|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
2 - 3 pages of circle-jerking into a Trump level stunt.
fuck nations and states and fascists and the whole notion of 'em!. we came, we mixed them, we saw no more culture hence there is no culture and there was no culture. ever.
of course culture exists and it existed since humans started organizing themselves in social groups; that its definition(concept of) varies across 'current nations' means nothing; it doesn't that mean culture doesn't exist.
culture is what made some groups of people better at surviving than others; it also created a framework in which knowledge/skills/habits/philosophies were better passed on/perpetuated.
i'd rather celebrate diversity and multiculturalism by seeing and acknowledging colours and culture rather than forcing everyone to see grays.
|
Well this thread has always been like that. Especially the German posters on this site are infuriating in their naivety.
Luckily I have to the skills to easily find jobs in any country in the world and decided to leave the country when Merkel opened the border.
I can promise that my family will not barely speak the tongue of the country they are born in and only speak German despite living here for 3 generations.
I would be the happiest person in the world if you guys here are all proven right and I am a bigoted small minded idiot that just doesn't see the glory of bringing in people that glorify middle ages/tribal values.
Experience makes me very pessimistic that this will be the case however. In my opinion 5 millions immigrants from China, Vietnam or the Phillipines (non muslim parts) would lead to less problems than 100,000 from the Middle East or Africa.
Anyway, I wish you all the best of luck thinking that even daring to mention that there is something like a German society is the most vile nazi propaganda. Having lived in 4 different countries now, such large scale stupidity can only be seen in Germany. I am out of this thread again since it doesn't change anything anyway. Have fun.
User was warned for this post
|
On July 21 2018 03:49 xM(Z wrote:
2 - 3 pages of circle-jerking into a Trump level stunt.
fuck nations and states and fascists and the whole notion of 'em!. we came, we mixed them, we saw no more culture hence there is no culture and there was no culture. ever.
of course culture exists and it existed since humans started organizing themselves in social groups; that its definition(concept of) varies across 'current nations' means nothing; it doesn't that mean culture doesn't exist.
culture is what made some groups of people better at surviving than others; it also created a framework in which knowledge/skills/habits/philosophies were better passed on/perpetuated.
i'd rather celebrate diversity and multiculturalism by seeing and acknowledging colours and culture rather than forcing everyone to see grays.
Sapiens seem to have things that humans do in order to hack together unity as a running theme of what makes us succesfull. Culture, tribes, families, money, religion are all things used in order to aggregate and unite larger blocks of people in order to be more succesfull. Ignoring, or worse, dismissing, culture is incredibly stupid.
That said, on the development scale of humanity something superceding culture and/or nation states are clearly the next stage of our development.
The thing is that these things happens organically. At some point something will unite people more efficently than culture and states and we will go global, or at least continent wide.
But if that will be cultural mixing, AI propaganda, tigther unions (EU) or something else entierly is impossible to tell.
Right now culture is a thing in many places however,
|
Tribes, family and religion are definitely nothing that improves the success of nations at the political Level. In fact, all of those are the precondition for patrimonialism and clientelism and generally lead to corruption and low-trust societies. Fukuyama discusses this at length in his 2015 book Political Order and Political Decay. One big divider between successful modern nations and unsuccessful nations is that the latter never developed impersonal bureaucracies (espcially not before they became democracies). States like Greece or regions like southern Italy are dominated by the family and transactional relationships.
It's a bad idea to build countries around cultural groups or tribes because it will inevitably lead to factionalism and dysfunction.
|
Greece and southern Italy were poor before successful modern countries became modern. You're not proving anything by pointing at the emphasis people put on the family there. They have nothing else to be proud of, of course they do that. It makes them appear more "family focused" than other nations, but that doesn't mean they're less successful because of their focus on tribalism, family or religion.
I would argue that those better developed nations achieved their success because their tribe and families were stronger than others. When you're strong you can think of investing into further growth (like developing those impersonal bureaucracies) instead of just clinging to what you already have.
|
I did expand on the mechanism that makes it less successful in the end. Focussing on the tribe or the family is counterproductive when a country wants to build a meritocratic state. Greece actually was not that poor doing pre-modern times, in fact the Greeks were quite commercially successful especially within maritime trade within the Ottoman empire. What Greece never had was a strong impartial state. As soon as democracy was introduced, by the way one generation before it was introduced in the United Kingdom, Greece 'modernized without development', the bureaucracy ran on private favours and soon was seven times as large as in the UK.
