Return to beauty

Our society has focused on utilitarian aspects for too long: what the average person wants, how to compromise and get along, what will not offend anyone, what one size might fit all, and what sort of standard allows the average person to succeed.

The result is that we have forgotten beauty.

Unlike function, beauty does not deconstruct. If you take one pixel of a great and famous artwork, you get a color of some dubious shade — it will not be, by itself, beautiful. With several million of its compatriots, it forms an image which emerges from the effect of the colors taken as a whole.

However, managerial society does not like taking many details together as a whole. It likes simple and straightforward: deconstruction to isolate a single factor, then comparing different methods of achieving that factor, then finally making an industrial process to make that factor increase in quantity.

The other option, then, is quality.

One of Edmund Burke’s famous quotes from Reflections on the Revolution in France sums up the contemporary official attitude to architecture and planning: “I cannot conceive how any man can have brought himself to that pitch of presumption, to consider his country as nothing but carte blanche, upon which he may scribble whatever he pleases.” This is the universal versus the particular.

I am promoting a Conservative view of architecture and town planning which advocates the design of new buildings by developing from the traditional styles that already exist in diverse towns and cities rather than forcing incongruous buildings into a round hole: the exploitation of cities across the world for a Global style of architecture. There is enough disjuncture in British urbiscapes as it is after the Second World War blitzes and sixty years of depredations by local councils without adding incongruous excrescences to it.

It is difficult to get a hearing for a non-orthodox idea. The Liberal-Marxist online journal Spiked would not use an article I wrote as an alternative view to an article praising The Shard. They complimented it but asked me to chop it down and send it as letter! Why suppress a different point of view? – New English Review

Universalism is deconstruction. In order to make something fit into every situation, it must be wholly generic and without any unique characteristics. This means simplifying, standardizing, utilitarian redesigning, dumbing down, averaging, conformity, uniformity and loss of distinct features. Boring.

However, universalism is “fair” because each individual likes to think of himself or herself as a universal. They want to be able to fit anywhere, and so they think there should be no obstacles. They know the world entirely through their minds, so the inability to fit into the mental construct they have of the world in any way strikes them as paradoxical.

The problem with universalism is that with the loss of these unique traits we lose everything but the utilitarian. All is function; all is isolated, considering as if in a laboratory in a single abstract moment with no thought to the consequences.

If you wonder why our world has become ugly, and slave like and functional, this is why.

As conservatives we defend free markets and capitalism against the onslaught of socialists and their deranged managed economy brethren. This does not mean that our ultimate goal is capitalism by itself. Our ultimate goal is a sane society, of high quality and producing people of high quality.

We know too well that without such a society, markets take over. Just as when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail, when an economy or government knows nothing but itself, it soon dominates everything. Ideas do this, trends do this, and even our social systems (like economics) can do it.

The economist Richard Layard is one of many who claim that unemployment is one of those misfortunes, like divorce and chronic pain, that most affect long-term happiness. Work is good, he says, because it gives people meaning, self-respect and the chance to make a contribution; unemployment is bad because it robs them of all this.

But unemployment is by no means the only work issue to affect mental health. Any significant discrepancy between our wished-for and actual work reality can be corrosive to our wellbeing. Some find their work soul-destroying but don’t have ready alternatives, while others flit from job to job in search of “the one”. Since the perfect blend of fulfilling and well-paid work is not always attainable, many people face the challenge of concocting the next best thing.

It may help to remember that paid employment is not the sole provider of purpose, self-worth and engagement. A job can work against us if it is experienced as tedious and irrelevant. Even Layard qualifies his praise by saying that work is vital if that is what you want, and if it is fulfilling. Tying too close a knot between meaningful activity and paid employment can be perilous, as we know from people who lose all sense of meaning when they retire. – Financial Times

Certainly we did not set out to make an empire of slavery, and in fact, we tried hard not to.

However, by making all individuals equal, we created an intense competition for resources. Nothing is given except to those who are used ruthlessly by our commerce; thus, we all compete by packing off to work. The old style jobs, where you inherited a role and unless incompetent kept it, are gone.

The resulting instability makes a society constantly at war with itself. True, it’s in the name of a good cause — but the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Despite population growth, the number of Americans with jobs fell again last year, with total employment of just under 150.4 million — down from 150.9 million in 2009 and 155.4 million in 2008. In all, there were 5.2 million fewer jobs than in 2007, when the deep recession began, according to the IRS data.

The figures are just one more indication of the toll that the worst downturn since the Great Depression has taken on the U.S. economy. – The Washington Post

If you add more people to a society, competition becomes more difficult and good jobs more scarce.

Since 1965, we have imported people from impoverished countries to be our cheap labor, and we have outsourced much of our own cheap labor to other countries.

The result is a concentration of wealth toward the top. However, we did this in the name of equality, fairness, morality and “freedom.”

Could it be that motivating ourselves by deconstructed ideas like “freedom” ends up making a cheapened, spread-too-thin, broken down and mediocre version of our past society?

It seems like that’s what we are living in now.

Let’s do away with these linear ideas, and replace them with complex ideas like beauty, honor, adventure and quality.

