collapse

Stories Untold

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - Wind

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 68
1
General / IM IN TEARS
« on: July 18, 2018, 11:00 PM »
MY MONITOR JUST FLICKERED PURPLE

oh my god :(

2
General / opinion 4 opinion
« on: July 18, 2018, 03:48 PM »
hit me

3
Debate Tower Sanctuary / test
« on: July 03, 2018, 12:11 AM »
Capital punishment; one of the most severe punishments sanctioned by law and thereby a defiance to human rights (...) It’s an unintelligent decision, wherein about 60% of all countries is consumed into, partly working or not working, it’s their case, more or less subjective. But objectively, financially and judicially, a death penalty is civil, judicially correct, extremely deterrent, cost-effective(excluding the court procedures),  and many more, even to the extent of defying its criticism nailed down by the abolitionists.
Alright, so right off the bat here: this is a minor point but I think it's rather disingenuous to not include the court procedure costs. Assuming that your argument is predicated on a fair and free trial, a trial in which the death penalty is delivered is going to be more expensive. The trials last longer, more prosecuters and attorneys are needed, and capital convictions will usually go through several levels of appeal within the court system. This is a sizable amount of both taxpayer and private cash. Again, mostly a nitpick, but disingenuous. Can't really say there's anything else in this section to pick apart because I can't understand what half of it means and the other half is utterly unsubstantiated as I'm assuming you will expand on it.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Capital punishment, being abolished is vastly quite objectional and futile, taking into account the cases where death sentences are implemented, that is, capital or grave offences, including treason, murder, rape, espionage, former radical methods of murder, war offence, etc. Hence, lawfully it is cast upon offenders of such great crimes with no proper feasibility of improvement. While in cases where the chances are found, life imprisonment is awarded. So, there shouldn't be any dispute over this case, or plight for humanity as the offender on whom this is employed is in no condition, humane or reasonable to be pardoned. Atonement and regret always get taken to regard in court procedures, and there hence the punishment is deployed. Also, most cases take about 15+ years to be undertaken, with the offender while on death row, plunging into every method to escape it. During these years only punishment can be reduced. Nonetheless, the death penalty opts as the last ways to penalize- as readily accepted by the police. So definitely death penalty need not be abolished or questioned for being unrighteous or unreligious(in some cases), and thus be undetained.

Hence, lawfully it is cast upon offenders of such great crimes with no proper feasibility of improvement. While in cases where the chances are found, life imprisonment is awarded.
Okay, so to make sure I'm not unintentionally misconstruing your argument here: you're essentially saying that the death penalty ought to be reserved for folks that have "no proper feasibility of improvement", correct?

 This is a strange statement to me, because in many cases, people with plenty of "feasibility of improvement" are executed. A sizable number of people executed are found to be completely innocent. But beyond that, I have to ask: how do you measure "feasibility of improvement"? That seems like an incredibly arbitrary and subjective thing to measure, and especially to stake somebody's entire life on.

Atonement and regret always get taken to regard in court procedures, and there hence the punishment is deployed. Also, most cases take about 15+ years to be undertaken, with the offender while on death row, plunging into every method to escape it. During these years only punishment can be reduced. Nonetheless, the death penalty opts as the last ways to penalize- as readily accepted by the police. So definitely death penalty need not be abolished or questioned for being unrighteous or unreligious(in some cases), and thus be undetained.
I'm having such a hard time figuring out what you're trying to say. My response to this is: yes, the death penalty can be reduced when the courts deem it appropriate. But I find that ultimately irrelevant to the discussion. Can you please articulate how this proves that the death penalty is not "unrighteous or unreligious"? I can't figure out how this is actually a defense of the practice because literally every punishment works in this way. Capital punishment is generally deemed "unrighteous" because the taking of a life cannot is ultimate and irreversible, and it is generally deemed "unreligious" because it entails man being the arbitrator of life and death in place of God. Neither of those are really the arguments I would make, but you brought them up and utterly failed to address them in any meaningful capacity.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let’s imagine a world without death penalty:
A normal person standing on some bus-stop gets murdered by a serial-killer, who gets through life-imprisonment for 20 years. Kills every policeman, again 40 years in prison, he or someone else kills everyone all together, 60 years both,  this would keep on rising in arithmetic progression with no stop to it, as the world will be left with serial killers and the jail, with perpetrators. Either way, the world would be filled with jails and asylums everywhere. (Opposite can also happen, but a bit improbable to think, if we relate to our animal instincts).

 ... uh can you actually prove this claim?

 So, trying to piece together your argument here, you're effectively arguing that, without capital punishment, people are liable to commit strings of policeman murders and rack up increasingly long sentences? We have prisons designed specifically to contain high-risk offenders that have an incredibly low escape rate. It isn't something new: we know how to prevent situations like this. I'm also confused by the idea of a 20-year life sentence :|

If you would give an example of other countries that have abolished this already with no such consequences? The answer is: Would be in some decades, possibly.