The same can be observed in Latin America, another region where religion and family are especially important. Politicians will use these connections to outright buy votes or hand down personal favours as election promises. People placed in the bureaucracy are functionaries that organise voters and promise them favours for their vote. It's pretty obvious to see how this hurts the efficiency of government. You can either focus on skill and competence regardless of origin, or you can favour personal relationships, you cannot do both.
And as soon as the tribe enters politics you produce the issue of identitarianism. If ethnicity or religion becomes a proxy for trust, then different groups soon become suspicious of each other, and will not vote on programs (which are supposed to reflect their true preferences) but simply loyalty.
|
And your solution is? Friendly occupation of a country for several decades like in germany? Doesn't seem plausible.
The Greek, for damn good reasons, never trusted the sates/their overlords. Making them democratic won't change that over night... See also Afghanistan, Iraq and Co..
Democracy needs trust in your state, if there never was any, it won't work.
|
I don't know what the solution is, but I guess understanding the problem is worth something. There is indeed no easy path. In France the creation of the administration was the result of destruction of the ancien regime, and in Germany the reason was militarization and competition with other European powers, so the modern states came at significant costs, often for martial reasons.
Some degree of fiscal discipline enforced by the European Union and institutions like the troika probably have to play a role if you want to reform governments. They can certainly help to produce institutions that are long-term oriented and less politicised.
|
On July 21 2018 03:49 xM(Z wrote:
2 - 3 pages of circle-jerking into a Trump level stunt.
fuck nations and states and fascists and the whole notion of 'em!. we came, we mixed them, we saw no more culture hence there is no culture and there was no culture. ever.
of course culture exists and it existed since humans started organizing themselves in social groups; that its definition(concept of) varies across 'current nations' means nothing; it doesn't that mean culture doesn't exist.
culture is what made some groups of people better at surviving than others; it also created a framework in which knowledge/skills/habits/philosophies were better passed on/perpetuated.
i'd rather celebrate diversity and multiculturalism by seeing and acknowledging colours and culture rather than forcing everyone to see grays.
Do you even know what the word 'circle jerk' means?
|
On July 21 2018 05:40 Sent. wrote:
Greece and southern Italy were poor before successful modern countries became modern. You're not proving anything by pointing at the emphasis people put on the family there. They have nothing else to be proud of, of course they do that. It makes them appear more "family focused" than other nations, but that doesn't mean they're less successful because of their focus on tribalism, family or religion.
I would argue that those better developed nations achieved their success because their tribe and families were stronger than others. When you're strong you can think of investing into further growth (like developing those impersonal bureaucracies) instead of just clinging to what you already have.
Any society that has grown bigger than, say a small village, has proven to be incapable to find truely collectivist decision processes. What you write happens on a personal level. For the greatest success the role of societies/states thereby becomes merely to shield the individual from negative decisions of other individuals.
Societies with the greates degree of individual freedom are therefore the most successful. From Ancient Rome to Napoleonic France, Victorian England or the USA, those societies that developed more reliable law and information systems and broader participation systems on the base of protection of personal freedom have been the dominant superpowers of their time. Scientifically, industrially, economically, militarilly.
Collectivist and traditionalist cultures have proven time and time again to be incompetitive with free states. Advocates of these forms of thinking are actively working on the death of the very thing they want to protect. The only way they could win is by outnumbering the free world.
|
On July 21 2018 07:23 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2018 03:49 xM(Z wrote:
2 - 3 pages of circle-jerking into a Trump level stunt.
fuck nations and states and fascists and the whole notion of 'em!. we came, we mixed them, we saw no more culture hence there is no culture and there was no culture. ever.
of course culture exists and it existed since humans started organizing themselves in social groups; that its definition(concept of) varies across 'current nations' means nothing; it doesn't that mean culture doesn't exist.
culture is what made some groups of people better at surviving than others; it also created a framework in which knowledge/skills/habits/philosophies were better passed on/perpetuated.
i'd rather celebrate diversity and multiculturalism by seeing and acknowledging colours and culture rather than forcing everyone to see grays. Do you even know what the word 'circle jerk' means? yes, dudes stroking each other(metaphorically or not) physically or psychologically, while being in close proximity(a circle, at arms reach/length etc); in there, was the later.
