In retrospect it was probably obvious that tying watching meatheads toss a ball around to academic performance would be the only way to motivate otherwise disinterested, diverse students to all come together and celebrate middle school jocks.
I really hope this doesn't give unmerited qualifications to dimwits. I've had it up to here with idiots being in charge of important things as it is.
But to do this, Alabama is taking an extraordinary, Orwellian step: using location-tracking technology from students’ phones to see who skips out and who stays.
I await the advent of the mad conspiracy theorists who have an absolute fit at the thought of people being tagged. I honestly can't see much of a difference between this and the 70's "Barcodes will be tattooed on your head" scare.
Didn't they go nuts at the idea of microchips being implanted in people?
That's not really a problem if he then goes on to make money for public appearances, etc., related to the book, assuming the Government can only take the money for book sales.
Okay, that's where campaigning comes in. If 50% vote, do they all vote Republican or Democratic? Focus on the 50% that don't, and encourage them to get out and vote. Giving up is not an option, and states have been known to flip as demographics change.
Knowing that a certain act is morally wrong has never stopped any criminal from proceeding with crime. That's why they're criminals; they know it's wrong and do it anyway. Police, whose job it is to enforce the law, know more than the rest of us what's right or wrong (you'd think!), but that doesn't seem to stop them killing, raping, and robbing at will when they're so inclined.
The only good LEO is one who does the job properly, professionally, and within the confines of the law.
Your slip, I mean bias, is showing. Haters gonna hate. Is that not authoritarian? I mean, you're painting me as a nut here to undermine me in the eyes of other readers. But they're not all haters. Hate if you want to while I exercise my freedom. I don't hate.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: By the way, WHO else wants others to pay for
Wendy, there's no getting around the fact that most philosophies argue from an authoritarian standpoint of what is "right and proper".
Okay, but now we need to agree on what constitutes authoritarianism. For me, it's the coercive enforcement element. If I have the option to ignore someone else's philosophy or religion without suffering financially, socially, or legally, it's just an opinion. I can take it or leave it. If that option isn't there, it's authoritarian.
As for religion it's even worse since it assumes, by definition, faith in a concept of ultimate authority by whose judgment mere mortals will be punished for their transgressions or rewarded for fulfilling a set of arbitrary rules.
Okay, but again, if you can opt out, it's not authoritarian (in my book). If adherence thereto is compulsory or you lose your job or go to jail, etc., it's compulsory. Remember, the door swings both ways; imagine being fired from your job because your atheist boss found out you're a Christian. NOW can you see what I'm getting at.
Philosophy can at least afford and encourage doubt. Religion, other than in the lip service aspect, can not.
Okay... so you're saying philosophies afford and encourage doubt in themselves? Sorry, I've not seen that anywhere except perhaps Pastafarianism, which is basically a mickey-take of religion.
Authoritarianism always relies on some sort of faith-based mechanism and organized religion is normally the natural partner.
Communism is not a religion. Neither is progressivism. Neither are Nazism and assorted right-wing positions. Yet all of these rely on some sort of faith-based mechanism and are the natural partners of authoritarianism.
Look, mate, you hate religion. I get it. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it and it seems to me that your bias is affecting your ability to effectively evaluate it. If you've ever read http://on-t-internet.blogspot.com/2017/05/who-has-lock-on-morality-left-liberals.html you'll see I'm not a bug-eyed True Believer type, I've examined my positions over and over and yes, I can see the problems with religion as an arbiter of morality. The reason why I've not written it off because many people have used it as a fig leaf for land-grabbing and other nefarious activities is because I'm looking more at the message than the messengers. Whether or not you choose to do the same is up to you. That's what "freedom" means.
Precisely. We're too selfish to make them work, so any ideology we develop in order to create a Utopian society needs to take human nature into account or it'll be just like the others: wonderful in principle, in practice - not so much.
Ah, but the Von Mises brigade reject empiricism on principle since everything happens in a vacuum so you can't learn lessons from experience, or something. Therefore our big "L" friend is not arguing in good faith because he can't; experimentation requires accepting empirical evidence.