127 Comments

  1. Ah-ha says:

    I don’t really see how there can be adventure in a homogeneous society. One goal, one belief and everyone is like-minded trying to reach the same goal. That sounds boring, monotonous and any other adjective one can think of to describe this type of society negatively.

    Also, seeking beauty doesn’t take that much. The areas humanity has encroached on due to urbanization or even worse rural development doesn’t even amount to the natural beauty that exist within the States alone. Sure, our cities and few towns are cluttered with subhumans but that’s natural for “humanity” to congregate close to each other.

    Beauty starts from within, the individual, not the collective. Once you’ve found your inner sanctum then you can branch out but don’t expect everyone else to agree with what you think nature wants us as humans to do. Nature is something far more complex than any humanist ideology. Nature did create us in this reality but couldn’t care less about what we do while we’re here.

    1. A. Realist says:

      What sort of adventure does a heterogenous society bestow that a homogenous one does not?

      Nothing, if you think about it.

      Adventure isn’t about shopping for ethnic foods. It’s about finding new challenges and escaping the boring, predictable, rote way we do things in this heterogenous society.

      You make me wonder, Ah-ha… why is it that sites like this attract so many liberal people like yourself who are more prompt and consistent about replying than regular posters, as if you’re trying to get in here first and paint these ideas with your disapproval?

      I mean, you seem fanatical about going to your enemies, telling them they’re wrong, and then disappearing. Is this just your method of propaganda? If it is, I can understand that. Like vandalism and poo-throwing, it’s probably effective. But if you think you’re “participating” in “discussion” or even bridging the gulf between us, I have some bad news for you…

      1. JooPe says:

        Obviously you are just too stupid to create your own adventures, take it from someone with an IQ above 120 without trying.

      2. JooPe says:

        A. ‘realist’, you seem to believe a prerequisite to participating in discussion is a complete and preexisting obedience to your ideas/worldview, it is not.

        Additionally, exactly WHAT reason do you have for asserting we free-thinkers are ‘liberals’, beyond our rejection/critical analysis of your worldview?

        Nothing.

        And i will state again, the only reason one so vehemently calls others ‘deviant/sick’ when in objective reality their actions do not harm you or others, is because it is you who are deviant, and sick. Why you feel the need to persecute gays and require the state to mandate heterosexuality is a pretty good question.

        I think it’s because you have repressed tendencies.

        1. Why you feel the need to persecute gays and require the state to mandate heterosexuality is a pretty good question.

          He means same-culture people by homogenous. It does not mean homosexuality. Heterogenous does not mean heterosexual either. These are different words and you seem to have confused them.

    2. JooPe says:

      “Nature did create us in this reality but couldn’t care less about what we do while we’re here.”

      I happen to believe it does ‘care’, or rather self-balances. As humans and given our dependency on other species to survive we are the only vehicle upon which life on earth can spread itself through the universe, assuming it has any innate desire to do so (as i believe it does). We have a lot of ‘credit’ with nature, but if we continue pushing the planet till it is unable to sustain life, the ‘gods’ may simply decide it is better to wipe us out entirely and start from scratch. The dinosaurs never developed the capacity to effect their environment and were extinguished, their continued evolution was unlikely to ever produce a species capable of leaving the planet, but we can. This may sound ridiculous or a mere anthropopathism of unconscious forces in reality but i believe it would be helpful for the majority to think of things in such terms.

  2. Ah-ha says:

    “What sort of adventure does a heterogenous society bestow that a homogenous one does not?”

    Uh yeah, free market, capitalism, the idea that the INDIVIDUAL can make something of himself. Overall, a heterogenous society allows FREEDOM. I know it’s something this site stands against but to me, it’s the best solution. In America, we’re not entirely free either. In America, this supposed freedom comes with a price. They’re limitations on our freedoms and it’s rightfully so. We as Americans (or Westerners in general) just need to use government correctly and enforce these laws set in place, not completely overhaul the American way as this site suggests.

    Also, adventure can only apply to culture when you live in a crude, primitive, warlike era. War brings on national pride and that contradicts the idea of pan-nationalism and “everyone globally understands that cultures and different races of people do better separately.”

    “Adventure isn’t about shopping for ethnic foods. It’s about finding new challenges and escaping the boring, predictable, rote way we do things in this heterogenous society.”

    What makes you think the only adventurous thing we do is shop for ethnic food? They’re plenty of people collectively challenging themselves and are not doing boring, predictable things. Some of it may get media coverage, some may not.

    Tell me, what would you like for a collective, homogeneous society to do that is challenging and adventurous? In my opinion, I cannot see a society work as one mind without it reverting back to what we have now. Irregardless of how hard you fight to preserve it.

    “You make me wonder, Ah-ha… why is it that sites like this attract so many liberal people like yourself who are more prompt and consistent about replying than regular posters, as if you’re trying to get in here first and paint these ideas with your disapproval?”

    That’s kind of my cause. I was lured here by another one of Mr. Stevens infamous sites. I can tell you this though, I find his articles to be intriguing and the semantics of it draw me in. However, every time I’m done reading them, I’m compelled to comment.

