|
On March 22 2009 13:13 Shiverfish wrote:
One final note I wanted to leave on. What does it mean when my depiction of a perfect dream world would treat my own self as one of the subjects it must purge of its ranks?
"The human species, the sluggish Homo sapiens, will once again enter the stage of radical reconstruction and become in his own hands the object of the most complex methods of artificial selection and psychophysical training... Man will make it his goal...to create a higher sociobiological type, a superman, if you will" - Leon Trotsky, Literature and Revolution.
courtesy of wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Soviet_man).
See where Homo Sapiens Sovieticus went? (Hint: it didn't).
Also, instead of 'reviving' our society using purges (this historically does nothing to solve any problem), we could instead alleviate our economic problem by funding long-overdue infrastructure at the local and state levels to poorer regions (where crime is abundant not due to the inherency of the evils of people, but just because they're lifestyle is so shitty, and crime gives so much allure as a way out), in works such as building schools, parks, libraries, etc. Not only does this assist in economic revitalization (long term), but it also prevents the need to set up purging institutions, and a bazillion court tribunals to determine the fairness of the "purges".
Also, when they come for you (as a progenitor of this idea, they by default must come), you'd better accept it.
|
|
|
this blog is flawed in too many aspects.
stating " The average return of a randomly selected portfolio is the same as those managed by professional investors." is simply ignorant.
also there aren't enough humans with the stable moral grounding, work ethic and intelligence required to fit into the scenario you dream of.
let's hypothesize that 85% of humanity would have to be wiped out, and this would be a near impossibility considering that the remaining 15 % would have to be of enough moral standing that they would not tolerate standing by as 85% of the world died while they were left to live.
you would have to eliminate the 85% yourself without the knowledge of these 15%, and either stay alive as long as you could to ensure that their children are not morally corrupt, but that will only last so long, and you will perish, and the cycle will restart, or kill yourself and follow your own dream, and have a perfect world for the very brief amount of time it takes for another morally corrupt human to arise.
there is a huge difference between shiverfish's perfect world and Light's from death note mainly shiverfish wants to eliminate all morally corrupt individuals, and Light will settle for killing as many as needed for the remaining to change their ways.
( honestly i believe as low as .00001% would fit into what i percieved to be your scenario. )
|
On March 22 2009 15:22 Tensai176 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2009 14:31 Peter[Deuce] wrote:
Good blogs.
It reminds me of my history debate on whether America should have an agrarian society rather than the industrialized behemoth we are now.
With people as farmers, I think we'd have less people starving and stress about capital would be insignificant. We'll be healthier and stronger also because, obviously, eating healthier and doing farm work...
Then again what if America was too weak to stop Germany in World War I and II? What about our technological advances, ease of traveling, communications, amusements? America didn't stop Germany in World War I. America helped greatly to stop Germany in World War II. It's not a one country war btw, hence, WORLD War. America had help.
Obviously it's a world war, hence the name World War.
Point is, the Allies(US is in it I know, referring to Britain/France(knocked out WWII)/Russia surrendered WWI -> Lead to pulling German troops out of Russia which would lead to Germany potentially winning the war) were losing the war both times anyway and needed America's help.
|
On March 22 2009 14:08 cunninglinguists wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2009 13:55 yoshtodd wrote:On March 22 2009 13:51 cunninglinguists wrote:On March 22 2009 13:48 yoshtodd wrote:
Can admins please ban this faggot? ? for what? For using TL as his livejournal, to rant about murdering people who are obsolete to society. sure his blogs could find a better forum elsewhere (lol @ him posting this at a starcraft site) but that's not enough reason to call for his banning, and then claim he is a 'faggot'. plus livejournal is a blogging site, so there's nothing wrong with using tl's 'blog' section as if it were livejournal.
agreed no1 asked u to read it
On March 22 2009 14:31 Peter[Deuce] wrote:
Good blogs.
It reminds me of my history debate on whether America should have an agrarian society rather than the industrialized behemoth we are now.
With people as farmers, I think we'd have less people starving and stress about capital would be insignificant. We'll be healthier and stronger also because, obviously, eating healthier and doing farm work...
Then again what if America was too weak to stop Germany in World War I and II? What about our technological advances, ease of traveling, communications, amusements?
r u CRAZY?! we wouldn't have starcraft then!!! dude... think it through a lil more
oh that and we have more than enough food that we export surplus and we actually rot a big batch to keep the price at a lvl where farmers could live off of
other than that this blog entry is fail... in that it poses questions only the author could answer in his self-defined world of self-perfection, from which he must be purged to make it perfect? iono man i say stop taking w/e it is u r taking or start taking w.e it is u rn't taking
that and u noe perfection in such a wide sense is pretty friggin relative... relative...just in case u don't get it, RELATIVE
|
On March 22 2009 15:22 Tensai176 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2009 14:31 Peter[Deuce] wrote:
Good blogs.
It reminds me of my history debate on whether America should have an agrarian society rather than the industrialized behemoth we are now.
With people as farmers, I think we'd have less people starving and stress about capital would be insignificant. We'll be healthier and stronger also because, obviously, eating healthier and doing farm work...
Then again what if America was too weak to stop Germany in World War I and II? What about our technological advances, ease of traveling, communications, amusements? America didn't stop Germany in World War I. America helped greatly to stop Germany in World War II. It's not a one country war btw, hence, WORLD War. America had help.
Not to derail the thread (or maybe I want to  ) but American industry contributed enormously to WW2's outcome. You're not really saying otherwise, I just thought it was worth a post. Even before we officially entered the war, it was true and certainly throughout our involvement. No one will or should begrudge English/French/Russian contributions, but the Western front was ENORMOUSLY impacted by American industry - which, afaik, is what Peter[deuce] was talking about.
Just sayin!
|
On March 22 2009 15:18 L wrote:
This looks like a job for... me.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Baa?21247 Posts
Didn't we go through this before in your previous blogs?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
