Brain Candy

Baraka im definately a bit iffy on, Kuchinich might be the best choice in that camp.

This debate has been the biggest waste of time. We do know that climate change is natural, and we do not know how much human activity contributes to it. What we should be focusing on is how we know alot of emissions and an increasing rate of resource consumption will hurt our own sustainability and general health, not some apocalyptic scenario which effects may or may not be seen hundreds of years from now.

What about mocking something because so many others believe it exists?

what in his policies could be considered harmful to minorities who arent illegals

Yet he also wants to eliminate spending on fighting foreign wars and end allowing illegals to stay and become huge tax burdens, is it possible these things could balance out? So he has said some insensitive comments in the past, what in his policies could be considered harmful to minorities who arent illegals?

He is not cozy with the white heritage people but because he wants to eradicate illegal immigration thus those pale faces see less illegals=less mexicans=good. Alot of blacks also support him due to his drug policy (which i think is correct, lock people up for hurting others, not potentially hurting themselves). Maybe he is wrong on the specifics but he exposed a hell of a lot of people to new ways of thinking and for that his presidential bid will be worthwhile.

"We are continuing in the same policy to make America bleed profusely to the point of bankruptcy," -OBL Maybe thats the plan, juggle americas military focus this way and that, only a couple real signs of action per week, and the debt goes soaring higher and higher. Who knows how many people they got scattered around the middle east? It could go on forever.

We laugh at independents because we know that most Americans have taken one side or the other, and use that idea set as common ground with others to drum up public support for their businesses, personalities, films and books. You can convince anyone you’re a friendly good guy by being liberal and permissive, or convince those experienced enough to be cynical that you’re a realist by drawing a clear line between what’s acceptable and not. It’s more than a political view; it’s a definition of your personality, and a reflection of the audience to which you want to appeal. In a more cynical statement, we want liberal neighbors and conservative bankers and lawyers, because those are the personalities who either leave us alone or work carefully with our money, respectively. With this in mind, Paul’s success is nothing short of amazing. Candidates like Nader and Badnarik appeal to a small few who are already alienated, but scare off most voters because the single-minded single-solution approach they have taken does not address a range of problems. Paul took basic conservative values, and applied to them a traditionalist twist as interpreted through the mechanism of modern libertarianism. He is both recognizably part of something we would like, which is a solid and moral conservative leader, and a bridge to a new way of thinking about government. How Ron Paul Changed Conservatism

Money cannot be the root of all evil, it is merely a tool through which material goods are exchanged. Material goods cannot be the root of all evil, they are merely tools which people can either buy if they deem them necessary for some purpose or not. What could be "evil" is using goods in a destructive or moronic way, or buying goods on impulse only to throw them away and add to the landfill a little while later. For example TV and the Internet could be used as useful things to receive and exchange information, but at the same time it could be used as a way to keep the mind and body idle for hours on end watching and looking up stupid things that will not make you a better person and not make you of use to those around you. Alcohol can be used as something to take the edge off the day and just chill with some friends or it can be consumed to the point of intoxication so you can ashamed and depressed the next day. Toilets can be used for the disposal of bodily waste or as a .The Nazis theory that history is a struggle between races for superiority is wrong. The communist/capitalist theory that history is a struggle between classes for equality or an equal playing field is wrong. All of this is really a struggle between the smart and the stupid choices. Smart people can do stupid things and then learn from the experience but stupid people (who are now usually solopcists disguised as "individualists" ) do stupid things allmost exclusively unless they are told what not to do. The stupid will ruin any good idea if given the chance.

.

Muslim world is countries that are muslim. Muslim "extremism" is not class struggle, probably more a form of militant traditionalism. I don't know enough about the specifics of muslims faiths or Pakistan to make a value judgement on what type of entertainment and technology they can have that is proper for their faiths, but i do know that a big enough population of muslims doesnt like western influence enough to kill this women and execute the most elaborate terrorist attacks ever a few years back. Therefore i would prefer not to get involved in trying to reconcile their beliefs to fit ours. Any change their will happen from within but its pretty obvious they dont not want it at least at the moment.

Let them have it, in fact give them ALL of it, launch weapons of mass fapping. Porn is the worst waste of time and energy imaginable.

Only for the cosmopolitanist. The muslim world has sent the message time and time again that they dont want western values. I believe they have that right and in order to avoid more wars with them we have to approach our dealings with them from that angle.

