The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The language of discontent > Comments

The language of discontent : Comments

By John Töns, published 8/4/2014

It is not enough for us to point at politicians - for we all have responsibility for the sort of society in which we live. By our silence we are complicit.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
< It is not too difficult to do something similar for indigenous Australians >

Really Jon?

Your five paragraphs following this statement suggest that it is far from easy.

If you look at every human culture on the planet and every one that has ever existed, and look at every species of animal and plant and understand basic ecological principles, you will see that inequality is fundamentally present everywhere.

I put it to you that the problems of inequality in our society are extremely difficult to deal with. And that perhaps we are stuck with them more or less as they are.

Perhaps in a society like ours, which is among the best and fairest in the world, equality is about as good as it is ever going to get.
Posted by Ludwig, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 8:14:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
YOU ARE OF COURSE FULLY CORRECT
but..please see..that some of us are deliberately silenced
and thus the lies grow ever longer..this is the cause of the seasons of our discontent

resentment/re lack..of ability to present/redaction of fraud
colluded systamised fraud.that and special attentions/sin tax

who can we talk to?
ABC-FACT CHECKING..WONT EXPOSE..these clear/BIAS
yet/MORE FOR ABC..[media-tarts]...TO IGNORE

FROM/olo/thread

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16191&page=0

WHERE THIS LINK..WAS REFERENCED..and
progressed/UPON..sanS CORRECTION/of THE clear-BIAS
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130301122256.htm

ITS A Complete fraud..but thats how govt..declare war on its kids
FOR REVENUE RAISING..its pathetic..even/aunty sells us out/and i cant reply even..for 20 hours/post limits..[freespeak?]

but heck..lets lay it at abc feet
see if abc even notes it/they sure helped set the lies in place

abc is a DISGRACE/..hence/..this language..[of discontent]

setting it up..was/a study..quoted
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130301122256.htm

<<..New study shows cannabis effects on driving skills>>

WRONG/MISLEADING....who paid?
its..a DELIBERATE LIE/read on..THINK WHY?

<<..In this paper, 30 male chronic..*[note/word-use]..daily cannabis smokers...resided.[read/imprisoned]..on a secure research unit..for up to 33 days,..with daily blood collection.>>

ie locked up..in jail..or prison..or
phyc unit or qunatonimo bay..for all we know..no/dope/..given blood

please/mote
no mention..of..*measuring..'driving'..skills
[thats not what..this fraud exposes..its what..it was turned into

so..what/was really tested

<<..These results demonstrate,..[for the first time]>>

lol first time my butt..pure..[RUBBISH]
but lets calm down..and read on..

IMPORTANT

<<..that cannabinoids..*can be detected*..in blood of..*chronic daily cannabis smokers..*KEY..*during a month..of *sustained..*abstinence.>>

ie locked-up/IN JAIL/INSTITUTION
IE non driving..not smoking

yet..here is summery

<<..Cannabis is second..only to alcohol..for
*causing impaired driving..and motor vehicle accidents...>>

of the tested causes..[in prison/not driving]
[eg..prescribed meds/noR thesis..none..were tested.jusT BLOOD TESTS/THATS IT]

further if its.in our blood for 30 days..and no other cause/was tested/report is biased..but more is this..IT misleads that which actually was tested..[they tested..cannAbinoids..REMAINING..IN BLOOD..after abstinence..ie.not driving skills/impairment\TESTING

further..the research bias source.isn't noted
ie 99%..of the tests showed booze..1%..cannabis
[but only booze and cannabis was tested for..[

so yES IT CAME IN SECOND]..BY Design
in a two test biased..disgrace

further fraud/expose..CONTINUES
SO/TOO OUR R-AGE OF DISCONTENTMENT
Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 9:07:01 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
again/note what WAS tested..wasnt driving skill
wasn't coming in second..but measured cannabis\trace/ammounts..in blood/without smoking

[please note vegetable intake not mentioned..5 vegetables HAVE CANNABINOIDS[POTATO/TOMATO/LETTUCE]..SO IF THEY ATE THEM..THATS WHAT WAS BEING MEASURED.and dont think they noted that

but worse..they found a way..to include kids
[note/no age MENTIONED..