@the others - everyone, yes even the germans, started with tribes; german tribes(but not only) were unified to create a Germany so the idea that democracy in Greece failed because tribalism/family ties is not even worth considering; corruption sure can and was the main culprit but don't blame the substructure of a state/nation for the fail.
even today the remnants of tribalism is very strong, yes in Germany, when you look at regional cultures, appartenances(political,economical, social), values etc.
i had more things on democracy but i'm kinda fucked these days so to put it short: there's a big difference between the taught, theoretical democracy and applied democracy and the plebs feel the whip of the later.
democracy needs to project its power onto other states to sustain itself which in turn makes the one(s) spreading it, greedy little fuckers. democracy creates, sustains and perpetuates 'to big to fall' entities because it needs them to jostle for resource control on the world stage. it's justice angle is total shit when applied i.r.l because more often than not for similar crimes, the rich/well connected get a wrist slap while the pleb gets hard time in jail. the plebs get evicted/resettled for the greater good while the rich get tax breaks on propriety etc etc etc.
wake the fuck up 'cause what you were taught is not what's happening.
|
Jeeze that's unnecessarily homophobic
|
On July 21 2018 23:51 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2018 07:23 iamthedave wrote:On July 21 2018 03:49 xM(Z wrote:
2 - 3 pages of circle-jerking into a Trump level stunt.
fuck nations and states and fascists and the whole notion of 'em!. we came, we mixed them, we saw no more culture hence there is no culture and there was no culture. ever.
of course culture exists and it existed since humans started organizing themselves in social groups; that its definition(concept of) varies across 'current nations' means nothing; it doesn't that mean culture doesn't exist.
culture is what made some groups of people better at surviving than others; it also created a framework in which knowledge/skills/habits/philosophies were better passed on/perpetuated.
i'd rather celebrate diversity and multiculturalism by seeing and acknowledging colours and culture rather than forcing everyone to see grays. Do you even know what the word 'circle jerk' means? yes, dudes stroking each other(metaphorically or not) physically or psychologically, while being in close proximity(a circle, at arms reach/length etc); in there, was the later. @the others - everyone, yes even the germans, started with tribes; german tribes(but not only) were unified to create a Germany so the idea that democracy in Greece failed because tribalism/family ties is not even worth considering; corruption sure can and was the main culprit but don't blame the substructure of a state/nation for the fail. even today the remnants of tribalism is very strong, yes in Germany, when you look at regional cultures, appartenances(political,economical, social), values etc. i had more things on democracy but i'm kinda fucked these days so to put it short: there's a big difference between the taught, theoretical democracy and applied democracy and the plebs feel the whip of the later. democracy needs to project its power onto other states to sustain itself which in turn makes the one(s) spreading it, greedy little fuckers. democracy creates, sustains and perpetuates 'to big to fall' entities because it needs them to jostle for resource control on the world stage. it's justice angle is total shit when applied i.r.l because more often than not for similar crimes, the rich/well connected get a wrist slap while the pleb gets hard time in jail. the plebs get evicted/resettled for the greater good while the rich get tax breaks on propriety etc etc etc. wake the fuck up 'cause what you were taught is not what's happening.
I was born at the end of the 1980s. I live right now. I couldn't give any fuck about ancient German tribes.
Wake the fuck up, because the past is the past and outside of contracts and social interaction the living people have agreed to for themselves completely irrelevant for anybody. The real existing information that tells us about things that happened in the past my be a source to learn from for the present, everything else like "tribes" is at best worth a good night story or a TV series. What you are being told by traditionalists is not what is happening!
|
On July 22 2018 02:13 Artisreal wrote:
Jeeze that's unnecessarily homophobic
What exactly is?