 Yea I don't buy this. There's not a concrete argument here: you're literally just saying "possibly". There are plenty of examples of countries abolishing the death penalty long, long ago without having a serious spike in violent crime. Iceland, for example, had its last execution was in 1830, and they formally abolished it in 1928 yet I can't find any documentation of a serial killer murdering "every policeman" after being imprisoned. I think 188 years is time enough.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There have been more than 20 people executed in spite of being innocent?         
Well, this could be because of an error being crept in the legal proceedings, or due to some interference of the state. Well, there are various mistakes in law, which needs to be amended. But, this conviction has been exemplary in countries where the State has the right to interfere in judicial matters, or they could have invaded it. Such conditions, though precisely de facto are the supreme cause for such injustice. As an instance- Countries with rigid judicial laws have had no such case. There may have been a delay but no incurrence of injustice. Example- most cases are from U.S., Australia, U.K. and China, where the states had invaded into the cases or the judiciary wasn’t apt. While in some, improper justification from media or guardian’s opinions is taken into account for calling them unjust. Concurrently, the mistake is of the state or the judiciary. Also, many innocent people die every day, this is not something to call death penalty unlawful. The exercise of the miscellaneous power of ‘Judicial Review’, helps to later correct such errors, preventing further miscarriage. Again, the state’s mistake if this hasn’t been prescribed within the constitution.
...

Well, this could be because of an error being crept in the legal proceedings, or due to some interference of the state. Well, there are various mistakes in law, which needs to be amended. But, this conviction has been exemplary in countries where the State has the right to interfere in judicial matters, or they could have invaded it. Such conditions, though precisely de facto are the supreme cause for such injustice. As an instance- Countries with rigid judicial laws have had no such case. There may have been a delay but no incurrence of injustice. Example- most cases are from U.S., Australia, U.K. and China, where the states had invaded into the cases or the judiciary wasn’t apt. While in some, improper justification from media or guardian’s opinions is taken into account for calling them unjust. Concurrently, the mistake is of the state or the judiciary.

 So to sum this up here: your argument is that mistakes in the application of capital punishment occur because of an imbalanced government without an independent judiciary? Okay, so I want to, again, ask you to back this up. Can you give me some examples of countries that apply this properly? Also, I would like to draw attention to the fact that two of the four nations you listed as examples of nations that frequently misapply the death penalty (Australia and the U.K.)... have abolished the death penalty. Huh. That makes me a bit skeptical.

Also, many innocent people die every day, this is not something to call death penalty unlawful. The exercise of the miscellaneous power of ‘Judicial Review’, helps to later correct such errors, preventing further miscarriage. Again, the state’s mistake if this hasn’t been prescribed within the constitution.

 You keep saying that it's the states fault, but have you ever considered that, maybe, if the state's judiciary is consistently misapplying the death penalty, maybe it shouldn't have that power to begin with? You don't seem to have a lot of faith in the state's ability to not make mistakes when killing people, so why do you support their ability to do so?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Capital punishment is immoral, why to support it?                                                     
It’s NOT till it is being employed correctly by solely the judiciary or any unbiased faction locally present. The offences of the offenders are in fact immoral. Humans are responsible for their own actions, they know what is right or wrong(except for the some being psychopath or brainwashed), and hence should be held responsible for the grave crimes they commit, liable for punishment extending up to the death penalty. Also, reiterating the statement: that it is given for unforgiving cases only; most other horrendous acts are subjected to life imprisonment. Capital punishment is moral as it relieves the burden of such criminal, immoral, callous minds from the society, which is in fact moral enough to be accepted. Prison is a place for punishment, rehabilitation and isolation, but loses its value of ‘rehabilitation and isolation’ in this account, and should be deliberately in the case of mad-people, psychos, serial killers committed for capital offences; getting them executed by hanging, electrocution, injection, shooting, etc, for these people would only fill up the seats of asylums and prisons eating away the taxpayer’s cost at hand. However, the death penalty helps to relieve the workload and population in the prison and comply for the taxpayer’s losses.

...

The offences of the offenders are in fact immoral. Humans are responsible for their own actions, they know what is right or wrong(except for the some being psychopath or brainwashed), and hence should be held responsible for the grave crimes they commit, liable for punishment extending up to the death penalty. (...) Capital punishment is moral as it relieves the burden of such criminal, immoral, callous minds from the society, which is in fact moral enough to be accepted.
Yes, and life imprisonment also removes those burdens from the greater society. That's the only actual argument you've made here. Beyond that, everything is extraordinarily vague ("and hence should be held responsible for the grave crimes they commit": yes, but why the death penalty specifically?).

Prison is a place for punishment, rehabilitation and isolation, but loses its value of ‘rehabilitation and isolation’ in this account, and should be deliberately in the case of mad-people, psychos, serial killers committed for capital offences; getting them executed by hanging, electrocution, injection, shooting, etc, for these people would only fill up the seats of asylums and prisons eating away the taxpayer’s cost at hand. However, the death penalty helps to relieve the workload and population in the prison and comply for the taxpayer’s losses.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
States should not have such rights, because we can’t take or give life? And unreligious?                                                             Utterly ridiculous. The criminal itself has taken life, and thus shouldn’t be pardoned,  unless in special cases of course. Nevertheless, even we all take lives, lives of animals! When an animal does wrong, it’s taken down, why then for humans. Offenders should be equivalent. A simple idea- People- If you can’t give life, why take it. Judiciary- We can spare your life and in a way save it, also we can make you atone for them and in a way take ‘em. Satisfying answer right.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How are such punishments cost-effective where they cost about 54% of total penalization-related expenditure in America?            Mainly due to the legal proceedings which can’t be helped. Also this, in turn, helps to prove innocence or guilt. Although, a brief comparison between the net worth of life-imprisonment to death penalty including the legal records and assemblages, shows a ratio of  3:1, considering the whole world. Particularly, in some countries, death-row inmates are hardly taken care of, besides food, and quick justice within a span of 20 years is awarded. So, altogether it is truly cost-effective.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, capital punishment needs to exist, for the inexcusable crimes, regardless of how destructive it is. What could be reconsidered is- abolishment of penalty by electrocution, beheading, shooting and all sorts eccentric ways practised in places and replacing them with more humane ones like hanging and lethal injections. By and large, the death penalty is carried on under special conditions and is effective towards the reduction of crimes. This could be noted more the crime index chart(2018)- where crime rates are relatively and comparatively less for practising countries, with Japan at the last, standing as the safest country- thus, showing the effect of capital punishment as a deterrent, that too when it is less encouraged. If its presence were to be increased, possible increase in crime reduction could definitely be noted. At the present moment, it serves as an effective tool to linger and foil the to-be criminal mindset or potential of the youths and adolescent, who fear such possibilities of punishment the most. Various example can be found to show the fear of the to-be-executed: Such as the Chinese show: Interview before execution- where the fear of the convicts can be noted, and their desperate desire to flee, as well as repentance, their emptiness can be seen all around; while though some still remain blatant and violent as their deed, subsequently breaking down and crying at the time of execution. So execution is one of the best ways to build repentance in an offender, which deems definite regret for their crimes into their minds, while repentance through imprisonment is variable and truly is of no use. American leaks of electrocution along with the record of 40 years in death row; gives us substantial proof to validate death penalty as an extreme deterrent. Indian cases of Ganga-Billa and the infamous kidnapping, pick-pocketing, multi-murders case(Gravit case) got revealed due to skilled interrogation and threatening of a death penalty by the police. So, with capital punishment being regarded as both de jure and de facto; crimes can be reduced extensively. Though incorrect in the light of humanity, Saudi Arabia’s execution by beheading has proved a lot effective against foreign criminals. Similarly, North Korea’s default death sentence has been a constitutional preserver for a decade.
                         