<<..In 2009,..12.8% of young adults..>>
BUT NO DOUDT 1ST YEAR.DRIVERS[THESE THINGS USUALY DONE..IN SCHOOLS.

]SELF.<<../reported driving under the influence..of illicit drugs>>

Failing to name any/but the new drugs of choice are not cannabis
yet here we are/how pathetically one eyed

<<.and in..the 2007 National Roadside Survey...*more drivers tested positive for drugs..than for alcohol.>>

again drugs
not cannabis

yet somehow/the flip is made..

<<. These cannabis smokers had a 10-fold increase in car crash injury..>>

who were we compared to..boozers>/the clear and present danger/..no

<<.compared with infrequent or nonusers>>

then note this..<<..after adjustment>>..
yeah/adjustment for what..booze?

<<..after adjustment for blood alcohol concentration.>>

its pathetic/the lies needed

so what was really
tested?

<<..New research appearing online today in Clinical Chemistry, the journal of AACC, shows that cannabis can be detected in the blood of daily smokers for a month after last intake.>>>

were salad eaters excluded?

<<..The scientific data in this paper by Bergamaschi et al. can provide real help in the public safety need for a drugged driving policy that reduces the number of drugged driving accidents on the road.>>

by avoiding testing/or mentioning testing 'impared driving skills'

again with the spin/unrelated..to/the actual info tested

<<>Cannabis is second only to alcohol..>>

because prescribed drug driving is ok/or\.of no concern
GOVT EVEN pays for..'them'..then even protects/..them..[not us]

ts pathetic/..*..\..its..abc..fatcat/fact checking

FACT-check..yea..i know..ITS A JOKE

FROM/olo/thread

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16191&page=0

WHERE THIS LINK..WAS REFERENCED..and
progressed/UPON..sanS CORRECTION/of THE clear-BIAS
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130301122256.htm

ITS A Complete fraud..but thats how govt..declare war on its kids
FOR REVENUE RAISING..its pathetic..
Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 9:09:08 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If one is to expect equality, then why only between humans?

<<I am diminished when I stand by and hear people marginalise individuals on the basis of their race, colour, religion, gender or physical ability.>>

But you are not diminished when others are marginalised on the basis of their species, right?

<<In every instance we are engaged in anti-human behaviours and as we are all human – we are not just hurting others we are hurting ourselves.>>

No Sir, we are not humans, we only happened to acquire a human body for a while, for as long as it lasts. Yes, when we hurt others we hurt ourselves, even when those others do not happen to wear a human body as we currently do.

We ARE equal, already - we only wear different costumes. Imagine how boring it would be if we all wore the same costume: that would include being born at the same place, the same time, to the same parents and always occupying the same position in space...
Posted by Yuyutsu, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 9:15:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The concept of 'equality' shouldn't be used as the bar of all judgement and morality. In fact, it it should be rarely used. Two reasons why: the first is that it brings out the worst traits in human beings - envy, resentment, frustration, entitlement complex, anger, and hate. The second is that it fails to see that inequality is the natural condition. Equality is an ideal, that is all; it doesn't actually exist anywhere except in the head of those who preach it. Equality of opportunity may exist, but equality of outcome doesn't, nor should it ever exist. Why? Because human beings have different talents, skills, and motivations, and they also differ in the degree that they will cultivate these traits. No amount of social engineering will correct the human impulse for achievement, rank, and distinction.
Posted by Aristocrat, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 9:44:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, we are unequal from the day we are born!
There are physical, intellectual and emotional differences.
However, that can never be used as an excuse for the strong to exploit the weak, but rather, reason to protect, the way we are supposed to, with children, the fail and old, or disabled.
Nor should difference be used by the emotionally crippled uncaring, to confer a privileged status on people who don't deserve it; given brighter, stronger persons are denied those privileges, and knowingly locked away in poverty traps by the policy paradigms of the ruling elite!
When they could serve humanity so much better, if given a measure of equality or a fighting chance.
Education ought to be the starting point, and then let merit or natural attrition decide a much fairer contest!
Why?
Because there is a natural order and a natural contest. And that is how it should be?
All human progress has been accompanied by the contest of ideas, and the strong assisting/providing for the weak!
The graves of the earliest humans, show that at some point in our development, we became compassionate caring humans, and stepped up above other animals on the evolutionary scale.
Not everyone is cut out to be team leaders, but almost everyone is cut out to become members of teams and engage in teamwork.
The current discontent has it's origins in individualism, and or taking undeserved credit and reward for the work of many; manifesting as unearned obscene returns for a few!
And a reason to inculcate discontent, but particularly, in the brighter and more competent!
What we need is team/corporate Australia, and a return to genuine teamwork and cooperation!
The economic miracle, that turned a war-torn and impoverished Japan, into the second most powerful economy, was teamwork, pure and simple.
They didn't compete with each other for the spoils of defeat, but rather, with the rest of the world, for pragmatic nation building opportunities and economic recovery!
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 12:11:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Author says -

