Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
InvaderRamModerator
in my opinion. he did more than that.
Like what? I’m not doubting you. Maybe I’m conveniently forgetting the hate-filled pejoratives he used to describe her as a human being.
i’m not talking about trashing hillary.
i’m talking about the manipulation of people’s fears.
it’s been hashed over again and again. so i don’t want to go over it another time.
i think hillary did similar things. i don’t like how her campaign seemed to center around don’t vote for trump or you’re a racist homophobic ass hole. i think it turned a lot of people off.
i wonder how bernie would have handled it. i don’t think he would have handled it the same way. i hope not.
- This reply was modified 8 years ago by InvaderRam.
InvaderRamModeratorBut he did label her as corrupt and a crook.
in my opinion. he did more than that.
InvaderRamModeratorAnd so I find that we have descended and degenerated, from some far ancestor (some microscopic atom wandering at its pleasure between the mighty horizons of a drop of water perchance) insect by insect, animal by animal, reptile by reptile, down the long highway of smirchless innocence, till we have reached the bottom stage of development–nameable as the Human Being. Below us–nothing. Nothing but the Frenchman.
ja.
now i’m going to crawl into a hole for the next four years.
InvaderRamModeratorHe’s not. It’s a manipulation of people’s emotions perpetrated by the left.
and you don’t think trump did that too?
i agree clinton engaged in her own fear mongering too. which is one reason i dislike her.
but i also dislike trump for the same reasons.
i just don’t see it getting better for the people trump claims he’s fighting for.
InvaderRamModeratorAnd if even one illegal immigrant murdered or raped a woman (and one did), then he’s not incorrect.
there’s just something so wrong with that statement.
he was fear mongering. that’s the way i saw it.
plain and simple. to me.
InvaderRamModeratormy guess is as the population increases the need for hierarchy increases.
That would assume that human beings are wired to have a need for hierarchy.
If you look at history and anthropology combined, human beings are not wired either for or against social hierarchy. That is you can find examples of everything. If you measure human beings by looking at examples of the kinds of social systems they construct, then, we have done absolutely everything.
In fact what you find about human social hard wiring by looking at examples across space and throughout time is that other than being social animals, we are actually not hard-wired for any one particular way of doing things. We contain endless possibilities that way.
Given that, there’s no reason to assume that population increases lead to a need for hierarchy.
As a rule, though, people tend to desire hiearchy the more they base ideas about social order on fear.
Real or imagined fears.
…
I agree with most of that.
More and more recent studies are actually showing humans are hard-wired for cooperation and empathy, and desire equality. Several recent studies deal with very young kids, most of whom actually get upset when food and toys are not distributed equally. It actually ticks them off, and the studies show they’d rather get rid of extra food and toys than have one kid receive more than the others. There appears to be a bias in favor of equality.
And those kids are saying this about their peers. It’s not just them demanding they receive as much as the other kids. It’s them saying it’s wrong that the other kids receive less, etc.
To me, the evidence points to this: Cooperation, empathy and the desire for equality are beaten out of us over time. These things are replaced by artificial calls to competition, aggression, inequality, indifference, etc. etc.
Yes, there has always been a small percentage that comes into the game already with close to sociopathic ways. But the vast majority of humans are taught to be selfish shits. Most humans aren’t born that way.
how do we not know those kids are sharing because of learned behavior though? i’m always suspicious of those kinds of studies. too much bias inherent in those studies. humans will always see what they want to see.
of course i could just be seeing what i want to see, so i concede i could be dead wrong about this.
humans love to teach their own to be sharing and to be compassionate with each other. but when it comes to others we are taught to be fearful and guarded.
- This reply was modified 8 years ago by InvaderRam.
- This reply was modified 8 years ago by InvaderRam.
InvaderRamModeratorIf you measure human beings by looking at examples of the kinds of social systems they construct, then, we have done absolutely everything.
that is true too. and even now you can find examples of more egalitarian societies.
not completely egalitarian. but yeah.
but i also don’t look at it as just certain segments but at the planet as a whole.
but yeah. i’m making a BIG assumption that we are hard wired to need hierarchy.
that’s just my negativity talking right now.
InvaderRamModeratorAs a rule, though, people tend to desire hiearchy the more they base ideas about social order on fear.
Real or imagined fears.
…
that’s kinda what i’m trying to get at.
our shit’s emotional.
ya know. i’m just really down right now too.
and half of what i’m saying is born out of frustration.
but hey. forgive me. i’m human.
nyuk nyuk.
InvaderRamModeratorHis list of potential cabinet appointees include women, gays, and blacks. So much for being a racist, or homophobic, or a misogynist. And please. You can’t honestly believe that Killory is THAT stupid that she didn’t understand the lucid instructions given to her about the handling of classified information. Careless? lol. Intentionally defiant would be a more apt description. Let alone lying about it. Let alone allowing someone without security clearance (her maid) print out and view classified materials. And yes, that falls under the category of traitorism.
personally i don’t think he’s a racist.
i think he’s an elitist. and that’s more scary to me.
but that’s just me.
and we mean nothing to a man like him.