|
On July 20 2018 19:34 TheDwf wrote:+ Show Spoiler +After Macron privatized our football victory to have the privilege to scream a few irrelevant sentences with his horrible high-pitched voice to get images just in time for the TV news + Show Spoiler +, he is rewarded with another gift: a major State scandal. Macron aide Benalla in French probe for beating protesterFrench prosecutors are investigating a senior presidential aide who attacked protesters in Paris while wearing a police visor. Alexandre Benalla, an assistant to President Emmanuel Macron's chief of staff, was filmed targeting a woman and a man during May Day protests. He was caught on video by a student activist and left the scene once challenged on camera. He was identified from the video by French newspaper Le Monde. On Thursday, it emerged he was accompanied on the day by a reserve policeman and employee of Mr Macron's political party, Vincent Crase. France's Interior Minister Gerard Collomb said he had ordered an investigation by the country's national police inspectorate. "These two people had no legal right to intervene," he said. (...) https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44883583 I will try to sum up as clearly and quickly as possible. 1) During the 1/05 demonstrations, some demonstrators and left-wing militants are filming what they think is cop violence. So far business as usual, a cop is beating demonstrators for free while other cops watch and do nothing, yawn. The video is uploaded on the Internet. 2) Turns out that the perpetrator was not a cop. Two days ago (18/07), Le Monde revealed that this guy, named Alexandre Benalla, was in fact Macron's aide. 3) Le Monde revealed that the presidency was aware of his behaviour, and punished him two days after the event (3/05) by suspending him for... only two weeks. Now, why is this big, why is Macron's name involved and why this will splash badly. 1) Macron's aide (he basically seems to be his Mr. Security) was impersonating a cop and acting like one, whereas he should have just been there “as an observer”. He also had a talkie-walkie. 2) Only yesterday was a judicial inquiry opened, for “violences perpetrated by someone entrusted with a public mission,” “usurpation of functions” and “usurpation of signs reserved for the public authority”. 3) According to Le Monde, Macron was quickly aware of the events after they happened. 4) Benalla seems to be quite close to Macron; not only he was acting as some kind of bodyguard during his travels, but there are also numerous photos of them during Macron's leisure time: + Show Spoiler +All of this means that: 1) The presidency (and the Interior) tried to cover up the affair. As per our article 40 of the Penal code, they must seize the justice when they are confronted with those kinds of facts. They did not, hoping that the case would not be revealed. Bad luck, it seems that some journalists still do their job. This reveals the behavior of an arrogant caste who think they are above the law. 2) To extinguish the fire, the presidency's spokeperson, in an absolutely pathetic and panicked statement yesterday morning, was forced to revealed that a second guy working for l'Élysée had also committed similar violences and had been fired. But this means that there likely was a network of brutes of that kind. 3) Active complicities up to the high ranks of the police prefecture (it wasn't actually the first time that Benalla was here in demonstration with cops). Three high-ranked cops were suspended today for complicity. The passiveness of cops nearby while Benalla was beating up demonstrators also likely means that they had instructions not to intervene because he was some “VIP”. 4) Given that Benalla was in the bus of the victory when our national team returned, i.e. a place of privilege, he was clearly not pushed aside as he should have been. Since Benalla was not fired rightaway for a severe case AND was covered AND was still working for l'Élysée (only today, in the heat of the massive sh*tstorm, are they starting the procedure to fire him!), how valuable he is and what does he know to be protected like that? My personal guess is that they were running some kind of small parallel police for the presidency, as the right-wing mafiosos did in the 60's with the infamous SAC: gathering thugs to do shady stuff, for instance beating up left-wing activists and demonstrators in order to intimidate them. We will see. There is a political crisis dawning, all oppositions are blocking the Parliament (the Constitutional reform was being discussed, where King Macron intends to make our already Phantom Parliament even more useless) until the government comes and explains the events. So far they dodge, the majority is heavily embarrassed. The Interior minister possibly lied yesterday in front of the Senate, pretending that he didn't know while he apparently did. At the request of all oppositions, there will be a parliamentary committed of inquiry which will audition people on those events next week. In a public visit yesterday, Macron refused to answer the journalists' questions, feigning to not hear them and wearing a fake smile de façade. In any mature democracy the whole hierarchic chain involved in that case would have resigned. But in the French Banana Republic, nothing of that order is happening yet. As of today, Benalla is currently held in custory. A fourth count has been added, apparently he was complicit in hijacking surveillance images… Medias are talking non-stop about this for the last 40+ hours. Stay tuned for the collapse of the Macronie… :popcorn: TL;DR: one of Macron's aides, quite close to him, beat up a few persons while impersonating a cop in a demonstration more than 2 months ago. The presidency tried to cover up the case, which is now blowing right under their nose. Possible signs of a secret cell operating as some kind of private militia for Macron.