“Like most Australians I am vaguely aware that indigenous Australians are poorly served" but note that "However all the indigenous" he knows are "educated" and in "middleclass contentment".

Then John claims that "But if we take the trouble to inform ourselves then we have reason to be ashamed at our ongoing failure to enable all Australians to enjoy the quality of life that we tend to take for granted”

Again I ask as ALWAYS:

WHO is this WE, WE, WE

Does "WE" include the 10 million citizens who have no connection to the historical misdeeds in this indigenous issue, namely those from "non-European backgrounds"?

If so then do you also include or exclude in this "WE" the millions of poor white Anglo Australians who similarly had Absolutely NO CONNECTION to those misdeeds since their ancestors (i.e. convict slaves) were also abused and gravely mistreated by the elite white classes for last 200 years.

I very much doubt you considered this, or if u did, if u gave a damn.

I know this to be FACT since what truly authentic person of any kind who is honestly espousing and wishing to pursue issues of helping the oppressed and underprivileged would not talk about and include ALL these oppressed people, rather than just one or a few sections of the underprivileged (like the indigenous) as they are currently socially “TRENDy” for such,
and a sure key to their “apparent character” getting points for decency amongst their pale-skinned neighbours each of whom entered this world with a default inheritance position of 1 million dollars in assets.

Also . . .

REALLY Ludwig,

You claim that regarding equality - “Perhaps in a society like ours, which is among the best and fairest in the world, equality is about as good as it is ever going to get”

Why would you think this let alone say it.

I can safely assume that Mr Ludwig is not of the underprivileged classes, otherwise such nonchalant demeanour to a vile reality would not be so easily let go.
Posted by Jottiikii, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 4:31:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rhosty,

You say:

"we are unequal from the day we are born" as there "are physical, intellectual and emotional differences" BUT "that can never be used as an excuse for the strong to exploit the weak, but rather, reason to protect".

I agree but I note the confusion in your conceptual comprehension, and further note that this very inept conceptual-grasp is why we have "master-slave" type cultures globally and for ever thus far.

I wish to educate thee on the correct conceptualization.

Think of the self (individual) like this -

1. Each and ALL persons are beings born and "thrown" into a world of a specific environment different to all others and a world that self cannot control or change.

2. That said this seemingly random splattering of souls throughout the world and into bodies in all sorts of situations MAY lead to the myriad differences and inequalities we see in the world of men, the fact remains that there exists in ALL and EACH person the deepest desire to overcome such boundaries.

3. However, I strongly express that regardless of each individual's "thrown position" such that he is less or more, slave or master . . .

. . . each person possesses essentially an "EXISTENTIAL EQUALITY" which makes them essentially EQUAL.

This type of equality is what I think leads to our social belief in absolute equality, but we are inept to comprehend it fully
Posted by Jottiikii, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 4:45:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This essay provides a unique Understanding of the human situation, especially vis-a-vis the "21st century".
http://www.dabase.org/p3family.htm
I remember John from by student days at Flinders University 67-68-69
Posted by Daffy Duck, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 5:46:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<< REALLY Ludwig,

You claim that regarding equality - “Perhaps in a society like ours, which is among the best and fairest in the world, equality is about as good as it is ever going to get”

Why would you think this let alone say it. >>

Hello Jottiikii.

I can’t imagine why you’d have a problem with that.

It’s obvious isn’t it – inequality has always been an issue of considerable concern and hence of political importance. Over recent decades governments have made very significant efforts to help our most disadvantaged people.

They’ve achieved a certain amount, but there is a long way to go.