             
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                     
Relating to this the government should maintain this provision, despite the criticism that comes around. To please the public, execution via electrocution and as aforementioned must be abolished, in the prominent states. Some tricks like guerilla tactics on the stand of the death penalty can be used to prevent crimes, wherein the cops could threaten the offenders to surrender or they’ll be executed on capture for law-breaking, in some encounter(only for high-ranked offenders). This was effective in the city of Lucknow, India; where a number of low to high-rank criminals surrendered(after some instances of execution(encounter) had been undertaken). Putting everything together, the death penalty is quite necessary in today’s world, to evade crime, deter crimes and judge crimes. It just needs to be manipulated correctly, with cases being followed under a fair judiciary, and justice implored and correctly imparted.

4
General / the truth about apods and i's relationship...
« on: June 19, 2018, 10:01 PM »

5
General / on a more wholesome note
« on: June 11, 2018, 06:05 PM »


here is my love. Sploder is now a cat discussion forum.

6
General / y'all are ultra-cuties
« on: June 05, 2018, 04:51 PM »
just saying

7
Custom Data / not important just me pasting stuff
« on: May 30, 2018, 07:21 PM »
Let me preface this by laying out my own views: I am absolutely not in support of Hamas or any other terror organization. I believe that Israel has the right to exist, but I am not afraid to criticize it for its continued abuses against the Palestinian people. I also consider Hamas to be as much a threat to the people as Israel is, albeit in a different way. The focus in the conversation is going to be placed on the actions of the IDF, because I believe we’re both in agreement concerning Hamas and the role of extremists in escalating the conflict.

Throughout this response, I've attached a pretty significant number of sources, related analysis, and general historical overviews. If anything I say isn't really clear, please refer to those.

Yes, and 50 of them were actual terrorists. https://bit.ly/2xrlO1u
There are a few crucial points that we have to keep in mind when discussing this number.

 1.) Both sides in this conflict have a vested interest in inflating the number of Hamas members killed. Israel gets to position themselves as attacking terrorists, whereas Hamas can now claim that they're risking their lives in defense of Gaza and the Palestinian people. Terrorist groups do this constantly by claiming various attacks that were not actually carried out by them, because it allows them to posit themselves as having the moral ground among those who support them or could be swayed into supporting them. Is a claim, in these circumstances, not subject to a bit of doubt?

 2.) but wait... The Israeli government is refusing to allow the United Nations Human Rights Council to launch an investigation. And now the leading party is pushing legislation to outlaw the videotaping of soldiers in the wake of numerous recorded war crimes. Is this how a government should behave in wake of numerous, prolonged accusations of crimes? Israel, if it is in the right, needs to be more open and transparent about how it handles these incidents, because there are few things more indicative of wrongdoing than a refusal to allow investigation. If Israel allowed an independent investigation to take place, and said investigation revealed that the majority of those killed/injured were a legitimate threat to the people of Israel, then this conversation would be entirely different.

 3.) Being a member of Hamas != "actual terrorist". Hamas is the largest political party in the Gaza strip, and Gaza is the government. Anybody working for the public sector within Gaza is an affiliate of Hamas. This is essentially the same line of reasoning that Islamists use to justify attacking Israeli civilians: "all Israeli citizens must serve in the IDF, thus are valid targets". Hamas fought a violent civil war against the main opposition party in Palestine, Fatah, consolidating a one-party regime. Hamas runs the hospitals and Hamas cleans the water and Hamas repairs the schools. We don't generally hold Putin accountable for crimes committed by the Soviet Union because there was a direct compulsion to be a member of the party.

Do you really think Hamas is sending jihadis and paying people to throw themselves at the border just out of a display of anger?

This is not simple enraged rioting. If by some stroke of luck the rioters break through the border, they will surge into Israel and commit unspeakable acts of horror. They themselves admit this. Everyone from the demonstrators: https://bit.ly/2rJWXAN To top officials: https://bit.ly/2KmlG51

 The dude from the first video is literally the leader of Hamas in Gaza, not another "demonstrator". Sinwar is definitely a nutjob, but he falls firmly within the second category.

