Recent posts by urine420 on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is Atheism a belief system?

Religion isn’t a belief system. It is a mechanism for interpreting real beliefs but where the objet petit a of that ideology is substituted for the objet petit a of God. Atheism is just a rejection of that paricular object petit a and doesn’t necessarilly provide an alternative. (hence why you get techno-futurist atheists, humanitarian atheists, populist atheists, etc.)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What is Anarchy?

The BDSM scientist believes in alpha males, a discredited concept who’s only evidence was based in how wolves operate in artificial captive environments

 

Topic: Serious Discussion / What is Anarchy?

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 

Topic: Serious Discussion / [Poll] Should Donald Trump be president?

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / What is Anarchy?

Beep boop. I am BDSM Science lady and I don’t believe in anything other than science. Ideology cannot exist because I look at graphs of the brain and see that everyone’s brain is grey and lumpy. Because of my embedded scientistic beliefs, I refuse to understand basic notions of economic superstructures, historical materialism and theories of the production of ideology.

(out of character: nature is, of course, an ideological construct.)

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Mental health and transport

retard

edit: mods, don’t delete this post, it is the correct response to the OP

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Is treating everyone equally actually right?

Structural unemployment is necessary to the functioning of capitalism. There’s no amount of “education” or “indoctrination” which can produce full employment. Unemployment can only be solved by excising the cancer of capitalism.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should homeless people be allowed to keep pets?

Why am I not allowed to make fun of worthless sources and citations?

 

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should homeless people be allowed to keep pets?

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should homeless people be allowed to keep pets?

Originally posted by vikaTae:

Definitely not true. A disruptive technological wave by its very definition undermines already-existing industries by offering technical capabilities that didn’t exist before, and allow new ways of doing the same things, far more swiftly, cheaply, and often energy-efficiently. It has a tendency to blow the previous industry away, and have a disruptive effect on other, related industries. There are countless examples throughout our race’s history, and if anything, they’re coming more quickly and closer together now.

The wealthy caste has more power at their disposal to make use of these technological advances in their own interests. Some specific people lose and win, but the overall societal structure is unshaken. It’s just a different gang of rich bastards fucking over the common man. Zuckerberg, Branson, Gates, all cut from the same cloth as the old money establishment.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should homeless people be allowed to keep pets?

Let’s say such technology was a possibility; it wont change the fundamental systemic relations extant in society. Only people can change society, not technological shifts. Look at the mechanization of labour since the turn of the 20th cty. While that could have resulted in fewer people having to work less amounts of time to produce the same value, the power distribution and systematic pressures of capitalism (which was transitioning into late capitalism at this point) resulted in many people being made redundant by machines with the remainder squeezed for more productivity with a decreased portion of that going towards them.

Same with the internet, which promised a democratisation of speech, that individuals would be able to communicate on equal footing and ideas would spread based on their merit. Of course this never happened either. The already powerful were more able to grab ahold of these systems and shape them towards their own interests, rending the internet as an even more powerful form of information control than the television and radio before it, with the addition of a fully realized corporate surveillance system inherent to the internet.

technology cannot create revolution, only the people can create an ideal world. pie in the sky thinking about technological gods only results in tools which further benefit the entrenched power structure. The ideas you present are not bad, but they can only operate positively in a non capitalist system

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should homeless people be allowed to keep pets?

Originally posted by mysticvortex13:

no. deus ex is what i believe. not metal gear rising revengeance, which would be what i quoted.

Got it. You know most fiction is metaphorical and doesn’t present a literal reality, yeah?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should homeless people be allowed to keep pets?

Originally posted by mysticvortex13:

that’s not what i’m referring to… i mean literally, abolish the world’s market system in favor of development of the molecular assembler.

with such a device, we’d have no need for putting effort into production. just press a button and the atoms of the stone you placed there are reconfigured into a brand new nintendo ds or whatever floats your boat.

yes, i’m still stuck on this envisioning and refuse to give it up because penning traps and particle accelerators to me are literally the precursors to a perfect world.

the next step? finding out how to trap an uncharged particle like a neutron.

after that, how to reassemble what has been smashed at that level.

after that, figuring out how to automate the process in a controlled fashion that presents no danger of a grey goo type apocalypse. aka, without nanomachines, son.

a world with that level of sheer convenience would be without any other form of war besides that which is derived from purely emotional reasons.

if you can press a button and out comes resources, there’s no need to press it to get a icbm to threaten your neighbors with for the sake of getting more resources.

although i suspect that logic would be more useful if we were dealing with kim jong un and not manuel valis.

still, the convenience is what’s important.