InvaderRamModeratorBut are hierarchical structures really proof that we can’t have truly egalitarian ones instead? We used to. As far as we know, our first 200,000 years on this planet were very close to non-hierarchical and egalitarian, structurally. By no means perfectly so. But the norm in “traditional societies” was for pretty flat pyramids, with maybe one or two steps.
We now have hierarchies with thousands of them.
Given the fact that the vast majority of our time on this planet was spent within those virtually non-hierarchical societies — which in some parts of the world, lasted into the 20th century, btw — is it really accurate to say “human nature” prevents this?
i don’t know. haha.
my guess is as the population increases the need for hierarchy increases.
i could be wrong.
sometimes i imagine there’s a planet out there somewhere with an advanced society with the egalitarian values you talk about. the vulcan?
or maybe humans will become that eventually.
or maybe it’ll be a war of the worlds.
- This reply was modified 8 years ago by InvaderRam.
InvaderRamModeratorthis affirms to me why humans will never survive.
I can’t help it. I love humanity. But should we survive? If we take the proverbial “god’s eye-view” — not in the religious sense, but in the widest possible, most perfectly objective, disinterested sense — should we?
No other creature on this planet has come within light years of being so destructive. We’ve wiped out more species than all other life on this planet combined. And, unlike them, we all too often did it because it pleased us to do so. We do it maliciously and with self-conscious cruelty.
As far as we know, no other animal has that trait.
The caveat to the above, at least for me: I think the vast majority of that has happened because hierarchical societies have dominated the last several thousand years. Those at the top have ordered that destruction, primarily to protect, defend and expand their power. “The people” largely had to go along with that or die. If we are to truly end the biggest structural/systemic reason for that destruction, cruelty and maliciousness, we need non-hierarchical alternatives.
i try not to think of it in terms of should we survive. more just will we survive.
i don’t know if it’s necessarily cruel or malicious. it just is. humans can’t operate the way you would like them to. i hope i am wrong.
i think trump and clinton. and for that matter jinping and putin. and the conflict in the middle east. just proof that an egalitarian society is not possible.
humans are just way too emotional. to quote our great president camacho our shit’s emotional.
we need cold hard logic.
now of course maybe we get off this planet, but people here don’t think that’s possible.
InvaderRamModeratorthey gotta get to fitzpatrick a lot.
InvaderRamModeratorthis affirms to me why humans will never survive.
InvaderRamModeratorisn’t the jets run defense like really good?
defense will have to play lights out, and keenum will have to do just enough to win…
ummmm………………..
InvaderRamModeratorThe only ray of hope…hope in the dark….is that all this will galvanize the Progressives. And we have to hope there are actually ‘enough’ real live progressives to make a difference.
Thats a lot of ‘hoping’ but thats all i got.yeah… we hope.
InvaderRamModeratorThe big mistake of liberals was to think Trump was bringing fascism, without realizing fascism was already here.
true.
question is can we come back from this or will trump destroy everything?
i don’t think it’s the end. yet.
- This reply was modified 8 years ago by InvaderRam.
InvaderRamModeratorsecession? eh. don’t know how serious this is, but separating oneself from people you disagree with seems a lil counterproductive… i mean we all have to occupy the same planet… for now.
InvaderRamModeratorya know. my guess is humans will eventually just make their way off this planet and infect the entire galaxy.
i like your thinking, but we’re too primitive a species to be able to do that.
robots on the other hand…
Unfortunately invader, humans will be extinct long before we have that capability. There’s no place to go. There’s no lifeboat. Our only option is saving this planet. We do that or we die.
unfortunately?
or maybe just fortunate enough?
haha!
robots it is then.
InvaderRamModeratorThe silver lining is that…hopefully…the progressives who are mad as hell and motivated with Bernie’s run (and many kept at it through the election) will take the mantle and keep fighting and can now do so without the DNC cockblocking them.
Cuz…fuck the corporate sellout DNC. They’ve been slamming progressives…even co-opting the progressive moniker while taking on virtually no actual progressive positions…even engaging in slimy character assassination that would make Karl Rove proud…all so that they could keep those corporate bucks rolling in.
Margin call, bitches.
Now is the time to get to do the REAL, Progressive work and hopefully not have to deal with any more DNC, centrist interference.
In my view, it’s past time for progressives, too. They’re better than centrists, who are in turn better than wingnuts. But we need stronger medicine than progressivism, and that needs to come from the anticapitalist, radical egalitarian left.