 I think the point I need to drive in here is that these protests cannot be reduced down to pure hatred of "Jews" (I'm assuming that's the angle you're going for). Prior to the advent of zionism, Jewish-Muslim relations were not significantly worse than Jewish-Christian relations. The Israeli government is, in large part, responsible for creating the animosity between them and the Arabs. I'll touch on this more soon, however, so lets move on.

 The leadership of Hamas made threats: that's what you do when you're a militant organization fighting what your people perceive to be an existential threat. That's how you sustain political power, and their militancy is the primary reason they have a backing. The truth of the matter is that none of those protesters stood a chance of committing "unspeakable acts of horror". Very few of them were armed with firearms, and those that were were not actively participating in the conflict. The majority of the protesters, as I will reiterate, were unarmed, and those that were armed were almost entirely armed with rocks and molotovs, compared to the Israelis, who were in possession of American-made assault rifles, shotguns, sniper rifles, drones, small arms, bombs, and armor and one of the most technologically advanced militaries on Earth. The issue with the IDF's shooting isn't that they were defending their border, its that the force used by the IDF was disproportionate to the thread posed by the protesters , especially when you add in the fact that Israel knew this was going to happen for months beforehand and utterly failed to prepare for it in a way that would not lead to a massacre.

 Additionally, the protest definitely cannot be reduced to a Hamas attempt at infiltration. It's important to remember that, while Hamas played a role in organizing the protest, the issues that sparked it are shared by almost every party operating in Palestine: the right for the Palestinian populace to return to their homeland that they were expelled from and to escape the horrific conditions they are kept in within Gaza. This was much, much bigger than Hamas, and had the support of people from all across the Palestinian political spectrum. But more on that coming up.

No, that's what YOU think a democratic society SHOULD do.

 Okay, so in an attempt to clarify here, my claim here is this: in a democratic society, the police should withhold lethal fire pending no direct threat to their lives.

 Is that just "my opinion"? Do you disagree with it? Because from where I stand, this is a terrifying thing to say.

Also, Hamas is literally paying people to go out there and get themselves injured or killed at the hands of the Israelis, and their hatred for the Jews transcends any level of physical pain, so...no, rubber bullets won't solve anything.
Who would have knew that one of the world's most advanced militaries are suddenly and mysteriously incapable of using 189 years of nonlethal crowd control against a foe that they subdue on a weekly basis. If there's anything Israel should have mastered, it's humanely controlling Palestinian protesters, considering they do so against more intense protests frequently. You said that I was significantly overestimating the damage done by the IDF, but I believe you are significantly overestimating the threat posed by the demonstrators.
 
All throughout the 20th century there have been several international proposals to split up the disputed territory between the Jews and the Arabs - the Peel Commission, a 1947 UN proposal, the 2000 meeting between Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat, among others - all either met with flat-out rejection or belligerent action from the Arabs. They're not being "deprived" of anything: they're deliberately victimizing themselves in an attempt to pull the wool over the rest of the world's eyes - the Khartoum Resolution being a prime example of their absolute refusal to cooperate.

 The specific right in question was not a matter of statehood, it was of their right to travel and their right to inhabit they land from which they were forcefully expelled.

 But on to your examples: the one I'm most familiar with is 1947, and I wouldn't have settled for that either. The region of Palestine was an almost entirely Arab region. The majority of land was held by Arab citizens in literally every state of Mandatory Palestine. 85% of the total land of Palestine was held by Arabs.

 So tell me: why would the Arabs ever want to accept a proposal like this? 1947 called for over half of Palestine to be given to the Israelis, stripping the majority of their property rights and displacing them from their homes, which is something I think we can both agree would not be ethically acceptable. Would you be willing to surrender 60% of your nation, your homes and livelihood?

 To be specific here, I am not fundamentally opposed to the prospect of a Jewish homeland. I could be described as a very critical zionist: the Jewish people, especially after the tragedy of the holocaust, deserved a place to call their own. However, I do not believe that that homeland can come at the cost of the people inhabiting it.

 But let's see what happened immediately after 1947. We see what is called the Nakba, or the Palestinian Exodus. About 80% of the Arab population in the region were either forcefully expelled from Palestine or fled in fear after events such as the Deir Yassin Massacre, in which Israeli militias slaughtered 117 Arabs were killed (also fun fact: the majority of this slaughter was committed by my favorite zionist paramilitary, Lehi, aka the Jewish fascists who advocated an alliance with Hitler against the British and later elected a Prime Minister).

 This exodus is where the Palestinian's claimed right of return begin. I can't speak too deeply of the other statehood bids, but the Peel Commission was also largely rejected by the Israelis as well, and the Arab counter-proposal was an independent state of Palestine "with protection of all legitimate Jewish and other minority rights and safeguarding of reasonable British interests".

 Now, I'm going to examine a quote that really frustrates me:

They're not being "deprived" of anything: they're deliberately victimizing themselves in an attempt to pull the wool over the rest of the world's eyes - the Khartoum Resolution being a prime example of their absolute refusal to cooperate.

 Alright, so I'm going to collect a list of what I perceive as miscarriage's of justice delivered to the Arab people within Palestine:

 1.) The deprivation of Right to Return
 I've discussed this a good bit already, but my issue here amounts to this: the vast majority of Palestinians fled Israel in fear or at gunpoint during the exodus. Those that didn't have been entrapped in the open-air prison of Gaza or the slowly disappearing West Bank. The creation of Israel is based around the idea of the Jew's right to return to their ancestral homeland, and the refusal to permit this for the Palestinians that fled the war as refugees and have been turned away by countless Arab governments and seek to return to their home is deeply hypocritical. Israel is an explicit ethnostate, as per its founding documents, and I believe ethnostates are something that the both of us can oppose.