Mysticvortex13 sitting in front of a tv showing metal gear solid 4 guns of the patriots pointing at the screen any time a futuristic machine is shown -
“that’s the solution to aids in africa!” “that’s the solution to the syrian civil war!!” “that’s the solution to the zionist system of global control!!!”

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should homeless people be allowed to keep pets?

i’m very angry about people who don’t do sex normal. >:(

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Should homeless people be allowed to keep pets?

Originally posted by vikaTae:

Not in owner-pet relationships James. The sub/slave is entirely under the thumb of the owner. By choice they put themselves there, yes, but it requires a great deal of personal discipline and mental stability on the part of the owner to consider their pet’s needs in everything they do. Likewise the pet considers the owner in everything they do.

If that discipline and work isn’t there, that’s when human pets start suffering extensive psychological trauma, dying, or both.

It’s also why it cannot be a mainstream thing without literally untold amounts of suffering by well-meaning idiots trying to control other’s minds & lives when they cannot even control their own.

Lol, you get horny over pretend slavery. “I’m some sort of scientist, i guess, i dunno. but get this: instead of test tubes and bunson burners, I keep women locked in my basement and they have to ask permission to use the bathroom”

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The paradox of suicide

Originally posted by Athrul:

If you ave nothing to say, don’t say anything. Mangas are comics like any otther, just with a different art style and cultural background.

Hmm, no, I don’t think that’s quite right. I’m pretty sure what I said was accurate.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The paradox of suicide

Originally posted by mistersocial:

Based on my research, readings of blogs, manga, and lifestory of others etc

Based on my vast experience reading comic books written for and by shut-ins and paedophiles, I believe I have some profound insights into suicide…

 

Topic: Serious Discussion / The paradox of suicide

This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Does SD need more Right Wing regulars?

American “Conservatives” and american “Liberals” are practically identical, but the so called “conservative” liberals differ themselves from the self-described liberals by generally being cunts to minorities and the disadvantaged explicitly and personally in addition to the institutional discrimination that both sides engage in.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Defend liberalism

can i say “tone argument”? Cuz that’s totally a tone argument. The core of the argument is the same regardless of if I capitalise everything or if i dont bother. as long as it’s readable, what’s the problem?

Of course, this is just an example of the mentality which exists in both online discussion spheres, where a dissenting opinion is constructed as coming from a position of insincerity. Your opponent is not using punctuation, must be a troll; an opponent is saying something you would not, must be a troll. It’s all a method of ignoring the heart of the argument and instead constructing a fiction surrounding the circumstance of it’s production to delegitimise it while never having to directly engage it.

edit: if you genuinely have a problem with the clarity of my points, please make a list and I’ll see what I can do to bring things down to your level of understanding. just so you can stop forcing this bullshit aside.

ed 2: aside in the last paragraph was noun form, if that needed clearing up

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Defend liberalism

i use the term jew, as it is the term used by people when talking about this topic. Hell, i’ve even cited the origin of my use of the term. It’s a function of citationality and clarity. Sorry if you’ve got sloppy standards around here.

ed: specifically the ideological figure of the/a jew

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Defend liberalism

try reading, pete, you may learn something.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Defend liberalism

sorry, but you did not understand the point. the jew as an ideological construct is evoked by institutions that promote liberalism as a means of resolving problems that occur in society as liberalism, the ideology, does not have a means to understand these conflicts without the invocation of the ideological figure of the jew.

It is worth noting that i am not literally talking about jews or judaism here, so if you’re reading it that way then you’ll probably not be able to understand my point

edit: your google definition only works as a description of how liberalism is used in american political parlance, not as the actual definition of liberalism would be to anyone who know what theyre talking about (i.e. not americans)

edited for clarity and typos

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Defend liberalism

“liberalism is a bullshit ideology that doesnt provide a framework for meaningfully understanding problems, let alone resolving them. It encourages believers to invoke the ideological construction of the jew (as detailed in zizek, 48) to understand its inconsistencies”

someone argue against this, please. Jhco need not bother as he has failed to learn what liberalism is across the 70 odd years of his life & i dont expect that to change any time soon. I am looking for a reasonable explanation as to how liberalism can be such a dominant ideology when there is no framework within it which allows for the comprehension of the world.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The next President Clinton

on one hand, hillary clinton is an insider trader & wife to one of the most right wing dem president. on the other, jeb bush.
fptp voting is (deliberately) fucked y’all