A Question For Right Wingers

[betsy]

On 6/20/2020 at 12:42 PM, Moonbox said:

Yeah this is a truly epic thread necro.  I don't think I'd even joined the forum yet...

Hahahaha   and here I am marvelling that we got quite a number of newbies!   I didn't even think to look at the date!

[Argus]

11 hours ago, cougar said:

Do you really believe this?    "Rewarding", "Providing a service", "benefit to society" ?

You know you're talking to someone who wrote that 16 years ago, right?

Quote

No, it all starts with raping the environment.

The environment? How do you rape the environment? Where is the environment's sex organs? Do you really feel this kind of absurd hyperbole helps whatever case you're trying to make?

Quote

 Someone exploits nature - land, resources, other forms of life, that they get for nearly free.  Then they turn around and sell all of that to everyone else, putting many consumers in debt.

Very little of modern economics or business has much to do with nature in the first place. And your presumption that because you offer something for sale those pathetic, ignorant, stupid sheep called 'people' or 'consumers' will get themselves in debt to buy it is almost breathtakingly arrogant. Tell me, if 'consumers' are to pig-ignorant to be able to properly manage their financial affairs why in the hell do we let them vote? Perhaps we shouldn't. Perhaps government should make all decisions for everyone, and even assign them what consumer goods the government feels they need?

Quote

In the industrial jungle there are going to be all those supporting industries - services and good manufacturers where people at the very top will do better by exploiting those below, but for their own benefit, not  with society in mind.

In every human endeavor some will do far better than others due to skill, drive, talent and luck. A very few singers get hit records. A very few actors become stars. A very few writers sell most of the books.  A very few athletes make the major leagues, and then a very few of those become stars and get all the hits, the touchdowns, the baskets, the goals. Did the likes of Gretzky, Howe and Hull 'exploit those below' or were they just more talented?  That some succeed and some fail is not a result of exploitation.

Quote

"The human society" as you put it, is a damn tumor - an engine turning this planet into a landfill.   It is brainless, greedy and depraved.

There are more trees on this landfill than there were fifty years ago. And environmental concerns are a major aspect of every resource industry in the Western world. Perhaps not so much in the corrupt third world. So maybe you should wish for the third world to be destroyed so the capitalist west can spread out everywhere.

Edited June 27, 2020 by Argus

[cougar]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

You know you're talking to someone who wrote that 16 years ago, right?

 

Argus , you can save yourself the time reading my comments and replying.  I do not read your replies.

[Argus]

54 minutes ago, cougar said:

Argus , you can save yourself the time reading my comments and replying.  I do not read your replies.

And yet you did. And even if you find yourself so over-matched in discussing your emotionally driven, fact-free opinions that you won't dare to deal with my rebuttal I leave it here to point out to others the barren intellectual landscape of your views.

[cougar]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

And yet you did. And even if you find yourself so over-matched in discussing your emotionally driven, fact-free opinions that you won't dare to deal with my rebuttal I leave it here to point out to others the barren intellectual landscape of your views.

I did not read past the first sentence Argus.   I am convinced in what I said to the point your narrative does not matter.

[Argus]

8 minutes ago, cougar said:

I did not read past the first sentence Argus.   I am convinced in what I said to the point your narrative does not matter.

Ah, but it matters to me. When people make wholly ridiculous assertions on things like Capitalism I feel the need to point out the (many) errors of their thinking. So you're going to get responses to your posts regardless of whether you read them or not.

[cannuck]

On 1/17/2004 at 6:07 PM, udawg said:

Just a comment about abortion.

Many people DO believe this. But is it fair to a child, to be born into an environment where they are a) not wanted, or b)unable to be taken care of properly.

Those are the two main reasons for abortion, I would think. Child not wanted, or parent/s unable to care for child.

There are tens of thousands of new immigrants in Canada in an environment where they are not wanted and can't be taken care of properly.  So, by your standards, it is just fine to murder them?

Ahhh, wait a minute:  I forgot how the double standards of the looney left works: you only want to murder those who can't speak or fight for themselves.  The right to life is only reserved for those who will likely vote left.

Edited June 28, 2020 by cannuck

[cougar]

8 hours ago, Argus said:

When people make wholly ridiculous assertions on things like Capitalism I feel the need to point out the (many) errors of their thinking.

You first need to find out where your money is coming  from and what the economic growth is based on and then we can talk.  From my observations you have no clue.   It is easy to the so called intellectuals to completely forget that what goes into their pocket is based on the environment and that the food and all goods and materials they buy come from the same environment. 

[August1991]

On 6/20/2020 at 7:15 AM, Rue said:

Your question is not logical. It presupposes to be Conservative one is against gay marriage or women having final say over what they do with their bodies. Neither issue  is automatically rejected by one who would be Conservative and in fact under traditional Conservatism both could be defined as individual rights that the State should not decide for individuals.

I think you need to revisit the labels people use these days when they call OTHERS conservative, liberal, progressive, racist,  etc.

Too much labeling and assuming what others think or believe without taking the time to ask them.

Edmund Burke is often considered the classic example of a Conservative. If you find out anywhere in his writings he was anti abortion or anti gay let  me know.

As for me if you want a label, I like kosher doughnut ahole. Have a nice day. I love PEI.  Viva Spud Island ( McCain Slave Colony)..

Rue,

According to "American intellectuals", there are three branches of the American Right: 1. conservatives, 2. libertarians, 3. whackos.

According to these intellectuals, Libertarians believe that individuals should be free to do whatever they want - except have an AK-47.

Conservatives? They want women in the kitchen, pregnant.

Whackos? They want everyone to have an AK-47.

=====

Brennan? "American intellectuals" don't understand the irony.

Edited June 28, 2020 by August1991

[Argus]

7 hours ago, cougar said:

You first need to find out where your money is coming  from and what the economic growth is based on and then we can talk.  From my observations you have no clue.

Well, I know that it comes from the 78% of Canada's GDP which is based on a  service economy. I suppose if you want to get highly technical I need a computer, which is made with a variety of metals and petroleum products so there's at least 'some' raping of nature involved there.

7 hours ago, cougar said:

It is easy to the so called intellectuals to completely forget that what goes into their pocket is based on the environment and that the food and all goods and materials they buy come from the same environment. 

I don't think growing food involves 'raping the environment'. Nor is growing cotton which is made into the clothes I'm wearing at the moment.

[cougar]

9 hours ago, Argus said:

Well, I know that it comes from the 78% of Canada's GDP which is based on a  service economy.

Then why not those people in the service economy get money they can only buy services with?  No products, no food !

You have ways to go in your understanding of how things work.  Maybe you never will learn.

Quote

I don't think growing food involves 'raping the environment'. Nor is growing cotton which is made into the clothes I'm wearing at the moment.

Do I have to explain the very obvious to you, again? 

Where do you grow this food?  What did the place look like before you started growing food on it?  I can tell you what it was.  It was a live ecosystem with all kinds of life living, interacting and feeding there together. 

It was then leveled to the ground - all life destroyed, all plants destroyed, to leave only one plant species - tomatoes, so you can eat salad, only you and other humanoids, who keep growing in numbers, invading and obliterating more land to feed themselves, power their vehicles, make their useless products.

If one had to figure out the productivity of the land before tomatoes were grown, it would be probably tens or hundreds of times higher.   Nature had it working 100% right to the optimum capacity.   We went in there, raped and destroyed and left only our organic and non-organic shit behind.

Get your mind working a little bit, please.

 

Edited June 28, 2020 by cougar