 2.) The deprivation of freedom of movement.
 Arabs trapped inside Gaza are not permitted to leave, nor are outsiders allowed to enter. Israel claims to have ceased occupation of Gaza, but controls the airspace and water surrounding it with guns. This is a direct violation of Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Additionally, the Gazan hospitals are in horrible condition, and Israel allows very, very few to cross over in case of emergency health issues. In 2017, 54 Palestinians died as a consequence of being denied medical permits to leave Gaza.

 3.) Discrimination against Israeli Arabs by civil servants:
 Amnesty International, in their 2017/2018 World Right's report, identified a series of incidents in which Arab Israelis are violently discriminated against by civil servants. Amnesty International identifies at least "75 Palestinians" killed throughout the year, and acknowledges that a reasonable number of those were killed "while attacking Israelis or suspected of intending an attack". However, there's also a much more incriminating mark here: Amnesty International also states that "Many, including children, were shot and unlawfully killed while posing no immediate threat to life." They then allude to the killing of Abu-al-Qi'an, who was extrajudicially executed by police in his own car.

 Another topic Amnesty International highlights in the issue of arbitrary arrests of Arabs in Israel: "The authorities continued to substitute administrative detention for criminal prosecution, holding hundreds of Palestinians, including children, civil society leaders and NGO workers, without charge or trial under renewable orders, based on detainees, including children, to torture and other ill-treatment with impunity, particularly during arrest and interrogation. Reported methods included beatings, slapping, painful
shackling, sleep deprivation, use of stress positions and threats. No criminal investigations were opened into more than 1,000 complaints filed since 2001."

 Amnesty International identifies several other major issues with Arab civil rights in Israel, including the stripping of freedom of assembly, the illegal demolition of Arab property, torture, and deprivation of nationality. I'll let you go ahead and just check it out yourself. It begins at page 207:

https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/POL1067002018ENGLISH.PDF

 4.) The illegal colonization of Palestine:
The West Bank has been slowly eaten away at by Israeli settlers consistently slammed by the United Nations. The settlements are subsidized by the government and displace the already overpopulated Palestinians and force them into smaller and smaller territories. This has been nearly universally condemned as a direct violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The UN has requested for the Israeli government to cease the subsidization of Jewish settlements in Palestine over and over, yet they still have yet to do so. I woke up, literally TODAY, to see that Israel, in the wake of the recent shootings, has gone forward with a plan to continue settlements. They could at least pretend.

-----------------------------------------

 One thing I noticed that you failed to address was the horrific killing and injuring of several clearly-marked medics and doctors in low-intensity zones by snipers, as I mentioned in my last post. A few other horrible things that have transpired throughout the Great March of Return: the execution of a Palestinian protester actively fleeing the field, the shooting of a clearly marked journalist, another murder of a fleeing protester, and oh hey another journalist killed, on my birthday too. And that's just The Great March of Return: incidents like these are fairly widespread throughout Israel.

 Listen: I'm largely Jewish, and a good chunk of my family actively practice. But Israel cannot be left held unaccountable for their actions. Virtually every large human rights organization has condemned their treatment of the Arabs in the region. The blame doesn't fall squarely on Israel, either: Hamas and other Islamist groups play almost, if not just as large, a part in this. Anybody committed to progress needs to be willing to criticize and condemn injustices in every form, and our allies are not exempt. I know you're an intelligent and well-intentioned person, and I encourage you to research this further on your own, even if we disagree viciously in many areas.

 My ending statement here is this: the Israeli people deserve a life in their ancestral homeland, free of persecution. As do the Palestinians. Neither group can claim to have the moral high ground if they continue as are. Bilateral communication and a commitment to nonviolence are essential on both sides, and until those conditions are achieved, I can only hope for the best for the people of Israel-Palestine.

10
General / My opinion on a few things
« on: March 19, 2018, 09:30 PM »
Pineapple Pizza: Very good, definitely the underdog of pizza. I will, in every situation, choose a pizza with pineapple on it over one that doesn't (unless the competitor has stuffed crust)

Hamilton: The musical that got me into musicals. V good, super catchy, incredibly sad at points.

Rap Music: Mixed feelings, like some of it but its not generally my thing. The kind of music I can dig at a party but wouldn't be inclined to listen to on my own time.
 
Whip Cream: A core tenant of my political platform is the total criminalization of whip cream on fruit in school cafeterias. Whip cream is revolting and any situation in which I'm forced to even approach it is a human rights violation. Every aspect of whip cream is an utter abomination: the taste, the texture, the nutritional characteristics. The quickest way for me to determine whether somebody is worth befriending or not is to inquire into their opinion of whip cream. As a general rule, people who are ardently for whip cream tend to be among the worst of the worst, and honestly, I would be completely okay with opening forced labor camps for people that fall within the pro-whip cream side of the spectrum. I'm about three ruined fruit cups away from setting fire to every whip cream factory I can locate within a 50 mile radius. SERIOUSLY THOUGH LIKE it a.) is impossible to get off without smearing it onto every inch of the fruit cup b.) ruins the taste and c.) makes the fruit splodeing soggy like holy splode EVERY FRUIT CUP OFFERED AT OUR SCHOOL COMES WITH WHIP CREAM!!! LIKE EVEN THE SLICED BANANA. The Jews aren't running our government, they're just working with splodeing Big Whip Cream

Marxism: Pretty good, a lot of the economics don't hold up but as a philosophy and analytical framework, can be used to explain basically everything. I'm certainly not a classical Marxist in any sense, but I do think that anybody who waves away Marx's contributions to philosophy, sociology, economics, and historiography are severely missing out

Country Music: Classical, folk-esque country is very good and I appreciate it a lot (even if most of the artists had very distasteful political and social views) and banjo pop is... less good. I do have a soft spot for a lot of modern country, though, which is probably because I live in Texas and literally every public area has country playing 95% of the time and its all my parents listen to.