Update on the major scandal which is wrecking the Macronie:
- In its pathetic press conference, the presidency's spokesperson had pretended that Macron's thug militiaman, Alexandre Benalla, had been punished in such a way that he no longer worked close to the president. That was a lie. He was still in charge in July, journalists had no troubles finding numerous photos of him next to the Macrons during their travels. Apparently he was even supposed to be in charge of the security of the Macrons during their holidays this summer! Talk about “the most severe sanction ever taken”! (Words from the spokesman about his 15 days suspension for assaulting freely two protestors while impersonating a cop… LOL)
- The press revealed that from the 09/07 onwards, i.e. more than 2 months after his violent behaviour was known, he got a prestigious apartment in a district reserved to the president's close collaborators (his chief of staff, etc.; Mitterrand also had his hidden daughter there…). So clearly he was not at all punished.
- Benalla was apparently earning 10 000€ per month—more than the highest ranked people in the police, and as much as a minister—with bonus up to 3 000€; he had a car with a chauffeur, and his car had some devices reserved to the police (special headlights). Insane list of privileges for someone who didn't even have a clear and official role…
- Benalla and the other thug+ Show Spoiler +who still works for the macronist party…
- We learned today from the right-wing députés that Benalla had a H badge, something which gives him access to the hemicycle of the Assemblée. Not only he had zero business being here, since the President cannot enter the hemicycle, but the badge itself is quite a rare privilege (it's the highest level of access), only a few selected people from the presidency with a political role get it. No one understands why Benalla had this H badge. The right seems to think that this badge implies that he had political functions. Tomorrow we'll probably learn that he had the nuclear codes or something… lol
- The parliamentary inquiry about this mess begins as soon as Monday morning, with the audition of the Interior minister who lied about not knowing the case. The majority did everything to slow and sabotage the process, they wanted the audiences to be secret but were forced to concede public ones given the uproar and the demands of the oppositions, etc. The different groups are clashing about who should be heard. The FI (left) wants Macron himself to come and give explanations but of course macronists will never allow it.
- The Assemblée is blocked in a situation never seen before. It's like the opposition is on strike. Since the case was revealed, députés from the opposition are freezing the legislative work with endless rappels au règlement (points of order; literally, “remind the rules”) about the Benalla case. Living in their own world where there is apparently no scandal, the majority wanted to keep working on the constitutional reform (!) but had to concede this forced “pause” because of the political crisis. MPs debated the organization of the parliamentary inquiry, and those from the oppositions wanted ministers (the Prime and/or the Interior one) to come and give explanations. None came. The prime minister was at the Tour de France yesterday…
- According to Mediapart, during the 1/05 events Benalla was giving orders to cops nearby… while he should have zero authority over them. This wasn't the first time according to some cops in the medias, Benalla was known as a “president's man” with special privileges. Cops trade unions are very mad at this affair by the way, since it shows corruption in their hierarchy + a complete hijacking of the police by some parallel cell at l'Élysée.
- Macron is still silent, more than 72 hours after the case was revealed. Heard by investigators, his chief of staff confirmed that he was aware of the events (Benalla assaulting protestors the 01/05). According to the press, Macron personally agreed with the absolutely derisory sanction of a 15 days suspension. Hard to see how his personal responsibility is not involved.
- The Benalla affair now has its Wikipedia page and is being talked overseas.
The public parliamentary auditions will start Monday morning, so the massive sh*tstorm should continue the whole week. The press, even the macronist one, is heavily criticizing Macron about his attitude and silence. His own camp is stunned and dumbfounded. Some macronists are still in heavy denial and pretend that this is an individual problem or random nonsense like that.
So far Macron is refusing to talk (he made it known yesterday that he would not talk about the case) but he won't be able to hold for long. Their crisis management has been nothing short of catastrophic.
Stay tuned for further developments of this mini-Watergate. Drop Netflix and follow for free this French live show!
|
On July 22 2018 02:36 m4ini wrote:What exactly is?
Painting guys jerking each other off as negative.
|
On July 22 2018 07:26 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2018 02:36 m4ini wrote:On July 22 2018 02:13 Artisreal wrote:
Jeeze that's unnecessarily homophobic What exactly is? Painting guys jerking each other off as negative.
So when i say "i don't like feet" i'm kinkshaming other people, is that where you're going with this? I find the idea of jerking off another guy revolting. Yet here i am, at every possibility, i am advocating equal rights for gays (including actual marriage, not civil union or whatever bullshit you wanna call it). Here's facts. Homophobia is hating/having prejudice towards gays. Not liking or disliking their sexual preference, if disliking jerking off another guy is homophobic then "being okay with it" makes you gay. Do you see the very obvious problem in that kind of argument? Yes? Good, then continue attacking his argument, there's plenty enough there.