    “I mean, you seem fanatical about going to your enemies, telling them they’re wrong, and then disappearing. Is this just your method of propaganda? If it is, I can understand that. Like vandalism and poo-throwing, it’s probably effective. But if you think you’re “participating” in “discussion” or even bridging the gulf between us, I have some bad news for you…”

    No worrys. I’d have to say it’s the latter. It can be interpreted as vandalism but in my eyes, I’m just dispelling everything I don’t agree with. That’s not a crime, is it? I’m not trying to be harsh or mean-spirited, I just hate anyone who forcefully tries to make everyone believe their ideology should be the way everyone should live. Especially in such a conceited and condescending manner. Constantly belittling people and calling them “proles” because they don’t agree with your opinion is a guaranteed way of setting yourself up to fail and an open target for criticism. But I guess that’s what this site likes.

    (shrugs shoulders)

    1. Bert says:

      What lack of freedoms are preventing you from doing great things?

      1. Ah-ha says:

        There are none. What lack of freedoms are you speaking of? I never said there were lack of freedoms, did I? Also, I’m not the one trying to change things here, Amerika is for change. Are you asking me specifically or making a general question?

        It’s hard to really answer your question because Amerika has come to fruition yet. When and if it does, then I can speak on the lack of freedoms.

        1. I never said there were lack of freedoms, did I? Also, I’m not the one trying to change things here, Amerika is for change.

          This is not a very honest response. It’s the most obvious deflection I have seen all day. Liberals are for change. They want equality which means something is lacking in the current world, and they advocate for more and greater freedoms. He asked how the lack of those freedoms held us back and you had no answer, so you started typing before your brain turned on, from the looks of it.

          1. Ah-ha says:

            Clearly you didn’t read my response nor his response correctly. I’d expect that from an elitist, you guys only hear what you want.

            He asked me if it’s my lack of freedoms which I refuse to respond to because it can’t be answered. I haven’t lived the Amerikan way so I wouldn’t know but I can tell you it would not be pleasant and I would rebel as soon as it’s indoctrinated.

            I haven’t deflected anything, it seems you’re a little butthurt for someone questioning your views of how life should be and that’s good, you and Amerika need to be scrutinized and interrogated for the silly concepts you support. Although they’re not your own, you stick by them as if they are which shows you have no thought process of your own.

            Sad.

    2. JooPe says:

      Ah-ha, you will find that continual persistence in offering critical analysis results in only “Fuck off liberal faggot!!!11″. I spent a lot of time formulating my response to the previous article as a well articulated deconstruction of why functional fascism is a fantasy. What i got was mere accusations of being ‘liberal’, gay, stupid (my initial IQ score was above 120), and a total lack of any real response to the actual points raised.

      When you say something which contradicts their worldview and they cannot refute it, they will merely claim you have no ‘point’, while offering ZERO deconstruction of what you’ve said or how it supposedly equates to nothing. The fancy language is just to present an ‘air’ of intellectualism but in reality this site is anti-intellectual, it is a calculated deception designed only to recruit unthinking followers.

      1. Ryan says:

        tsk tsk, my friend doesn’t everything decay and need a change? we are trying to look at things from the opposite side of the table, and one day maybe some people in the future will then start fantasizing about ‘socialism’ again. facism is a incorrect term for this site,you need to understand facism as a revolutionary concept of franco-itialian origin, that utilizes the materialist/anarchist/”nihilist” idea of “revolution” (mass mobilization as a form of control) with conservative/reationary tendencies.

        1. JooPe says:

          “we are trying to look at things from the opposite side of the table”

          That is the problem, you should be trying to look at things from ALL sides of the table, not merely what is contrary to the dominant view/ideology. But when anyone who is in all honesty, looking at things as objectively as possible for them is labelled said dominant ideology, it certainly doesn’t help your cause, assuming it is really to inquisition/expand human consciousness and not merely to proselytize others to another inherently flawed belief system.

          Additionally, i do not see a distinguishable difference between fascism as defined (rule by a power elite) and what this site proposes. If there is one, I would be glad to hear it.

          1. Ryan says:

            facism is a bit different, but i will agree that there are similarities, and you are correct, but does that automatically mean that any school of thought not socialist in nature is automatically nazi or facist? here are some “liberal” definitions of facist concepts that are not discussed here and play no role in the “discussions” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integralism
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_syndicalism

      2. in reality this site is anti-intellectual, it is a calculated deception designed only to recruit unthinking followers

        Silence! Or you will have to do your explaining to Lord Voldemort

    3. Victory or Death says:

      please, the underclass can’t handle freedom.

  3. Don Plastic says:

    Well said Ah-ha.

  4. crow says:

    Amerika must be getting it right, at least more often than not, when leftists come from far and wide, to compulsively slam it.

    Unable to tolerate anything other than their own dogma, the tolerant-ones exhibit all the sophistication of Pavlov’s dog.
    I wonder why leftists are forever claiming we’re all special, and we can all learn from everybody? When what they so obviously mean is everybody except everybody else.

    It’s really not very adventurous, individual, or free, to insist on everybody thinking and saying exactly the same things.

    1. Ah-ha says:

      “Amerika must be getting it right, at least more often than not, when leftists come from far and wide, to compulsively slam it.”