That's EXACTLY how Boogeyman Politics works: create or identify a Scary Thing. Promise to fight the Scary Thing. Acquire power. Realise you actually need the Scary Thing to keep hold of your power. Create or identify a scapegoat as an avatar of the Scary Thing so you can be seen to be doing what you promised. On no account should you ever succeed in slaying the Scary Thing, or you'll have to find another one to keep you in power.
Agreed in full. Libertarianism is an offshoot of communism. If you put their main principles into a Venn diagram there'd be a fair amount of overlap. On the Libertarian side, the idea is that everything is voluntary and the individual's rights trump the commonwealth. On the Communist side, the opposite is the case.
In both ideologies, human nature gets in the way of the ideal working out in practice.
Re: Re: By the way, WHO else wants others to pay for their mista
This is of course the horrible anti-American ACLU showing it's opposed to the entire Judeo-Christian tradition.
As it should be. There's nothing American about "the Judeo-Christian tradition", other than its followers constantly whining about non-followers not following it.
Erm, I'm going to call both of you out for those statements, AC.
Blue, the ACLU is only opposed to violations of the Constitution. America was never intended to be a theocracy. Deal with it.
AC, I've never whined here about non-followers not toeing the "traditional Judeo-Christian" line, and I'm not about to start now. The issue is authoritarianism, not religion. Atheists can be dreadfully authoritarian too, you know.
Re: Re: Re: By the way, WHO else wants others to pay for their m
''In God We Trust' was added during the cold war in response to the 'godless commies' to show that unlike those dastardly russians america was filled with good god fearing christians.
Yep. The fear and paranoia were strong with those folks. Interestingly, interest in socialism is growing in America today. I had a bit of a barney with two bug-eyed True Believers the other day about how to implement their Utopian vision. They baulked and made excuses when I pointed out that a totalitarian regime is required to make it happen if they can't get people to buy into it. And the "professional classes" they love to bash wouldn't want to buy into a system that insults them and portrays them as the enemy.
The point is, it's nothing to be afraid of; a bit of mockery and some awkward questions will send the commies packing. I think the real reason behind the "In God We Trust" statement on the dollar was more about getting the "God-fearing Christians" to toe the capitalist line. The union-busting and dismantling of worker's rights appears to back me up.
It annoys me no end when religion or philosophy gets co-opted for authoritarian purposes.
"Everyone owns the roads" = public ownership, i.e. tax-funded. When nobody owns the roads and maintenance is voluntary, they'll only do the parts they need for themselves.
This is WHY we need government. They can take care of all the infrastructure and essential services delivery while we get on with our lives.
On the post: University Of Alabama Is Using A Location-Tracking App To Punish Students For Leaving Football Games Early
Re: End-times nutters, come forth!
Ah, I've noticed this:
In retrospect it was probably obvious that tying watching meatheads toss a ball around to academic performance would be the only way to motivate otherwise disinterested, diverse students to all come together and celebrate middle school jocks.
I really hope this doesn't give unmerited qualifications to dimwits. I've had it up to here with idiots being in charge of important things as it is.
On the post: University Of Alabama Is Using A Location-Tracking App To Punish Students For Leaving Football Games Early
End-times nutters, come forth!
But to do this, Alabama is taking an extraordinary, Orwellian step: using location-tracking technology from students’ phones to see who skips out and who stays.
I await the advent of the mad conspiracy theorists who have an absolute fit at the thought of people being tagged. I honestly can't see much of a difference between this and the 70's "Barcodes will be tattooed on your head" scare.
Didn't they go nuts at the idea of microchips being implanted in people?
On the post: DOJ Decides To Help Publicize Snowden's Memoir By Suing Him For Failing To Run His Book By The CIA And NSA First
Re:
That's not really a problem if he then goes on to make money for public appearances, etc., related to the book, assuming the Government can only take the money for book sales.
On the post: History Repeats Itself: Twitter Launches Illegal SF Street Stencil Campaign Just As IBM DId Decades Ago
Re: "Our Sidewalks are for Vagrants, Dammit!"
Or -- mad idea -- why not set up hostels for the homeless with Twitter's messages plastered all over them? Kill two birds with one stone (as it were).
On the post: House Intelligence Committee: Intelligence Community Is Burying A Whistleblower Complaint That May Involve Wrongdoing By The White House
Re: Re: I know...
Presidents can be impeached, so impeach, already!