So what would you do?

If you think that we can deal with the various forms of inequality in our society relatively easily, then how would we do it - in realistic manner, not just a theoretical one?
Posted by Ludwig, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 9:05:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Talk about the fairies escaping from the bottom of the garden, this bloke must be their king leading the charge.

I really can't find if ­zero carbon networ­k is anti carbon dioxide, or all carbon. So does he want to starve all flora of CO2, or eradicate carbon life forms. I guess eradicating carbon life forms would go with the Stop Population Growth Now party, it is just a bit more radical perhaps.

We see from the article that John prefers top get his ideas from movies, rather than real life, but what else do you expect from fairies. I have always wondered about people who actually believe what is put out on film, documentary or fiction. I can't understand how some take this stuff as gospel.

Once past that John is a little hard to follow, jumping all over the place. It is so disjointed it reads like something someone high on pot would write. If this is the type of thinking someone about to gain a PhD in the area of Global Justice displays, it is rather alarming.
Posted by Hasbeen, Tuesday, 8 April 2014 10:35:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig,

PART I -

You ask me to address real world practical considerations for this reform.

I admit the answer is not simply nor is it easy. But I am certain that much of the focus will tend to revolve around reforming the education institutions but simultaneously with other cultural Media and Popular Entertainment arenas as I believe all has been infected within the last 30 odd years of the elitist self-interest group, the Leftists, hijacking the universities and specifically those main Arts Departments usually more prevalent in Philosophy, History, Sociology and Political Studies.

To provide you with an indication of the type of realistic practical model I would like to use to reform these institutions I will be forced to focus narrow only upon this small section although it is a spike at the fore of this hijack I think.

From personal experience as a Philosophy major I can recall numerous instances in which a student or a teacher would make some extremely emotive-intense remark like:

"Little Johnny Howard enjoys throwing coloured kids into the sea" as "he knows the more he drowns the more votes he gets in election".

Take this typical remark and think on the effect of its existence and of its usage in such a supposedly higher learning environment.
First anyone in the class who voted John Howard instantly feels attacked morally and very deeply in a most unfair manner. The comment conflates being a Howard voter with being a person who enjoys seeing Howard drowning refugee kids and in fact such visual pleasure entices a future vote for Howard.

But surely this is not only unfair to assume by conflation e Howard voter is likely a racist it also assumes that many constituents who vote for Howard are also racists who somehow enjoy seeing refugees drown.

Yet the severity of these remarks and the extreme conclusions/judgments of being "immoral" and racist and a bad person is added to the concept of Howard or Liberal by use of the strongly emotive-intensive language and shaming or guilting a person into submitting to their views.
Posted by Jottiikii, Wednesday, 9 April 2014 7:17:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig,

PART II -

It is extremely low and unethical not to mention above all with regards to our concerns here for the culture of the education institution which has been hijacked by the elitists group aligned with Leftists. This type of method to get your message or opinions across especially in an environment where people are supposed to be able to argue against Anything is a disease to freedom.


Why this type of method of "brainwashing" (essentially) young future leaders so as to influence or control or completely hijack them is destroying the unique and extremely advanced achievement of the ability to develop people who have full critical analysis and freedom of thought.

The further danger sinister in nature of how these Leftist bully opinions as methodologies [i.e. brainwashing techniques] is that they redefine words and important terms and definitions of concepts for example with concepts like "racist" or "discrimination" they twist to redefine to be defining only the thing they want to target (like ONLY white westerners can be racist etc.).

Worse than is how they include as a widespread claim so that all people who consider themselves free and open thinkers will likely think in them they have found a home as the Leftist group tends to draw in the adolescent and otherwise shallow and vein minds by offering them an automated perpetual showering of claims that by mere virtue of being accepting of the Leftist agenda they become "intelligent", "free thinker", "open minded", human rights activist" and "anti-racist" also an "educated critical thinker".

This is likely why the majority of high school kids today have already been indoctrinate like this and so when they get to uni any semblance of their own raw potential and true curious and critical nature of mind has likely already been paved over and cemented on.