      Whoever said leftist are here commenting. I’m a moderate so far as all these issues are concerned. The majority I don’t agree with but sometimes this site will surprise me. That’s what keeps me coming back. I’m the true definition of a nihilist — a passive nihilist if you will. No action, big or small can contain the process the world is taking whether it’s a good or bad one.

      “It’s really not very adventurous, individual, or free, to insist on everybody thinking and saying exactly the same things.”

      Well duh, that’s why you guys are here. The opposition the lot of you. The other end of the spectrum. I’m just stating that Amerika’s reaction or causation wouldn’t get any better results if implemented thus resulting in what we have now happening all over again. It may take a year, years, decades or centuries but we all (humans) will be right back to square one.

      I don’t understand how this site and it’s followers can’t see this. It puzzles me, really. Maybe that’s the blinding lightbulb to my moth-like brain that keeps drawing me back here day in and day out.

      “I wonder why leftists are forever claiming we’re all special, and we can all learn from everybody? When what they so obviously mean is everybody except everybody else.”

      I’m not a leftist but I can tell you I’ve learned from this site and continue to do so but I don’t want the ideals of this site indoctrinated in the West. Just because you’re open-minded and can learn from everybody doesn’t mean you want that way of life. Everyone should approach all knowledge with reservations, not neccesarily to make someone else’s culture, beliefs, etc… my own but just to know. It’s as simple as that. That’s the adventure.

      1. crow says:

        To the leftist, anything not-leftist gets judged as rightist.
        Not so.
        There is a massive no-man’s land in-between. A forgotten realm where things make sense.
        Amerika surveys this land, and explores ways of inhabiting it.
        It provides a refuge from extremists of all types.
        Unfortunately, like every other desirable thing, extremists demand inclusion, thereby turning it into what already lies desecrated.
        That’s humans for you.
        Luckily, in this no-man’s land, there is still plenty of space for newcomers, who will, hopefully, discover that their old baggage is no longer useful, or necessary, in this new land.

        1. Ah-ha says:

          That’s where you’re wrong because if this “no-man’s land” were so special and meant to explore, the brightest of minds and it’s ilk would be fighting to the death to reach it, not complaining about others not being able to reach it. Only you (crow) and a few others seek this. I believe you when you say it’s a utopia….for you and those like you. Trying to spread your propaganda to others and insulting them as “leftist” and such because they don’t agree won’t do any good.

          “Unfortunately, like every other desirable thing, extremists demand inclusion, thereby turning it into what already lies desecrated.”

          So this is an exclusive thing? I thought this site was trying to change the entire world completely. I thought this site wanted all human separated and back to their cultural roots based on their race. I thought this site wanted beauty and an eco-friendly environment (I agree with this)

          You do realize all of your objectives and goals are easily attainable. You don’t need to change everything globally to be happy. Amerika can be it’s own little providence where all the like-minded people here on this site can secede from the States and it’s policies of utilitarianism and multiculturalism. Hell, you can actually communicate face-to-face with other like-minded conservatives instead of using an online bandwidth where you’ll be subjected to criticism from the opposition.

        2. JooPe says:

          “To the leftist, anything not-leftist gets judged as rightist.”

          Jesus you are a hypocrite crow, and i am beginning to think your IQ is a bit under 100.

          1. crow says:

            Actually it’s a bit over 150.
            And you simply are unable to see what I am talking about.
            Sorry. Nothing I can do about it.

        3. JooPe says:

          150, before or after you conditioned yourself to produce high scores? I am sure i could match or exceed that if i tried.

          And again, give me ONE single reason why i am ‘liberal’ beyond the mere refutation of your worldview, I am sure i do not have to explain why that is false logic. And how would a person being a proponent of liberalism instantly invalidate everything they say?

          If a pedophile were to state that “2+2=4″, would you refute this merely because you find his nature and actions deplorable? You cannot dismiss what i say based purely on you believe i am.

          1. 150, before or after you conditioned yourself to produce high scores? I am sure i could match or exceed that if i tried.

            Do you see where this has gone?

            You called him stupid, and then he suggested a contrary version of reality, and now you’re back to insulting him.

            What is the point of this?

          2. JooPe says:

            Actually it was he called me stupid in the previous article, i merely drop IQ scores as a quick and easy way of refuting this despite their inaccuracies. It is a pissing contest i know, but what else is possible when the other person simply decides to shut down discussion by calling the other ‘liberal’ and refusing to listen?

          3. JooPe says:

            Brett, to be fair much of the ideology of this site and the others like it (anus.com) certainly appears derived from Nazism, that is not a moral condemnation but an honest observation. That said, there are also similarities which would give anyone the impression there is little dignificant difference;

            a) Pretentious, elitist tendencies.
            b) Constant blaming of the ‘proles’/poor (despite the fact their role is largely passive and the negative effect they have is largely due to manipulation from said elite.)
            c) Desire for unobtainable purity.

        4. JooPe says:

          “Clearly, dear chap, you are immune to reason. Your condition demands you argue, undermine, tear-down, ridicule anything anyone else is doing, unless it gets your personal OK.”

          Again with the self-projection. Which of us is it that throws the ‘liberal’ label, purely intended to force everything the other says into a ‘box’ where it can be ignored instead of reasonably processed?

          Your hypocrisy/self-contradiction is blindingly self-evident.