"As a lifelong observer of the Pakistani struggle for autonomy, my thoughts of Benazir Bhutto are brutal, honest, and accurate: she is a lackey for the selfish mass of people who want to adopt Western style reforms under the guise of "democracy" but really seek to enrich themselves materially at the expense of the spiritual and cultural life of the country. As a Pakistani who does not want my country to follow the path of the United States into slovenly decadence, nor the Soviet Union into dogma and misery, I would prefer a traditional solution because it escapes all of these problems. Benazir Bhutto opposed such a solution and pompously insisted that her own way was "morally superior" to other ways, even though she was aware of the decay and perversity and corruption it brings. Dear Americans, not all of us want to follow you on your path to doom. Your future is like a bag of candy, in that it is so tempting now, and will feel good for awhile, but when the candy is gone, it is an empty bag blowing in the wind and we wish we had eaten a real lunch so we have energy to do what is right. I am glad Benazir Bhutto is out of politics and, if it took her death to do that, I am glad she is dead. " http://www.corrupt.org/news/thoughts_on_benazir_bhutto The message of this bombings is clear: Arabs are tremendously proud of their culture and beliefs and if anyone tries even in a nonviolent manner to force western style multiculturalist/capitalist values in the middle east they will be shown no mercy. Stop global terrorism: end cosmopolitanism

Conspiracy theories and why they fail.

lol sorry, link fixed now.

Some suggestions here.

I was called a "snow nigger" once. I laughed. When confronting an opposing idea try to understand it thoroughly then poke holes in any parts that may be logically flawed. Come to think of it doing the same for your ideas would be helpful in examining what you actually stand for. Name calling or more subtle insults (ie surely only an idiot would think...), while they shouldn't be illegal, serves no purpose in debate.

Hitler was not a bully, bullies tend to be outcasts that push people around. Hitler Himmler, and Goebbels were master manipulators who convinced (not bullied) a nation into believing in their cause without the general populace even knowing what they had done.

Highly intelligent people are neccessary for all large scale civilisation to function and move forward. It also needs physically fit workers of various skill levels and trades who, while self efficiant enough to take care of their basic needs without being told what to do, need direction when doing their various small but important parts in creating and maintaining civilisation.

"The world may be explained in sociological terms. David Riesman describes three basic social personalities in The Lonely Crowd. 'Other-directed' people pattern their behavior on what their peers expect of them. Suburban America's men in gray-flannel suits are other-directed. 'Inner-directed' people are guided by what they have been trained to expect of themselves. [General Douglas] MacArthur was inner-directed. The third type, the 'tradition-directed,' has not been seen in the West since the Middle Ages. Tradition-directed people hardly think of themselves as individuals; their conduct is determined by folk rituals handed down from the past." ~ American Caesar, by William Manchester, p. 537

"there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically." How did this become a racist statement? We all needed to adapt at least somewhat differently to our surrounding, though obviously for not enough time for us to be different, and thats wonderful and what makes humanity a diverse species. But then again maybe we are actually all the exact same, we all bleed red. after all! Also... This "man" cant be racist because he is 16% black, and 40% vegetable!

Yes i know what Adam Smith thought but he failed to take into account that what people believe is to be in their own self interest can be manipulated through state policy. For Nazis it was enforcing in everyone that they are above the rest of the world and must make more breeding room for their people. For Commies it was enforcing that everyone except the elites are equal and should work collectively and impose this thought process on the rest of the world. For our world it seems to enforces that everyone is individuals, their should not be a cultural basis for society and whatever makes the most money (usually that which appeals to the most basic instincts) and doesn't offend is good. Some people have recently added from the Nazi and Commie doctrines that we must spread this thought process around the world. "If you except the ascetic ideal, man, the animal man had no meaning. His existence on earth contained no end; "What is the purpose of man at all?" was a question without an answer; the will for man and the world was lacking; behind every great human destiny rang as a refrain a still greater "All is vanity!" The ascetic ideal simply means this: that something was lacking , that a tremendous void encircled man—he did not know how to justify himself, to explain himself, to affirm himself, he suffered from the problem of his own meaning. "-Nietzsche's The Geneology of Morals

Of course smart people can be wrong, but why especially? Wouldn't the average to lower class opinions be easier to sway through propaganda and the like? I agree that the government should'nt regulate culture, especially through affirmative action.

I didnt mean to imply that im talking about any group specifically here, plenty of smart but totally selfindulgent people who walk around with PHDs. Im not a moralist but i tend to see things as either constructive or deconstructive. The method to their madness might be this modern version of individualism (which you claim to oppose is uncivilised) that is apparently everyone indulging in their primary and selfish urges as opposed to what is best for the whole, or even themselves!