To be clear: your reasoning is in the same corner as asking germans to not wave a german flag during the world cup, because that would basically make you a Nazi.
edit: for the uninitiated: yes, that's an argument some german politicians made.
|
On July 22 2018 02:17 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 21 2018 23:51 xM(Z wrote:On July 21 2018 07:23 iamthedave wrote:On July 21 2018 03:49 xM(Z wrote:
2 - 3 pages of circle-jerking into a Trump level stunt.
fuck nations and states and fascists and the whole notion of 'em!. we came, we mixed them, we saw no more culture hence there is no culture and there was no culture. ever.
of course culture exists and it existed since humans started organizing themselves in social groups; that its definition(concept of) varies across 'current nations' means nothing; it doesn't that mean culture doesn't exist.
culture is what made some groups of people better at surviving than others; it also created a framework in which knowledge/skills/habits/philosophies were better passed on/perpetuated.
i'd rather celebrate diversity and multiculturalism by seeing and acknowledging colours and culture rather than forcing everyone to see grays. Do you even know what the word 'circle jerk' means? yes, dudes stroking each other(metaphorically or not) physically or psychologically, while being in close proximity(a circle, at arms reach/length etc); in there, was the later. @the others - everyone, yes even the germans, started with tribes; german tribes(but not only) were unified to create a Germany so the idea that democracy in Greece failed because tribalism/family ties is not even worth considering; corruption sure can and was the main culprit but don't blame the substructure of a state/nation for the fail. even today the remnants of tribalism is very strong, yes in Germany, when you look at regional cultures, appartenances(political,economical, social), values etc. i had more things on democracy but i'm kinda fucked these days so to put it short: there's a big difference between the taught, theoretical democracy and applied democracy and the plebs feel the whip of the later. democracy needs to project its power onto other states to sustain itself which in turn makes the one(s) spreading it, greedy little fuckers. democracy creates, sustains and perpetuates 'to big to fall' entities because it needs them to jostle for resource control on the world stage. it's justice angle is total shit when applied i.r.l because more often than not for similar crimes, the rich/well connected get a wrist slap while the pleb gets hard time in jail. the plebs get evicted/resettled for the greater good while the rich get tax breaks on propriety etc etc etc. wake the fuck up 'cause what you were taught is not what's happening. I was born at the end of the 1980s. I live right now. I couldn't give any fuck about ancient German tribes. Wake the fuck up, because the past is the past and outside of contracts and social interaction the living people have agreed to for themselves completely irrelevant for anybody. The real existing information that tells us about things that happened in the past my be a source to learn from for the present, everything else like "tribes" is at best worth a good night story or a TV series. What you are being told by traditionalists is not what is happening! you need to come down from the internet there buddy; there are countless posts in this topic talking about/describing various german regions and their historical and current unchanging trends.
if you pretend something or someone doesn't exist, it doesn't make it go away or disappear regardless of what your parents told you when little.
Edit: most social interactions i've came across are defined by 'i need this so i'll fuck you to get it'; sure i'll say sorry after but i'll fuck you anyways. no one agrees with that shit.
news flash at 11!, "people struggle in life". coercion, intimidation, inequality are facts of life you don't pre-agree with.
|
On July 22 2018 10:56 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2018 07:26 Artisreal wrote:On July 22 2018 02:36 m4ini wrote:On July 22 2018 02:13 Artisreal wrote:
Jeeze that's unnecessarily homophobic What exactly is? Painting guys jerking each other off as negative. So when i say "i don't like feet" i'm kinkshaming other people, is that where you're going with this? I find the idea of jerking off another guy revolting. Yet here i am, at every possibility, i am advocating equal rights for gays (including actual marriage, not civil union or whatever bullshit you wanna call it). Here's facts. Homophobia is hating/having prejudice towards gays. Not liking or disliking their sexual preference, if disliking jerking off another guy is homophobic then "being okay with it" makes you gay. Do you see the very obvious problem in that kind of argument? Yes? Good, then continue attacking his argument, there's plenty enough there. To be clear: your reasoning is in the same corner as asking germans to not wave a german flag during the world cup, because that would basically make you a Nazi. edit: for the uninitiated: yes, that's an argument some german politicians made.
