SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: ahhaha who wrote (3313)10/29/2001 9:51:35 PM
From: frankw1900Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 24758
 
Socialists are control freaks because they're convinced the capitalist pigs will destroy the country to get more money.

No! Their agenda is far more base and subtle. They want to turn you, me, and everyone else, into "clients", just like a welfare mom.

I spent a lot of time with socialists.

It's personal. It's power. They want to run our lives. They don't want to protect us, they want to run us.

They don't give a damn about the capitalist 'agenda', supposing there was one (there isn't). They'll get in bed with capitalists anytime, so long as they can control our lives. (That's the trade off unwary capitalists make).

They want to do this because it lets them feel good. They have hubris. They are not reflective, they don't look inside themselves: they don't see they are servants of emotion and that all emotions are ambiguous: emotions can attach themselves to any idea. We're all vulnerable -perfectly sensible ten to twenty year olds can be turned into monsters- anger and lust are energizing, and attached to perfectly stupid ideas give these ideas amazing persistence.

Exercising power is pleasurable. It masks what ails us. It places our ills in others. It narrows vision. That's the dirty secret of socialism. (But obviously anyone can make this mistake).

It's the moral error of the easy metaphysical way. (A trivial error of the same sort is made by the person who suddenly gets snuggled up to a couple of hundred million dollars. Instead of being cautioned by responsibility, he suddenly thinks he's twice as intelligent as when he was poor. Compulsive shopping is another).

Instead of guns and planes and germs and a theological social agenda, socialists use paper and a plain Jane social agenda - these days. But when the chips are down and the means available - poof! six million kulaks and another six million Jews and Gyppos and uncountable Chinese. Gone. Like magic.

Perfectly stupid ideas will persist until they are totally defeated as happened in Germany and Japan when they vanished in exhaustion - enough of the emotion bled from the idea.

I'm not going over the top. Another example. Years ago I talked to a lady who lived less than five kilometers down wind from a WW2 death camp. She was a perfectly normal teenager at the time, as far as I can tell. She told me they had no idea what was going on there. How could she say this? The stink, the smoke, the trains and trucks, the personnel from the camp - this was countryside; no secrets there, you'd think. Horror and awe would not let her see it.

Socialists and religionists both see money as an enemy. It's more fun and more useful than their ideas. While we chase the mild, limited, extremely subtle, and often false, promise of money we're not paying attention to their message. We're not cooperative. They don't like that.

How do we inoculate against emotions being captured by perfectly stupid ideas?

They are perfectly stupid, aren't they?

Playfullness, humour, delight, gusto, pain - lots of pain, tragedy. A perfectly stupid idea will always have a wretched premise. Ten to twenty year olds are so vulnerable to bad ideas because their playfulness is mainly physical, their humour is not yet well developed, and they are roiled by hormones and emotion. It doesn't come naturally to most children (or adults) to take an idea, turn it upside down, whack it around, see what falls out, pin the bits down and see what they're made of. Once you show them and they get the hang of it, they find it's fun, until they dissect a sacred cow.

It's a tight wire act, tricky - no security.

(Mostly, and unfortunately, we leave it to artists, poets, scientists and philosophers to do this and who do the repressive regimes either kill or kidnap, first? And the 'art' these regimes produce! Mediocre, at best. Or, they ban singing, dancing, fornication and art.)

It's personal. It's power they want over us. Even to kill us. They are that deficient. Present day socialists are different only in degree, not kind, from those people we are fighting now.

Evil people have attached young folks' emotions of anger, lust, horror, and awe, to perfectly stupid ideas and we are going to have to kill a lot of them. And they may well kill a lot of us. We will have to persist until exhaustion bleeds emotion from the idea.

.



To: ahhaha who wrote (3313)10/30/2001 12:30:12 AM
From: frankw1900Respond to of 24758
 
they think about that one fictitious person who might get hurt by responsible policy when it's their job to protect
and prevent anyone from getting hurt.


Yes. It's an error. Doing this allows them not to look at the bigger picture and what they're doing as they walk through it.

I know all about the guy. He was no better than all the other clowns who trotted through over the decades. Consider that
Diefenbacher had a good fiscal policy and restrictive monetary policy. This is what Coyne didn't like.


I was young then. Not as "smart" as I am now. I was furious about them letting inflation go and that colours my view. But I was easily distracted - girls, and so forth. I'm going to have get to the library and look through the old newspapers and journals and put together a more competent view of the affair. Those few years around 1960 were the most disastrous in Canada's last fifty, I think.

I think it was Peter Newman who said the Canadian ship of state under Diefenbaker was commanded by a mad man who rushed from one side of the bridge to the other screaming contradictory orders to all and sundry, while under Pearson the captain huddled in his cabin ceaselessly plotting with an unending stream of crew members coming in and out. All the while, under both, it steamed continuously about in circles. Something like that. Would that it had been so benign.

But you can't reason about any of this since when the BoC was founded, it was based on absurd tenets:

I'm taking that to heart.