          1. 1349 says:

            “much of the ideology of this site and the others like it (anus.com) certainly appears derived from Nazism”
            “Constant blaming of the ‘proles’/poor”

            NSDAP was a socialist party, not just nationalist.
            It extensively used the righteous anger of the proles, it was legitimated by the proles. It promoted the cult of labour.
            Hitler himself detested monarchy and aristocracy.
            Know this pre-WWII joke?
            “- Was ist die UdSSR?
            – Ein proletarier Staat.
            – Was ist Deutschland?
            – Ein prolet-ARIER Staat.”

            NSDAP’s nationalism was actually nation-statism.
            It promoted a unified “Deutsch” identity over local identities (Bavarian etc.) and tried hard to centralize economy.

            Amerika.org speaks against nation-statism/unification
            and against socialism.

            Which all means that
            you’re…
            telling lies
            again.

            “Pretentious tendencies.”
            “Desire for unobtainable purity.”

            Where exactly?

          2. Dan says:

            “Again with the self-projection. Which of us is it that throws the ‘liberal’ label, purely intended to force everything the other says into a ‘box’ where it can be ignored instead of reasonably processed?”

            Does it bother you that the opinions you express are being put in a box? Does it hurt your self-esteem? lol

      2. Ryan says:

        ooooo, your a “nihilist”. we will appriciate your opinion here, but not your reaction. you are reacting to things you don’t understand. you must grok amerika, not just react to amerika. take it in an think about it first.

        1. Ah-ha says:

          I’ve taken it in. I’ve tried to invision all the possibilities, shook my head, shunned them and felt the need to say something. It’s one thing to visualize and another to live it in reality. I can guarantee no one hear has lived it because they wouldn’t complain about how everyone else are “proles” and missing out on the purpose nature has for us.

          Amerika is an illusion. A delusion….of grandeur. An ideologue that’s try to replicate it’s older brother, Nazism. Ooooo, did I just compare to Nazism?

          Yes, yes I did.

          As cliche as this may sound, it’s true that actions speak louder than words. “Ideas” (more like complaints) being exchanged back and forth between a few like-minded people here in the articles and comment section of Amerika.org just become stale from stagnation. You guys are self-proclaimed elitist. I don’t understand why you even comment to each other if you already are know-it-alls. You have your plan in mind, go forth and do it.

          1. crow says:

            Clearly, dear chap, you are immune to reason. Your condition demands you argue, undermine, tear-down, ridicule anything anyone else is doing, unless it gets your personal OK.
            This is the nature of the disease.
            Destruction. Posing as caring.
            Niceness by being horrible.
            Inclusion, by excluding.
            Diversity by annihilating anything diverse.
            Vibrancy by ruining anything that vibrates at a different frequency.
            Equality by denying it to any who are unlike you.
            Etc. Etc…

            I don’t attempt to reason with madness.
            I do, however, make use of it, to show readers the difference between madness and sanity.

            The bottom line is: does your life work for you?
            Sane commenters here, read, consider, take further, and contribute.
            Insane commenters do nothing but whine, resist, undermine, ridicule and destroy.

            I have no problem deciding what sort of society I would subscribe to, given these two choices.

          2. Ah-ha says:

            @Ah-ha

            “Insane commenters do nothing but whine, resist, undermine, ridicule and destroy.”

            So you don’t do this? Do I need to quote everything comment you’ve written. Must I shine the mirror to show you that you’re describing yourself.

          3. crow says:

            Go ahead. You know you want to. See what you can find. But do take a look at yourself first.

          4. JooPe says:

            They are completely oblivious to their self-projection.

          5. An ideologue that’s try to replicate it’s older brother, Nazism.

            Godwin’s law invoked again.

            You’re behaving like what Fox News says liberals are: anytime they lose an argument, they call their opponent a “racist.”

          6. Ryan says:

            wow you are just fucking with us, you bastard, you don’t care, this is fun for you? hahaha i like you, if only it were a open society so we could all meet for lectures on this material, and then this “nihilism” would dry right up! god i love the internet, its so insane and in the manner of art (as symbolic expression, etc.) your cave paintings are beautiful they tell us all of the insanity of the world out side.

      3. ferret says:

        “No action, big or small can contain the process the world is taking whether it’s a good or bad one.”
        Can you explain it to me (just re-phrase)?
        I also curious what you think about “free will” concept?

        1. JooPe says:

          Allow me to interject, assuming you do not find my other statements as cause for knee-jerk reactions and name-calling like most others here…

          Free-will, assuming pre-determinism is false (I happen to believe chaos exists, since order exists and duality seems a staple of our world) certainly does/can not exist in an ‘absolute’ form. We are restricted by material needs, and even if a person were to will themselves to stop breathing in defiance of existence and it’s limitations, the concept of ‘absolute’ free-will is still obviously false since it would require omnipotence to be a reality. Sure, you may be able to ascertain any goal you will yourself towards through a series of actions, but some of these actions are bound to be to some degree unpleasant/undesirable, and since are also delays to your actual goal would rather be avoided. Thus you are still subject to realty and conditions/actions outside of your will.