Thus by uni they likely are already an avid proponent of common leftist beliefs and opinions.
Posted by Jottiikii, Wednesday, 9 April 2014 7:41:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig,

PART III -

But the reason why I feel that all this becomes so important to my goal and desire to eradicate all oppressive and deceitful/immoral entities in society is because it is as a primary tool or weapon in that very Leftist propaganda methods which is leading to the creation of a community and culture who all have the same ideas and desires (Leftist) which is of the exclusive Leftist design, which they will use to further influence the systems and cultures by further hijacking other institutions and similarly planting subversions.

To go back to my original point that small elitist self-interest power groups hijack specific institutions for their own group's narrow and selfish interests. In the education/Leftist example I would say that the only way such a strong presence of the Leftist force could easily enter and hijack the entire Arts departments is if already sufficient critical mass of Leftist control top positions already. Thus my claims of hijacking again show true as it seems the smallish elitist wealthy-type Anglo-group who are the Leftists have hijacked these institutions and have completely destroyed much of t=what is vital and essential to education and replaced it with propaganda which then runs continuously to turn out more and more faithfuls.

However it seems to me clear that these small elitist self-important Leftists have made their own beliefs about things down to even right and wrong to be the standard as accepted in these places of "learning", and if that is not a clear case of hijacking then I don't know what is.

I hope I did not go too much into silly vague details you might not agree with.

Yet I do hope that some of what I have said is taken to be what I simply and directly mean it to be. If not I am happy to further discuss.
Posted by Jottiikii, Wednesday, 9 April 2014 7:54:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig,

My method for realistically attempting reform would start with a course which would present to the class numerous topics which contain challenging problems of freedom and equality and discrimination.

Example - Situation where group A and a group T have some altercations and disagreements both groups claim to racism from the other side.

Question to class: How can we determine what is what in an essential moral sense in the scenario given involving Group A and Group T?

Obviously the answer will be hard to bring forth and many might even claim that without the real world "baggage" so we can understand context etc. we cannot hope to make judgements here.

But I note this bare and naked content-less story to be especially of note since I believe that whilst the full context loaded story would with fully clear and unbiased, un-pressed minds perhaps lead to a fair and more complete judgement, yet I also note the vital factor these baggage contexts plays in role of normal supposed critical thinking and judgements in destroying their balance and true form.

At least with my method it could perhaps be for the very first time the average Leftist influenced student can and does actually makes a moral judgement and decision about how to decide which group if any, 1 or both are responsible for the racism and the racial violence, without only and in all cases flocking as an automaton to the predicted answer to fit with Leftist beliefs.

To show the force of the possibility of this method - let us ask each student to explain what they decide and why and later tell them Group A was an Anglo group from Sydney and Group T was a Somalian teen group T from Sydney.

With that in mind have the class inspect and attempt to understand why if any discrepancies are found to exist in this type of judgment making as compared to their natural real life process.

It is my strong belief that a course designed in that way could serve some towards this reform I hope.
Posted by Jottiikii, Wednesday, 9 April 2014 9:02:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wow. Thanks Jottiikii. That’s a hooter of a reply!

Reforming education institutions, and cultural and entertainment arenas, all has much merit. But it would be very difficult, and even with our best efforts it would be a long time before we saw any real changes in terms of the various forms of equality across our society.

My take on inequality comes from an entirely different perspective:

I think that there is something far more urgent. This is involves the issues that I involve myself with most prominently on OLO – population growth and sustainability.

We need to head towards a paradigm of sustainability. As a fundamental prerequisite, we need to wind immigration right back progressively to net zero, so that our population growth will be reduced by about two thirds and will be due entirely to births. This will then slowly but steadily reduce of its own accord over about the next three or four decades until we reach a stable population.

We surely MUST strive for a situation where our life-support systems can meet our needs, very comfortably and with a big safety margin.

continued
Posted by Ludwig, Thursday, 10 April 2014 11:52:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If we just continue on as we are, with very high population growth, and a national budget which can’t keep up even the basic services and infrastructure without us going ever-further into debt, highly stressed water supply capability in many cities, towns and agricultural areas, a declining mining boom, an agricultural capacity that is not expanding while the domestic demand for food and the demand for export income for food is rapidly expanding, etc, etc, then INEQUALITY IS GOING TO GREATLY INCREASE!