Democrats: bad but significantly less bad than republicans

Iceland: a very good country can i move to iceland please like they have dope geography, nice weather, an actual health care system and the COOL ASS LANGUAGE THAT IS ICELANDIC plus the way they name people is pretty cool

White People: v bad I don't approve i advocate for widespread white genocide

people who use the term "snowflake": i will absolutely never be able to take you seriously friends but thats ok

people who disagree with my fringe political views: two simple words: throw them against the wall and open fire

the police: usually pretty normal, okay people who find themselves being roped into doing very bad things due to the nature of law enforcement in western society. I've seen firsthand how the service can totally change somebody and create a situation in which decent people will do utterly inexcusable things.

cats: VERY pure children. There is no such thing as a bad cat I love all kittens they are all my friends and I would be very sad without them

my dad: i still love you but wow you continue to astound me with how bad of a person you can be dude

the harmonica: among the best instruments please don't listen to the anti-harmonica crowd because their opinions are objectively and scientifically wrong

11
General / wind q&a
« on: February 27, 2018, 05:16 PM »
hmu bros

12
General / I have a date tomorrow
« on: February 23, 2018, 09:43 PM »
AAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaa I'm so excited!!!!!!!!!!!

13
he was caught with a knife

 the worst thing about school violence is how it just sort of encourages and perpetuates itself

14
General / I have some new super cute cacti
« on: February 05, 2018, 06:29 PM »
 I present to you, my new comrade Oswald:


 And my faithful companion, Arnie:

15
General / I actually feel really good :)
« on: February 05, 2018, 06:03 PM »
 Skipped school today under the guise of a "Mental Health Day" because I've been having a pretty rough time lately. I've been very not okay lately, so sorry if I've been splodeing annoying with my constant moping and breaking down. At any rate, I took a very long walk today into the other side of my neighborhood that I've never really charted out, and just listened to some upbeat folk music while admiring all the super cute dogs and I feel a lot better!!!

 I want to try to break from this depression, so I'm going to try to start going on walks more often and I'm probably going to start seeing my counselor. If anybody has any good-vibes to share (wholesome memes, cute videos, w/e) please do so!

16
General / how would you describe my personality
« on: January 22, 2018, 01:54 AM »
as part of a self-awareness project, I'm trying to figure out how I'm perceived by other people. in as neutral and objective of a sense as possible, how would you describe my personality?

also i'll try to do the same for you guys

17
General / post for an opinion
« on: January 13, 2018, 08:52 PM »
^

also ama i'm bored

edit: also please thank and donate to my gofundme

18
General / Happy Quanza my dudes, I'm going to do a giveaway
« on: December 24, 2017, 03:58 PM »
Just comment in this thread with a game under $5 on steam right now and wish everybody happy holidays and I'll throw names in a bucket and buy somebody a game

 just try to pay it forward, okay?

19
General / Feeling pretty confident today, so take a picture!
« on: December 20, 2017, 04:48 PM »

20
General / So I need some opinions
« on: November 20, 2017, 10:37 PM »
Christmas is coming up, and I'm pretty smitten with a certain fine lady. For the last few weeks I've been just making a brief note every time my girlfriend does something awesome that I appreciate  (all the time), and I'll keep recording those up until Christmas day. I'm going to buy a cute wooden heart pedant necklace with a USB drive inside of it, and create a series of folders with a bunch of cute pictures of us, the notes, and the entire first three seasons of Drake and Josh (I can explain I swear). Then wrap it up in a small box with some peonies, candy, and maybe some origami flowers  (she loves origami and gets disappointed because im not particularly artsy) and give it to her on Christmas day.

Does that sound really cringey or is it a decent idea?

21
General / I feel really happy right now
« on: November 19, 2017, 12:53 PM »
Cheers to a good Thanksgiving break?

22
Everyone I care about is in so much deep splode, and it wears me down to realize that I can't help any of them. I was coming out of a pretty serious depression, but now I'm starting to break down again. I just spent an hour talking to one of my friends about her recent suicide attempt and trying my best to lend her moral support, and then another two talking to my other friend about her suicidal father and the fact that they're pulling the plug on her uncle. Almost everyone I love is so completely and utterly screwed, and between trying to help them and trying to help myself, I feel so powerless. I can't even keep my own life together but I become physically ill thinking about the things that Colton and Destiny and Hannah and Chloe and Jon and Divenhi and Habiba and Chris and Ashley are going through, and it compounds everything I'm going through. I try to be there for everyone but sometimes I just can't find the words or make the right suggestions or do the correct things to help relieve them of their pains, and it makes me honestly just break down on a nearly regular basis. I feel like I have no foundation to stand on and everything is just sort of collapsing around me, and it bleeds into absolutely everything I do.

I have no idea why I'm telling Sploder, of all places, this but this is honestly a cry for help because that wave is going to hit me again and I'm so scared I'm going to drown.