          ‘Actual’ or ‘realistic’ free-will from a human perspective is probably just the strength and/or good fortune to not be crushed by the world. The ability to, when all is said and done, still come out on top. Within the context of the human condition it seems to mean having the influence to realise your dreams/goals whilst retaining the restrictions in/of reality necessary to still give them meaning. Mere musings i hope were of some value.

          1. ferret says:

            An interesting approach to the concept of free will. Are you using “chaos” in sense of “unpredictability”? If yes, then it’s not a reason to assume determinism to be false.
            Actually, I regard free will as an illusion and the very concept of it to be incoherent. If randomness was involved in decision making, then the decision was random and not “willed”. If determinism is true, then the decision is a combination of inputs received by the “willing” agent. That means, there is no place for free will in both cases. The agent making truly independent decision should be able to create information out-of-nothing, that means, create energy. This is omnipotence, as you said, and violates the energy conservation law.
            Though I wanted to know what Ah-ha thinks about it, but, anyway, thanks for sharing your vision. Maybe you can help me with the first part of my question?

          2. JooPe says:

            No, i mean ‘chaos’ as in a state where multiple possibilities occur, ‘unpredictability’ merely being a byproduct and not the total.

            I too can see how free-will can be easily classified as an illusion/self-perception, and ‘absolute’ free-will definitely is. But I would distinguish between randomality being a factor in decision-making and being the sole determining factor, if that is what you meant. It also seems possible ‘randomality’ only exists outside the will/consciousness, meaning the ‘will’ or ‘desire’ remains in stasis but the means to itself change as reality changes.
            What i mean is, in the context of the human condition ‘true’ or merely ‘maximized’ free-will is not an absolute state, but a balance. In simplified terms between hardship/effort and achievement, particularly considering difficulties in achieving goals are also largely responsible/necessary to maintain our experience of said goal as pleasurable/desirable. If one becomes able to indulge every desire at a whim, said fulfillment rapidly becomes tedious/meaningless, at least in a human context and not a purely theoretical one, which i assume is what your hypothetical necessity to make ‘information/energy from nothing’ refers to.
            Otherwise, the only theory i could offer is that the part which makes ‘something from nothing’ even if that something is purely intangible is actually the remnants inside us of whatever force/power initially sparked the big bang, which created something from nothing, or rather everything from nothing.

      4. I’m just stating that Amerika’s reaction or causation wouldn’t get any better results if implemented thus resulting in what we have now happening all over again.

        What we have now is a lack of leadership and direction so if we took any direction we would be farther ahead, but also any direction can eventually fail and bring us back here, but there is no guarante that it would happen that way. We should try something different and new.

    2. JooPe says:

      We are not ‘leftists’ crow, at least i am not. We are free thinkers, and your constant attempts to ‘box’ anyone who presents information/ideas and critical analysis contrary to your worldview as ‘liberals’ only shows how weak your mind and ideology is.

      1. crow says:

        It shows you. Anybody who is not all ego sees it differently.

        1. JooPe says:

          Yes, it shows me, and anyone who is not psychotically devoted to your ideology the way you are.

          And again, what reason do you have for asserting i am liberal, beyond the fact i present information contrary to your worldview?

          None.

          1. And again, what reason do you have for asserting i am liberal, beyond the fact i present information contrary to your worldview?

            WHAT?

            All of the points you have tried to argue are somewhat well known liberal arguments and talking points. If you are not a liberal you should check with your neighbors because you might be sleepwalking near a TV with Rachel Maddow or Anderson Cooper on it.

            Please answer me this question honestly, are you receiving any treatment for mental health concerns or under psychological care at this time?

        2. JooPe says:

          But i am not merely refuting your worldview, I am also asking for further clarification/articulation, articulation you refuse to provide.

          Given this, and your constant throwing the ‘liberal’ label to shut down argument/discussion, i cannot HELP but think your ideology is little more than psychotic devotion, as would most.

          1. LuxLibertas says:

            JooPe, ironically, goes to show you the necessity of diversity. Talking in an echo chamber only serves the ego. Señor Joope represents the Jungian shadow side of this site. As Blake says, without contraries there is no progression. There needs to be more disagreement. If only for the hit count.

            Clarify, clarify, clarify.

            Results matter, let’s get it right this time.

          2. JooPe says:

            Thank you Lux, “be the shadow” is my mantra, something i believe this site aspires to do within the public conscious of the western world but doesn’t quite get right. Further articulation/exploration of it’s core ideas and how they are to be applied to reality are what’s needed, not merely endless criticisms of what is wrong with the system and most people in it.

          3. JooPe says:

            Finally, and yes i get the feeling i am over-stating my point/overstaying my welcome, I do not understand why this is not apparent given the last article on this site mentioned EXACTLY this refusal to acknowledge the truth in another’s words, and the importance of not dismissing challenges;

            “In The Iliad, men challenge, insult, and shame each other all the time. Achaeans challenge Achaeans, Trojans challenge Trojans, Gods challenge mortals, brothers challenge brothers, leaders challenge high-ranking chiefs, and allies challenge leaders. They don’t do it to insult and manipulate, they do it to rouse and inspire. Men had thicker skin in the days of The Iliad. Sometimes a guy just needs a swift kick in the arse.”