Our only real hope to achieve social justice is to shit-can the current economic system entirely, IMO. It’s also the only way we’re going to be able to save this planet for wildlife and ourselves.
ya know. my guess is humans will eventually just make their way off this planet and infect the entire galaxy.
i like your thinking, but we’re too primitive a species to be able to do that.
robots on the other hand…
InvaderRamModeratorpart of me wonders if this is what was needed to get our asses woken up. if clinton had won, it woulda just been “business as usual”. people continuing to deny that there is a problem.
maybe things just need to get real shitty before people collectively realize what needs to be done?
of course trump could just totally fubar this country into the middle ages…
InvaderRamModeratorLet’s be clear.
I’m not defending Trump. Nor do I think he was virtuous in all of this. The opposite of that, actually.
But… TWO people stood outside of factories that have closed or were about to close and spoke DIRECTLY to the worries and concerns of workers.
BERNIE…and…Trump.
Of course it was all a show.
But think about it. Clinton didn’t even care enough to do the show part…
hubris.
she couldn’t even pretend to care.
the democrats have a lot of shit to sort out. they majorly fucked up.
InvaderRamModeratori was mostly thinking how in the hell did we get to this place? i agree with what mack said above. in the end i blame the democrats, and i understand why people did what they did.
i just hope we didn’t inadvertently push the self destruct button.
maybe this will end up being the wakeup call we needed?
InvaderRamModeratorcan i say winter is coming?
or maybe it’s been here for awhile already, but a storm is a brewing i tell ya.
InvaderRamModeratoramericuh said you can either.
slit your throats.
or die a slow painful death.
americuns said we’ll slit our throats from ear to ear.
- This reply was modified 8 years ago by InvaderRam.
- This reply was modified 8 years ago by InvaderRam.
InvaderRamModeratorladies and gentlemen. your new president of the united states.
InvaderRamModeratorthis country is so screwed.
InvaderRamModeratormy report on the game isn’t so great i know. i’m not the greatest writer to begin with. couple that with a lack of knowledge about football, and reports would be basically useless.
Well on this one I will drop the informal poll bit and just flat tell you you are wrong.
I like your game reports, I think you have a good and distinctive writing style and I always enjoy your posts, and I appreciate your report and glad it contributed to our unique content here.
I just got into the “should Goff start” debate thing.
But that’s not a reflection on your report.
Heck I would trade up for your game reports. I like them. They have a very distinctive voice and flavor. So, thanks.
we’re just discussing the team we hold dear.
no problems. i like it. good conversations to be had here.
i will say that keenum got unwarranted jeers from the crowd yesterday. i don’t the know the exact reason they were booing him, but if they actually think starting goff this year will lead to more wins they’re in for a rude awakening.
yesterday. i don’t think keenum played all that bad. he had an int. and he missed a couple guys i think. quick in particular in the first half. but he did enough to win.
gurley not getting enough touches was criminal though, and i put that on the coaching staff. not just boras.
the weather was toasty. getting into and out of the game wasn’t too bad. my friend and i were even able to find free parking about a mile away from the stadium.
but part of that was because not a lot of people went to the game. i actually think the preseason game against kansas city was more packed than the carolina game. i get the sense that the fans are very much wanting to cheer this team on. but they’re frustrated. most of them don’t know the heartache that comes along with being a rams fan. ha!
InvaderRamModeratorwell. we’ve thoroughly beaten that subject to death.
one other thought. i think gurley lost too much weight.
my report on the game isn’t so great i know. i’m not the greatest writer to begin with. couple that with a lack of knowledge about football, and reports would be basically useless.
but gurley looked small. he dropped his weight to 215 pounds. and i don’t think it was good for him. he needs some of that power.
still. he didn’t play all that bad today, but boras abandoned the run too quickly i thought. he was effective at times, and if he had a chance, could have done more damage and taken some pressure off keenum.
of course. i don’t know if keenum audibled out of runs. i have no idea if plays were changed at the line of scrimmage. regardless. gurley not getting the ball more in a game that was so close is crazy to me. the rams best offensive player was taken out of the game. and a lot of it was due simply to the fact that he didn’t even touch the ball.
InvaderRamModeratorWhat I DON’T buy though is the idea that if he DOESN’T start as a rookie he’s a failure as a pick. I don’t believe that.
i’m not arguing that. i’m not saying he’s necessarily a bust. i just question the move up mainly. you’re already gambling. but this is just a shot in the dark if he’s that raw.
and again. i don’t think he’s that raw. i think fisher was/is hoping he can turn this around.
no. they’re not turning this around. the season is lost.
Most struggle. Only a small percentage haven’t. A team that starts a high-picked rookie qb is doing it, far more often than not, because they are rebuilding, have no choice, and are resigned to living with the losses. They were picking a qb high in the first place not because they traded up, but because they were bad and had to rebuild.
yeah. we might argue on the definition of rebuild. but this season is lost. starting keenum does nothing because they are not going to win without a running game.
InvaderRamModeratoran aside note. rams made a blunder in extending tavon. if they can cut him, they should. he’s not good enough.
-
AuthorPosts