23
General / I hate the mod team
« on: September 18, 2017, 07:02 PM »
:(

24
General / it ya boi
« on: September 16, 2017, 07:13 PM »

25
General / If anyone has some funny videos or memes that'd be great
« on: September 11, 2017, 08:11 AM »
I need a pick me up, thanks guys

26
General / I feel like everyone is just super messed up here
« on: September 09, 2017, 10:40 PM »
 I honestly believe that almost everybody on this forum is either just super... weird or has some serious problems boiling under the surface, myself included. This isn't an inherently bad thing (unless you're depressed/suicidal) because most of you guys are also real chill people, but something about this place just makes some real strange folks surface. I know that I'm definitely not an exception either lol but sometimes I worry about yall

i hope I'm not alone in this opinion

27
 Greetings comrades, this is a PSA from the Intergalactic Worker's League.

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/14mIFbhB0b8" target="_blank" class="new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/14mIFbhB0b8</a>

What Is Happening?:
Fortunately for us, the end is coming - the end of global neoliberal capitalism. The media refuses to report on this, but the truth is that we have made contact with extraterrestrials, and have been kindly informed that they have decided to finally export the intergalactic socialist revolution to our home planet. This will be achieved by an international nuclear holocaust, which will be triggered through a nuclear war between NATO and a Moscow-Beijing-Pyonyang axis. Only then will the extraterrestrials reveal themselves to the surviving public, with the global capitalist system burned to the ground, to bring upon a true worker's paradise on Earth.

Who Are We?:
 The Intergalactic Worker's League is a Trotskyist-Posadist organization dedicated to spreading the words of the great Argentinian revolutionary, Juan Posadas. We broke from the Trotskyist International in 1974 (we weren't kicked out splode you kevin) for having found a new, natural evolution of the communist ideology. In a recent conversation with the extraterrestrials, we have been informed that Sploder is where we must focus on spreading the truth.

What Must We Do?:
 The comradely extraterrestrials have made it very clear that anybody lacking revolutionary zeal will not be spared to bear witness to the worker's paradise that awaits after the war. Our goal, as an organization, is to prepare the planet for the nuclear revolution, and to do that, we must begin creating a powerful organization dedicated to spreading the teachings of our leader and priming the social and economic conditions for the coming arrival. As one can easily derive, the only way to freedom is to train your mind and body for the nuclear war. Join the Intergalactic Worker's League - we shall show you how to prime your body and hone your mind with the immortal science of marxism-leninism-trotskyism-alienism....

29
General / A Marxist Critique of the Sexual Economy
« on: August 29, 2017, 01:04 PM »
It may seem difficult to understand the realities of the blackpill. It may be hard to come to terms with how - and why - the world functions as it does. And even when you do, it is even harder to understand where to go next.

But there is one set of techniques which shines a clear light on the world we live in. A scientific and logical analysis of systems of limited resources - Marxism. When we undertake a Marxist analysis of the sexual economy, we immediately find its nuances explained and its realities presented for all to see.

The fundamental element of inequality is exploitation. In economic Marxism, exploitation occurs when a capitalist takes most of the value a worker's labor creates, leaving them barely enough to survive. In other words, the worker's surplus value is stolen from them. This is how capitalists make profits. Sometimes, the capitalists let some segments of workers keep more of their value, in order to bribe and pacify them.

In the sexual economy, there are two distinct classes of men - Chads...and everyone else. There is a group which keeps most women for itself - the Chad-Bourgeois - and a much larger group which, despite being responsible for maintaining global civilization with their labor so that Chad is free to take all he wants, is denied most women. These are the sexual proletariat.

The sexuality of women should be evenly spread among society, but it is not. Instead, it is commodified by sexual capitalism and given to Chad. The Chad-Bourgeoisie allow the sexual proletariat to have just as much splode as they need to keep the human race alive through reproduction. But even here is it not fair; the proletariat get Chad's leftovers - only when the Chad-Bourgeois no longer want a woman does she go to settle down, marry, and reproduce with a non-Chad.

Now, I mentioned before that the economic bourgeois sometimes bribe workers by giving them more than they would otherwise. In the modern era, the Chad-Bourgeois are facing a world where the proletariat is no longer consigned to the feudal life of arranged marriages without any questions asked, and can see the reality of sexual inequality via media and their own insights. The Chad-Bourgeois responds by bribing the sexual proletariat - they, too, are now allowed to have sex before marriage, and perhaps splode many women. These women are, of course, still the ones Chad doesn't want, but it bribes most of the world. Remember, this happened when the sexual free market, where women can now choose their partners without having to marry a non-Chad in the end, replaced the Feudal system of arranged marriage. This is sexual capitalism.

The people so bribed are normies. This is the main reason why normies are blind to the sexual capitalist system and lack revolutionary potential.

But the system is imperfect. Due to the female's nature, not all members of the proletariat can be bribed just by the Chad-Bourgeois allowing (pseudo) free sex for everyone. A group at the bottom is inevitability left out - incels.

As sexual feudalism shifted to sexual capitalism, a contradiction was exposed - the Contradiction of Sexual Capitalism is the existence of incels, and the conclusion of the capitalist stage of history must be the resolving of this contradiction. Due to how females are hardwired to be only attracted to Chads, incels always lose in a sexual free market. Many females would rather be single than marry an incel, and a result the incels become a class which doesn't even get marriage, much less any additional bribes. Due to their extreme condition, the incels become "blackpilled" and see the system as it is. The incels thus attain class consciousness.

The basic structure of the sexual world is that the Chad-Bourgeois take all the splode they can, especially the desirable kind, while eventually passing their leftovers to the sexual proletariat as bribes and allowances. Among the latter group, those are who successfully bribed are normies, and those who become class conscious are incels.