On the post: House Intelligence Committee: Intelligence Community Is Burying A Whistleblower Complaint That May Involve Wrongdoing By The White House
Re: Re: Watergate
^This. Sad but absolutely true. And there aren't enough people who give a damn about it so the status quo remains the same.
On the post: House Intelligence Committee: Intelligence Community Is Burying A Whistleblower Complaint That May Involve Wrongdoing By The White House
Re: Re: Re: Checks and balances?
Okay, that's where campaigning comes in. If 50% vote, do they all vote Republican or Democratic? Focus on the 50% that don't, and encourage them to get out and vote. Giving up is not an option, and states have been known to flip as demographics change.
On the post: Ninth Circuit Upholds Its Previous Declaration That Cops Stealing Your Stuff Doesn't Violate The Constitution
Re: Re: There's gutless and then there's downright corrupt...
Then its a "will o' the people" problem. People need to wake up!
On the post: Ninth Circuit Upholds Its Previous Declaration That Cops Stealing Your Stuff Doesn't Violate The Constitution
Re: Re: Re: The Golden Rule is basis of all law.
Knowing that a certain act is morally wrong has never stopped any criminal from proceeding with crime. That's why they're criminals; they know it's wrong and do it anyway. Police, whose job it is to enforce the law, know more than the rest of us what's right or wrong (you'd think!), but that doesn't seem to stop them killing, raping, and robbing at will when they're so inclined.
The only good LEO is one who does the job properly, professionally, and within the confines of the law.
On the post: New Mexico City Starts Crowdfunding Effort To Pay For Its Stupid Defense Of Constitutional Violations
Re: Re: Re: Re: By the way, WHO else wants others to pay for the
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190901/17093942906/new-mexico-city-starts-crowdfunding-effort-to -pay-stupid-defense-constitutional-violations.shtml#c1633
Your slip, I mean bias, is showing. Haters gonna hate. Is that not authoritarian? I mean, you're painting me as a nut here to undermine me in the eyes of other readers. But they're not all haters. Hate if you want to while I exercise my freedom. I don't hate.
On the post: New Mexico City Starts Crowdfunding Effort To Pay For Its Stupid Defense Of Constitutional Violations
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: By the way, WHO else wants others to pay for
Wendy, there's no getting around the fact that most philosophies argue from an authoritarian standpoint of what is "right and proper".
Okay, but now we need to agree on what constitutes authoritarianism. For me, it's the coercive enforcement element. If I have the option to ignore someone else's philosophy or religion without suffering financially, socially, or legally, it's just an opinion. I can take it or leave it. If that option isn't there, it's authoritarian.
As for religion it's even worse since it assumes, by definition, faith in a concept of ultimate authority by whose judgment mere mortals will be punished for their transgressions or rewarded for fulfilling a set of arbitrary rules.
Okay, but again, if you can opt out, it's not authoritarian (in my book). If adherence thereto is compulsory or you lose your job or go to jail, etc., it's compulsory. Remember, the door swings both ways; imagine being fired from your job because your atheist boss found out you're a Christian. NOW can you see what I'm getting at.
Philosophy can at least afford and encourage doubt. Religion, other than in the lip service aspect, can not.
Okay... so you're saying philosophies afford and encourage doubt in themselves? Sorry, I've not seen that anywhere except perhaps Pastafarianism, which is basically a mickey-take of religion.
Authoritarianism always relies on some sort of faith-based mechanism and organized religion is normally the natural partner.
Communism is not a religion. Neither is progressivism. Neither are Nazism and assorted right-wing positions. Yet all of these rely on some sort of faith-based mechanism and are the natural partners of authoritarianism.
Look, mate, you hate religion. I get it. That's your opinion and you're entitled to it and it seems to me that your bias is affecting your ability to effectively evaluate it. If you've ever read http://on-t-internet.blogspot.com/2017/05/who-has-lock-on-morality-left-liberals.html you'll see I'm not a bug-eyed True Believer type, I've examined my positions over and over and yes, I can see the problems with religion as an arbiter of morality. The reason why I've not written it off because many people have used it as a fig leaf for land-grabbing and other nefarious activities is because I'm looking more at the message than the messengers. Whether or not you choose to do the same is up to you. That's what "freedom" means.