I'm well aware that this is news to many, but it's not acceptable to equate homosexual acts with malicious behaviour. Whether you like it or not is your thing, whether you shout it out loud in other people's faces is the difference that counts here.
If you cannot understand that, then you probably have to experience what it means to be gay and have it shoved down your throat that it's a disgusting, horrible thing to do and have to be offered a proper fuck by some random stranger who felt intimidated because you were holding hands as two women.
Do you understand how what I'm doing had nothing to do with what you put in my mouth?
You don't use gentility towards women as a negative trait either, or taking care of your dog. It's just so utterly unacceptable you simply don't do it.
I'm sure you would criticise PETA for telling people to live vegan. By what right do they do that, right? Same goes for you telling gay guys that their behaviour is disgusting. How entitled do you have to imagine yourself to be to actually think you have the right to tell someone their behaviour that is absolutely none of your business as it's just love and free of malice, is wrong.
I'm incapable of understanding your reluctance to see that.
|
On July 22 2018 13:47 xM(Z wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2018 02:17 Big J wrote:On July 21 2018 23:51 xM(Z wrote:On July 21 2018 07:23 iamthedave wrote:On July 21 2018 03:49 xM(Z wrote:
2 - 3 pages of circle-jerking into a Trump level stunt.
fuck nations and states and fascists and the whole notion of 'em!. we came, we mixed them, we saw no more culture hence there is no culture and there was no culture. ever.
of course culture exists and it existed since humans started organizing themselves in social groups; that its definition(concept of) varies across 'current nations' means nothing; it doesn't that mean culture doesn't exist.
culture is what made some groups of people better at surviving than others; it also created a framework in which knowledge/skills/habits/philosophies were better passed on/perpetuated.
i'd rather celebrate diversity and multiculturalism by seeing and acknowledging colours and culture rather than forcing everyone to see grays. Do you even know what the word 'circle jerk' means? yes, dudes stroking each other(metaphorically or not) physically or psychologically, while being in close proximity(a circle, at arms reach/length etc); in there, was the later. @the others - everyone, yes even the germans, started with tribes; german tribes(but not only) were unified to create a Germany so the idea that democracy in Greece failed because tribalism/family ties is not even worth considering; corruption sure can and was the main culprit but don't blame the substructure of a state/nation for the fail. even today the remnants of tribalism is very strong, yes in Germany, when you look at regional cultures, appartenances(political,economical, social), values etc. i had more things on democracy but i'm kinda fucked these days so to put it short: there's a big difference between the taught, theoretical democracy and applied democracy and the plebs feel the whip of the later. democracy needs to project its power onto other states to sustain itself which in turn makes the one(s) spreading it, greedy little fuckers. democracy creates, sustains and perpetuates 'to big to fall' entities because it needs them to jostle for resource control on the world stage. it's justice angle is total shit when applied i.r.l because more often than not for similar crimes, the rich/well connected get a wrist slap while the pleb gets hard time in jail. the plebs get evicted/resettled for the greater good while the rich get tax breaks on propriety etc etc etc. wake the fuck up 'cause what you were taught is not what's happening. I was born at the end of the 1980s. I live right now. I couldn't give any fuck about ancient German tribes. Wake the fuck up, because the past is the past and outside of contracts and social interaction the living people have agreed to for themselves completely irrelevant for anybody. The real existing information that tells us about things that happened in the past my be a source to learn from for the present, everything else like "tribes" is at best worth a good night story or a TV series. What you are being told by traditionalists is not what is happening! you need to come down from the internet there buddy; there are countless posts in this topic talking about/describing various german regions and their historical and current unchanging trends. if you pretend something or someone doesn't exist, it doesn't make it go away or disappear regardless of what your parents told you when little. Edit: most social interactions i've came across are defined by 'i need this so i'll fuck you to get it'; sure i'll say sorry after but i'll fuck you anyways. no one agrees with that shit. news flash at 11!, "people struggle in life". coercion, intimidation, inequality are facts of life you don't pre-agree with.
OK, I'll add "region" to those other undefined - and therefore for the time being esoteric - terms like "culture", "society", "nation" etc that you keep using to justify your personal sexual fetishes. Maybe at some point you will come down to us on earth and tell us what they mean, by giving them a physical description.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dihf3f2X0AE5RiM.jpg )
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dihf25RXsAAao4h.jpg )
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Difm9ukX4AAKByj.jpg)
