much for the common folk.

And then the French revolution happened and both conservatives and liberals had been shocked. As suddenly these people weren’t untouchable. To get everything into the right perspective, the executions had been less frequent and less brutal then before. Many of the more barbaric ways of executions had been outlawed. Before the revolution it was the mindset, that someone sentenced to dead shall suffer as much as possible. Getting killed in a fast manner was the privilege of the bourgeoisie. And the peers only got exiled and could do whatever they want. In fact, visiting villages and raping random women was a common sport of the peers of this time. It also was common to drive carriages through busy streets, with the goal to injure as many pedestrians as possible. Just for fun. It was pretty bad in all monarchies, but the French monarchy really was over the top.

Personally I don’t think that this is the fate of the USA. As historically the socialists only have risen, when there was absolutely no other option left. As the workers are first of all worried to put the food on the table and are mostly non-political slaves. And in case of the French revolution they had been very eager to return the power back where it was. With the only difference, that there are at least somewhat humane conditions in the factories and that the general taxes are low enough to allow a decent life. What you have linked is actually a piece of historical propaganda. This text was written to rally people for the cause of the monarchy. Which in general was how Burke earned his money. That’s why I decided not to address it, although I’m well aware of the contents of this document. Beside that I think, that with such a historical document it would make sense to link to a commented version, as it’s impossible to understand the content otherwise. Sadly I don’t have something like that at hand for an English speaking audience.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tonal Distinctions in Party Politics

Well, it seems like Jantonaitis just confused the liberal or progessive movement (also called the bourgeoise) with socialism. Really? Because these two movements don’t have much in common. And both aren’t much into the idea of a strong leader. Socialism has their ideology of criticism and self-criticism. Which of course includes the chairmen. And liberalism believes in their freedom of speech and freedom of markets, which makes a leader who may not be questioned unthinkable.

And about the French revolution it would really help, if you also look at it from the other side. As the workers almost got forced into this revolution. The new generation of artificial dyestuff and weaving looms leaded to a high number of unemployment. A lot of worker of this time had been farmers, but they were unable to pay the ludicrous taxes without an extra income. And then there is the mass of unemployed in the cities, that where in an even worse position. Seriously, do you except that these people silently starve to dead?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Tonal Distinctions in Party Politics

Personally I can’t help, but I always strongly connected the conservative movement with corruption. But maybe this is because of definition. For me conservatives are the ones, that want that things stay as they are. It’s the right wing and traditionally they love the idea of a strong leader. If you call them king, president, dictator or even Evita doesn’t matter. And they are normally strictly against the idea of controlling these people, who rule with the grace of god. As in their opinion this only disturb the natural order.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Criticizing Progressive Politics

Originally posted by vikaTae:

Also, I thought Frost was German?

Almost right. I’m Austrian. That’s the greatest country ever, rightful owner of all ground of this world and magnificent naval power. And if you still can’t find it on the map: The small thing between Germany and Italy. Central Europe. On the most common political world map it’s bright pink.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Criticizing Progressive Politics

I wonder if I’m the only one, who is bewildered by the OP. Progressive politics is a macro-topic. And his examples are not representative micro cases.

This is like I say, that the right of all white people should be limited. And to prove my point I pick two white skinned thieves, who have not only stolen things, but also bond the husband and fucked his wife before him. Well, I’m actually aware of 3 not connected cases in the USA. But there are for sure more. And every time the offenders have been white middle class men over the age of 40. By the logic of the OP I could now ask, what the USA can do against the danger of white men over 40 running around everywhere.

And this seems to be a common tactic in the US-American propaganda. At this point I want to quote John Ehrlichmann from 1994. Who might be known from the Watergate scandal as wannabe president. Anyway, here is his quote:

At the time, I was writing a book about the politics of drug prohibition. I started to ask Ehrlichman a series of earnest, wonky questions that he impatiently waved away. “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / AIDS Emergence

Originally posted by petesahooligan:
National Health System. These are handy things. Your country should really look into getting one.

We tried it for a hot minute. Apparently we can’t afford it.

In my humble opinion the USA is too corrupt. As this country spend more money per head for medical healthcare then any country with “free” healthcare.

Another huge problem in the USA is, that poor people fear loosing their job and show up at work with all kind of contagious diseases. And then it gets really expensive to get these diseases under control. And then there are also a few other aspects that make US-American healthcare more expensive then here in Europe. Like for example that the USA has a lower population density. I’m well aware of all this problems. And of course nothing should be ever explain with malignity, that can be also explained with pure incompetence. But I still stick with my initial statement: It doesn’t work because of greed and corruption.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The education system

I think a worker education program in the USA would help a lot. This would give access to knowledge for a lot of people, that normally simple can’t afford education. I know that the SDUSA is running such a program. But with little success. A major problem is, that companies in the USA are hating any kind of workers organisations.

In general I consider it pointless to wait for the government fixing the problem. And private organisation are far too greedy, as they are a real use. It will be needed that especially poor people get together in societies and organise programs themselves.

edit: it seems like the SDUSA did organise worker education. With emphasis on the Past Tense. I know that this program was weak, but did they really gave up all together? Because I can’t find anything about this on their homepage. Or does maybe somebody who actually live in the USA knows more?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Characteristics of Trump's Strategy

In my humble opinion Trumps strategy is just pure brute force and throwing insane amounts of money at this game. These US-American elections have been never cheap. But this time the expenses are well beyond good and evil. Even here in Austria this election causes regularly title-stories and I don’t want to call names, but there is more then one AUSTRIAN newspaper that isn’t bankrupt, because of the added income caused by this US-AMERICAN election. Sorry, but this whole election is completely insane.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / About Gun Control...

Originally posted by James146:

Good luck with that, especially with those nukes.

Which nukes? Are there any left that haven’t been dismantled and sold as nuclear fuel rods? Last time I checked the number of US-American nukes was top secret and the USA as a country is heavily indebted since the late 80s. I don’t think they have much of a choice on this topic.

But this topic aside, I consider the US-Army actually a good idea and I can’t image that the US-Army will be declared unconstitutional any-time soon. Not with Trump or Clinton as next president, which are both warmonger. Maybe for very different reason, but the result will be the same.

My point was, that it is absurd to argue with the will of the founding fathers.