            I come here to challenge myself, and because even if i don’t agree with what is said (most of the time) it is well articulated and there’s usually something i can walk away with, but the childish acting out you face simply for presenting a challenging idea (and thus, actually attempting to improve the site and it’s ideas) frustrates my intellectual attraction to it. It is the intellectual equivalent of a teasing nymph, you know one of those girls who wears a dress the size of a belt and then waits until the end of the night to tell you she has a boyfriend? Sooner or later most will simply turn around exclaiming “Damn it bitch, i had options!”

            Of course, many might ask why i would bother going for something with such obvious tartiness, be it physical or intellectual, to which i can only answer it is only if nothing else logical for me to still go for what is genuinely interesting and thus profitable if gained, and not the endless, ‘safe’ mediocrity which is easily obtainable.

            Many on this site like to think they are the ‘challenging’ ones, a rebel movement facing almost insurmountable opposition from a dominant ideology, they don’t seem to realise that is exactly the role they act out every time they use the word ‘liberal’. It is not enough to merely challenge others, you must also continuously challenge YOURSELF (in this case by facing legitimate challenges from others), then you have legitimacy.

            On anus.com i was banned and my comments deleted for proving an ‘unmovable obstacle’ to the stale state of it’s ideology. I hope to see a different outcome/reaction here, lest it’s ideas be shown primarily designed to deceive/manipulate.

          4. Ted Swanson says:

            [quote]Finally, and yes i get the feeling i am over-stating my point/overstaying my welcome, I do not understand why this is not apparent given the last article on this site mentioned EXACTLY this refusal to acknowledge the truth in another’s words, and the importance of not dismissing challenges;

            “In The Iliad, men challenge, insult, and shame each other all the time. Achaeans challenge Achaeans, Trojans challenge Trojans, Gods challenge mortals, brothers challenge brothers, leaders challenge high-ranking chiefs, and allies challenge leaders. They don’t do it to insult and manipulate, they do it to rouse and inspire. Men had thicker skin in the days of The Iliad. Sometimes a guy just needs a swift kick in the arse.”[/quote]

            JooPe, as awesome as my article was :) you know what’ even better than my article? The actual Iliad! Have you ever read The Iliad? Yes, men challenge and shame each other. But also, sometimes, the men ACKNOWLEDGE the challenge and the truth. For instance, when Hector shames Pars for banging Helen while there is a war going on outside, Paris says, ‘yes, right you are Hector, you’ve said nothing less than what I deserve.’ And at that point Paris picks up his sword and his shield. He doesn’t carry on about how he is just expressing his sexuality, man.

  5. YT says:

    Quality is in the eye of the beholder. We have an ugly society because that is what is demanded by the weighted average of its evaluators. I fail to see how utility is increased by forcing your version of quality onto others. I would think that would be just as ugly unless I agreed with your version of quality. Put the shoe on the other foot: would you believe a society where Michelle Obama decided what represents quality? I personally would think its gaudy and ostentatious.

    A lack of universal agreement where nobody is happy with the average is yet another symptom of jamming multiple cultures into one artificial political border and overhead system. Economically, one could argue that utlitity (and thus net fairness) is better achieved through cultural segregation. Let the conservative, christian whites build their own community and let the LGBT brigade build theirs to paint everything purple. Let the blacks build their own as well.

    Oh, but that would not be fair because some groups would have more resources and skill? Well, that is why you can never get away from individualism at a basic level. Group, state, society are all abstracts for describing groups of individuals and their net traits. Thus individualism must be honored but the desire of individuals to associate with like minds should also be honored. That latter is what we are currently lacking and the only reason this one-size-fits-all clown society is ugly.

    1. crow says:

      “Like-mindedness” is a recurring concept, lately, inspired by recent posts.
      It is, I suggest, a concept worth exploring further.
      When like-minded people interact, their ideas may amount to more than the sum of the individual parts. As long as those people are free to let their ideas evolve.
      Whereas like-minded leftists police all thought, so it can never climb out of its box.

      1. Ah-ha says:

        So like-minded leftist and their ideas never amount to anything? I beg to differ. I would think 1.) being a conservative and 2.) being like-minded would slim your chances of success at anything. Conservatism sounds counter-productive because you’re so busy conserving what you know, you’re not privy to being open-minded to new ideas.

        When you say “Whereas like-minded leftists police all thought”, I interpret that as if the idea is supposed to be observed, investigated and then arrested and locked away not being able to evolve into anything. Wait, isn’t that the complete opposite of left/liberalism ideals. I would think a liberal would want an idea to flourish into something. It seems you’ve pulled that comment out of nowhere.

        1. crow says:

          Like-minded means different things to different people.
          To a leftist: sorted, understood, no further development necessary.
          To a rightist: support for further development and adaptive ideas.

          1. Ah-ha says:

            At that’s the only way you can process things. You ascribe everything to Left or right. Therefore, you fail and you will fail everytime.

          2. crow says:

            I describe what I see. I have keen observation skills, unlike most people. Why? I have lived.
            You love to inform people they fail, don’t you?
            Fail, fail, fail…
            I would be amused, but I have evolved further than being amused at such things any more.
            You misread everything, and judge your misreadings as if they were facts.
            If you had sense, as opposed to bias, you would see that I am probably the least political character you have ever encountered.
            But misreading, as you do, I appear to you as a right-wing extremist. Which, basically, is what I mostly write about here.
            Humorously: on right-wing sites, I get labeled a leftist.
            How’s that for irony?