So how do the Chad-Bourgeois manage to keep society under their control, even with incels attain class consciousness? In Marxism, the answer is the Base and superstructure. In a sexual capitalist society, all we know is shaped by the system of sexual economy we live in. Our culture, beliefs, and so on are bent to conform to and reinforce the Chad-Bourgeois narrative. In order to prevent the sexual proletariat from attaining class consciousness, the Chad-Bourgouse use culture to create a false consciousness for them to live in instead.

The key to understanding this is to understand that truth is relative to one's class. Comrade Lenin explained this with his concept of partiinost, party truth. What is "true" depends on your class, truth for one class may be falsehood for another. Thus, what class's "truth" you're listening to is very important.

For example, let's take the Chad-Bourgeois idea of "confidence." Confidence is an intentionally vague idea to explain Chad's sexual success as anything besides winning the genetic lottery. It is said that someone - anyone - with "confidence" can also live like Chad does. For the Chad-Bourgoise, this is true. All a Chad has to do is be willing step outside or set up an online dating profile and they will get all the splode they want. However, for the rest of the world, this is not the case. By enforcing the idea of confidence instead of genetic luck, Chad yet again bribes the sexual proletariat - bribes them with hope. The idea of confidence explains structural inequality as personal failure - in the same way the capitalist tells the exploited worker that he, too, would be rich if he only worked harder, so does the Chad tell the sexual proletariat that they could have sex if they were only just a little more confident. In this way, the sexual proletariat are blamed for their own oppression - their celibacy is a result of their own moral failings, because they were not "confident" enough. The Chad-Bourgeois present themselves as having earned the splode they inherent, while the rest of the world deserves to live without. Confidence is just one example of how sexual capitalism distorts culture and creates false narratives to keep people blind.

Normies love false narratives because they are bribed. A normie, who may have even had sex, believes that his success in the past means the confidence narrative and so on is true - he can truly be a Chad, if he works hard enough! Thus the normies convince themselves Chad's world is not only fair but desirable, because they too might have a chance of being chad.

Normies are deceived to varying degrees.

A regular normie has had their bribe a few times and doesn't bother to think about the realities of exploitation and the sexual economy. These normies can be blackpilled with evidence, but most of them just double down on the false consciousness due to their hope that they can be a Chad.

A beta is a normie who is faced with the reality of sexual inequality. He may be an orbiter, hanging around women in the hope he'll get sex. He may be a nice guy, who is nice to women for the same reason. He may be cucked, whereby he shares a single woman with other men so that he can at least get laid. Though he may deny it, he is painfully aware of these material and sexual realities.

A white knight has come against a blackpill before, and it scared them. They swing the other way - they actively try and spread Chad's narrative and enforce it, because they are trying convince themselves. There is great overlap between white knights and Betas, as the latter often exhibit white knight behavior. Many Betas turn into white knights when confronted with the black pill.

All normies have one thing in common - they do not want to accept the reality of the blackpill because they want to continue to believe they can be Chad. Another element is that they enjoy Chad's narrative when it suits them - regarding incels. They don't like to remember that Chad is sexually more successful then them because he is just better....but that's not so bad if it means that they are better than incels in turn, since they at least "earned" some sex and incels could not! In economic capitalism, the reality of economic status defined by class is ignored in favor of an individualist, democratic narrative, and sexual capitalism works the same way. The realities of incels and the Chad-Bourgeois are overlooked in favor of the lie that it's all about individual action, that any individual can work his way to the top of the sexual marketplace through hard work and imaginary concepts like "confidence."

By the methods described above, the Chad-Bourgeois extract all of the surplus value - in this context, surplus splode - from the workers/sexual proletariat for themselves, and maintain the system through bribing normies and creating false consciousness. But here's where it gets really interesting - the immortal science of historical materialism explains even more than this.

Everyone knows that even among Chads there is a hierarchy - a racial hierarchy, with white Chad at the top. In the 1960s, Comrade Mao Zedong developed Marxist-Leninist-Maoism to explain the differences between the first world and the third world. Maoism reveals the first world exploits the third world through imperialism, and sets up a global class hierarchy of sorts. This economic hierarchy in turn ties into a sexual hierarchy - one where the imperialist white Chads are above the colonized Chads. A critique of imperialism explains the racial Chad hierarchy - which, of course, filters down into the sexual proletariat as well.

Following this trend, we can see the close interconnection between looks (Chad privilege) and economic success. Females like money and power...and it seems Chad ends up with those as well.

We all know that studies have proven Chads are much more likely to succeed in economic sphere. They are given quality jobs and often end up in very social, very prestigious positions like executive officers. But this shows us that wealth comes second. Poor Chads still dominate the sexual proletariat, and their poverty, on average, never lasts long. In other words, sexual inequality comes before economic inequality, and due to how intertwined they are, it means that economic inequality is a consequence of sexual inequality due to society's constant preference for Chad. Sexual inequality predates economic capitalism, feudalism, even primitive tribalism - sexual inequality is the original and eternal form of hierarchy, it is harbinger of all other inequalities in other areas.

Thus, the Revolutionary and Immortal Science of Marxist-Rodgerism is born. We see that the fundamental conflict is between the well endowed Chad-Bourgeoisie and the sexual proletariat, and that all other conflicts ultimately derive from this great inequality. We see that the Chad-Bourgeois manipulates culture and society to further its narratives and worldview to maintain this power structure. Finally, we must conclude that the only way forward for humanity is to dismantle the system of sexual capitalism so that sex can be distributed fairly to all members of society.

Incels of the world, rise up! You have nothing to lose but your chains!


30
General / Undeniable proof that alon is a nazi
« on: August 27, 2017, 11:11 PM »

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 68