On the post: New Mexico City Starts Crowdfunding Effort To Pay For Its Stupid Defense Of Constitutional Violations
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Precisely. We're too selfish to make them work, so any ideology we develop in order to create a Utopian society needs to take human nature into account or it'll be just like the others: wonderful in principle, in practice - not so much.
On the post: New Mexico City Starts Crowdfunding Effort To Pay For Its Stupid Defense Of Constitutional Violations
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ah, but the Von Mises brigade reject empiricism on principle since everything happens in a vacuum so you can't learn lessons from experience, or something. Therefore our big "L" friend is not arguing in good faith because he can't; experimentation requires accepting empirical evidence.
On the post: Rep. Ro Khanna To Introduce Bill To Study Impact Of FOSTA On Sex Workers
Re:
Yep.
On the post: Rep. Ro Khanna To Introduce Bill To Study Impact Of FOSTA On Sex Workers
Re: Re: Now that fosta/sesta passed:
That's EXACTLY how Boogeyman Politics works: create or identify a Scary Thing. Promise to fight the Scary Thing. Acquire power. Realise you actually need the Scary Thing to keep hold of your power. Create or identify a scapegoat as an avatar of the Scary Thing so you can be seen to be doing what you promised. On no account should you ever succeed in slaying the Scary Thing, or you'll have to find another one to keep you in power.
On the post: New Mexico City Starts Crowdfunding Effort To Pay For Its Stupid Defense Of Constitutional Violations
Re: Re: Re:
Agreed in full. Libertarianism is an offshoot of communism. If you put their main principles into a Venn diagram there'd be a fair amount of overlap. On the Libertarian side, the idea is that everything is voluntary and the individual's rights trump the commonwealth. On the Communist side, the opposite is the case.
In both ideologies, human nature gets in the way of the ideal working out in practice.
On the post: New Mexico City Starts Crowdfunding Effort To Pay For Its Stupid Defense Of Constitutional Violations
Re:
^This.
Otherwise, which church runs the state?
On the post: New Mexico City Starts Crowdfunding Effort To Pay For Its Stupid Defense Of Constitutional Violations
Re: Re: By the way, WHO else wants others to pay for their mista
This is of course the horrible anti-American ACLU showing it's opposed to the entire Judeo-Christian tradition.
As it should be. There's nothing American about "the Judeo-Christian tradition", other than its followers constantly whining about non-followers not following it.
Erm, I'm going to call both of you out for those statements, AC.
Blue, the ACLU is only opposed to violations of the Constitution. America was never intended to be a theocracy. Deal with it.
AC, I've never whined here about non-followers not toeing the "traditional Judeo-Christian" line, and I'm not about to start now. The issue is authoritarianism, not religion. Atheists can be dreadfully authoritarian too, you know.
On the post: New Mexico City Starts Crowdfunding Effort To Pay For Its Stupid Defense Of Constitutional Violations
Re: Re: Re: By the way, WHO else wants others to pay for their m
''In God We Trust' was added during the cold war in response to the 'godless commies' to show that unlike those dastardly russians america was filled with good god fearing christians.
Yep. The fear and paranoia were strong with those folks. Interestingly, interest in socialism is growing in America today. I had a bit of a barney with two bug-eyed True Believers the other day about how to implement their Utopian vision. They baulked and made excuses when I pointed out that a totalitarian regime is required to make it happen if they can't get people to buy into it. And the "professional classes" they love to bash wouldn't want to buy into a system that insults them and portrays them as the enemy.
The point is, it's nothing to be afraid of; a bit of mockery and some awkward questions will send the commies packing. I think the real reason behind the "In God We Trust" statement on the dollar was more about getting the "God-fearing Christians" to toe the capitalist line. The union-busting and dismantling of worker's rights appears to back me up.
It annoys me no end when religion or philosophy gets co-opted for authoritarian purposes.
On the post: New Mexico City Starts Crowdfunding Effort To Pay For Its Stupid Defense Of Constitutional Violations
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Everyone owns the roads" = public ownership, i.e. tax-funded. When nobody owns the roads and maintenance is voluntary, they'll only do the parts they need for themselves.
This is WHY we need government. They can take care of all the infrastructure and essential services delivery while we get on with our lives.
Next >>