The rich will get richer and the poor poorer. Unemployment will increase. Newstart allowance with decline or become much harder to get. The old-age pension will decline further, as will various other pensions and allowances.

This massive and manic pursuance of growth is intimately connected to the power that big-business has over government. They give big donations, which effectively buy the policies they want. This results in the rich and powerful getting ever richer, while the rest of us will get progressively poorer, and in a very unequal manner.

Governments are basically powerless to do anything about it! It is political suicide to even try to do the most rudimentary things towards changing this situation.

The lack of independence of government, and the resultant massively antisustainable path that our country is on, is absolutely a recipe for a major escalation in inequality.

This is by far the most important issue pertaining to inequality in this country.
Posted by Ludwig, Thursday, 10 April 2014 11:52:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
LANGUAGE OF DISCONTENT
MEET POWER OF The people
http://rss.infowars.com/20140414_Mon_Alex.mp3

WE STAND TOGETHER
OR DALL ONE BY ONE ALONE
[WHEN THE CHIPS ..CAME DOWN/WHEN THE DICE ROLLED
THEY COULDNT SHOOT US/ LET thiS give yOU hope.
http://rss.infowars.com/20140414_Mon_Alex.mp3

A KEY POINT IN HISTRY
AND NO ONE TOLD ya the wwar is over
WHAT REALLY HAPPEND
http://whatreallyhappened.com/node
Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 15 April 2014 2:41:38 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig,

First I apologize for my vague and unhelpful proposal for a “practical effort” regarding the attempt to rectify “some” of the inequality that exists.

Second, I mention the education institution as a place to begin the “re-education” because (i) the brainwashing is too widespread and ingrown now, and (ii) as we will be competing against powerful groups (e.g. Leftists) UNLESS we can match that power and influence [which I at least CANNOT] I see little other option.

Perhaps the ‘education scheme’ of mine could be accompanied with regular and strategic public protests which play on the deep sense of moral duty which the Leftist propaganda claim as their own, since IF we were to carefully prod and ‘tickle’ that ethical-aspect in minds of the people whilst simultaneously demonstrating gross unfairness, unreasonableness and outright selfishness and ignorance of the majority of the world’s TRUE problems of inequality not to mention the majority of the world’s TRUE oppressed people, then it might be possible to pry loose some “imposter foundational material” laid by these Leftists to reveal the actual baron core of the Leftist results.

I would be very happy indeed IF some people in society who think alike and who also had some means of influence, would finally stand up and be counted.

“Can the REAL Slim Shady please stand up?
Posted by Jottiikii, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 2:00:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ludwig,

I agree that we should halt population growth ASAP.

However, as a classic examp,le of what I mean when I claim that minority elitist power group such as the Leftists have “Hijacked” certain KEY institutions like our media and education system which I note as proof NOW –

Who do you think has been the PRIME force behind driving the cultural taboo regarding the very hint of a discussion about immigration wind-down and population net-zero growth?

The LEFTISTS clearly.

No doubt the 1996 birth of Hanson gave their position more “apparent credit” which in turn gave it more fuel.

Still though, almost nobody STILL seriously considers population zero growth as a realistic option mostly due to this LEFTIST policy manipulation and control of, which they enforce through the infinite and myriad communication and edicational networks the LEFT have at their disposal which constantly “sprays” ‘taboo’ and ‘guilt’ riddled propaganda into the people so as to isolate those who would dare still discuss the issues of immigration etc. and MOST who do dare are forever branded as “Nazis” and racists merely echoing a still present but weakened “Hansonism”.

See the madness here. It is much like with the debate over nuclear power options so that the West might overcome their dependence on foreign oil – that is on extremely unstable, irrational Arabian nation-states.

The Left also have made the Nuclear power debate TABOO also.
So I aks you: if you wish to stop immigration ASAP does this mean you HATE foreigners?

Well the LEFT mostly think it does.

Where does this leave your Zero population idea? How would it sneak past the brutal barrages of 'guilt' and 'taboo' whipping it will receive at an average High School?

Still this type of thinking MUST not wither away into the abyss lest the spark of free thought and true authentic moral comprehension and intellectual unboundedness MAY NEVER achieve the status where BOTH co-pilot the reigns of human destiny.
Posted by Jottiikii, Wednesday, 16 April 2014 2:05:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy