NEW USERS:announce yourselves and get your balls cupped here (45 Viewers)

[Bjerknes]

Except they leave out certain variables that make their theory impossible.

Well, the creator does say that is indeed impossible under the current human psyche. He acknowledges that because of religion and human greed, it would be impossible.

The debate really should bridge into whether or not greed is natural.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Bjerknes]

That's a silly statement to make.

Well, explain yourself then.

 

[Enron]

It isnt, it is widely accepted in academia that left wing ideologies/eutopian ideals come from the upper middle - upper classes.

They are those that can afford to "dream".

 

[Ford Prefect]

I don't see why not.

But of course, this is not a perfect world.

It cannot work, because human nature is unnavoidable. You can get rid off rascism, you can get rid off religion, you can get rid of guns. Those are human inventions, you cannot get rid of greed.

 

[Bjerknes]

It cannot work, because human nature is unnavoidable. You can get rid off rascism, you can get rid off religion, you can get rid of guns. Those are human inventions, you cannot get rid of greed.

I'm afraid we can't get rid of any of it.

But yes, I too believe that greed is natural and unavoidable. So it won't work.

 

[Seven]

I'm afraid we can't get rid of any of it.

But yes, I too believe that greed is natural and unavoidable. So it won't work.

Wouldn't work even if there was no greed.

 

[Enron]

Well, the creator does say that is indeed impossible under the current human psyche. He acknowledges that because of religion and human greed, it would be impossible.

The debate really should bridge into whether or not greed is natural.

Right so if the theory is impossible, why spend time on it? Seems that in this case it would be more worthwhile boundaries of your current society and attempt to fit your ideology to it instead of the inverse.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

How much free food does the US get? How much free food does Russia get? All the other countries in the world? Africa? India has mad folks too? Jews gotta eat.
Resources free? Awesome who gets what? How much does each country receive? Who says? Why? What about Arab countries? What if another country wants more? Resources unlimited? No. Australia's like WTF mate. Korea say ah-uh gimme dat rice bitch. Africa wants some too. What else is free? Guns? Errybuddy got one? Yep. Guns, free food, free resources, and multiple nations of hungry needy niggaz? Only one answer...



BOOOM!!!!

I wasnt telling you how to do your job, but as a general rule of thumb is not it etiquette on forums to not divulge from the topic of the thread, which we were doing greatly, as such it made sence for to emplore the creation of a new thread as opposed to pissing of mods who would have just had to clean out this thread?

Okay, Sammy, I'm going to let you in on a little secret, I'm never serious. Second thing, I don't care about a lot. Third, I was joking.

So if you want another thread, make one, but to tell you the truth I don't really give a flying horse cock.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Right so if the theory is impossible, why spend time on it? Seems that in this case it would be more worthwhile boundaries of your current society and attempt to fit your ideology to it instead of the inverse.

Why do anything? Why masbate into my own anus? Why drink my own urine? Why beat off to Andries Gobert? Why hate whiteys when I am a black Mike Tyson?

 

[Enron]

Well, explain yourself then.

Your statement assumes that we had any power over the way we were conditioned. That somehow we could have made decisions over the course of history to alter the plain of societal thought that we now rest on. We are after all influenced by ourselves. Philosophically that is a silly statement, not calling it silly to be insulting or anything, just silly as in whimsical or "dreamlike".

 

[Ford Prefect]

Okay, Sammy, I'm going to let you in on a little secret, I'm never serious. Second thing, I don't care about a lot. Third, I was joking.

So if you want another thread, make one, but to tell you the truth I don't really give a flying horse cock.

Okay, ßüякε. I appear to hide my sarcasm well.

I'm afraid we can't get rid of any of it.

Without meaning to paraphrase you, but im afraid we can get rid of all of it. Time heals all wounds, and gets rid of most stupidity.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Okay, ßüякε. I appear to hide my sarcasm well.



Without meaning to paraphrase you, but im afraid we can get rid of all of it. Time heals all wounds, and gets rid of most stupidity.

Just Burke, and that's why we have emoticons.
:xfinger:

 

[Enron]

Why do anything? Why masbate into my own anus? Why drink my own urine? Why beat off to Andries Gobert? Why hate whiteys when I am a black Mike Tyson?

If your square bit won't fit into the round hole, why not shape the bit until it fits?

 

[Bjerknes]

Wouldn't work even if there was no greed.

I do not agree with that. In an advanced society, it could work. The greed is the major barrier between working systems and those that don't.

Right so if the theory is impossible, why spend time on it? Seems that in this case it would be more worthwhile boundaries of your current society and attempt to fit your ideology to it instead of the inverse.

Lots of things are deemed impossible at one point in time.

One matter that is impossible is preserving the Earth's climatology on a global scale, yet people still work on it.

I still find the idea beneficial to thought, even if it cannot become useful.

 

[Seven]

Your statement assumes that we had any power over the way we were conditioned. That somehow we could have made decisions over the course of history to alter the plain of societal thought that we now rest on. We are after all influenced by ourselves. Philosophically that is a silly statement, not calling it silly to be insulting or anything, just silly as in whimsical or "dreamlike".

Even without greed and anger the theory would suck.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

"I'll fuck you 'til you love me, faggot."



Seven, you'll love this...

 

[Bjerknes]

Your statement assumes that we had any power over the way we were conditioned. That somehow we could have made decisions over the course of history to alter the plain of societal thought that we now rest on. We are after all influenced by ourselves. Philosophically that is a silly statement, not calling it silly to be insulting or anything, just silly as in whimsical or "dreamlike".

But much of it comes from personal choice. For instance, some people think Obama is the savior just because they voted for him, or they believe everything they see on TV. We were conditioned because we let it happen ourselves.

Unfortunately though, everything I say regarding this topic is considered conspiracy theory by the general public, so I have nothing to add.

 

[Bjerknes]

Even without greed and anger the theory would suck.

Why?

 

[Enron]

Lots of things are deemed impossible at one point in time.

One matter that is impossible is preserving the Earth's climatology on a global scale, yet people still work on it.

I still find the idea beneficial to thought, even if it cannot become useful.

I'm not saying dismiss the ideal entirely, just merely shape it to fit society. We live in a society in which things are owned and given out (bought and paid for), if not then they are taken. It's the tragedy of the commons.

 

[Enron]

Even without greed and anger the theory would suck.

Greed and anger are human emotions. A world with humans would never lack of emotion or basic instincts.