          3. JooPe says:

            Crow you have shit. Your only defense-mechanism against anyone who presents information/ideas you don’t like to see is to call them ‘liberals’, that is putting the information into a ‘box’ where it can be easily dismissed rather than processed.

        2. crow says:

          Too good to miss, is your comment:

          It seems you’ve pulled that comment out of nowhere.

          Yes I have. It’s what thinking people do. They think. They create. They manifest new ideas from ‘nowhere’.
          Unlike leftists, who – I presume from your own words – trot out stock responses from stock ideas, over and over.

          1. crow says:

            I have many defense mechanisms JoePoo.
            But I hardly need use them against a such negligible threat.
            What you’re seeing is tolerance. You know. That thing you don’t have, but demand everybody else does.

          2. JooPe says:

            No what i am seeing is INtolerance, intolerance of ideas by dismissing them under the false ‘liberal’ stigma. As i have stated countlessly before, this is merely the equivalent of christians burning anyone who poked holes in their superstition/ways as ‘heretics/witches’.

            Where is your deconstruction of my arguments? You claim to be an intellectual, but your conduct is decidedly anti-intellectual.

          3. Ah-ha says:

            Crow, you need a slap in the face; brought down to reality. You proved my point with the conceited attitude. Brett earlier said that Fox News points out that the left(even though I’m the furthest from the left) resorts to name calling but the right always resorts to condescending name calling.

            “I’m better than you because I’ve lived”

            You egotistical prick! I take pride in calling you names because of sheer egomania! No wonder no one will respect your opinions or even dare consider your alternate lifestyle for humanity.

            You say Taoism has helped you understand reality but from what I can tell, it’s left you bitter, cold and a whiner looking for like-minds who do the very same thing.

            To all of Amerika, stop pointing out the flaws of others and find a way to circumvent your own.

  6. Decimator says:

    The solution is accepting what you are as an individual. Realizing what you are capable of and how it applies to the world around you. To know that you make a better hand than brain is to be truly sentient. It will allow you to have the required trust in your fellow man and his ability. This, knowing of your roll, will do away with the insane competition over things and positions. You will operate as a piece of the whole. The brain doesn’t tell the hand that it has it bad, nor does the hand tell the brain it has it good. It is given that one with out the other is utterly useless. No envy, no competition, no rivalry. Both do what they are built to do and are grateful to do it.

    That should be the way a society should work and that would be beautiful.

    1. Decimator says:

      I didn’t crush anything this time… :)

      1. Ryan says:

        you ever think of the cave art? its odd what does it depict? the hunting and killing of animals, which was man’s exisitence and essence, so it was as a “symbolic expression” (i hate using such “marxist” terms) of their conciousness. beauty was to them, their life, so beauty is sort of a form of life worship.

        1. crow says:

          People generally see things through contemporary eyes, and so they see ‘cave-art’ as ‘art’.
          I doubt that cavemen saw it that way. I imagine it to have been an early attempt at education, where the young could see, and get used to, what The People did, and how they did it.

          1. Ryan says:

            but don’t portraits serve a functional purpose as well?

      2. crow says:

        You’ve got a good thing going, Decimator:
        When reason dries up, resort to Rambo.
        Not a bad strategy :)

        1. Decimator says:

          If I am allowed to survive on reason that is what I’ll do. Otherwise I revert to animal until reason is applicable. I have only be able to view cave art in person once. Soothing. Every minute of your day with purpose. No regrets. The clan Is fully united. A mistake during the hunt is the solution. Tragic but necessary. So simple. competition was proof of capability. Those are the thought that come to mind for me.

      3. Maybe you should have! :) Then we would have a blank sheet and from that blank sheet we could create a society, where we would apply everything we had learned, all of the good parts and ideas, while leaving out all of the bad!

  7. Ryan says:

    ah-ha, is beauty facist? is it totalitarian to conciously express your aspirations, goals and cultural concepts through abstractions? what is “racist”?

    1. Ah-ha says:

      No, but conciously trying to express those ideals through abstractions won’t fare well with the so-called “proles”.

      If you want to live life without fear abstractly, then do it with the few resources and like-minds that you have. Don’t type your way to oblivion. I don’t know how many times one can say “diversity doesn’t work” or “liberalism has failed” before he or she realizes no one is listening.

      1. crow says:

        You seem to be paying attention, if not exactly listening.

      2. Ryan says:

        oh you are fun aren’t you, this is all so fun, but why?

  8. Mihai says:

    The problem is that this post-modern society of ours cannot conceive anything beyond the utilitarian ? Why ? Because it has lost its center. Classical modernity, that started in the 17th century was a sort of disease manifested inside traditional society. During the 19th and 20th centuries, modernism completed its destruction of every form of organic existence. That’s when modernism turned into post-modernism.

    The post-modern society is a society that is characterized by temporality – a fluid world where quantity reign over quality, resembling an undifferentiated ocean of gray, where forms are continuously spawning and melting into one another without any law.

    This post-modern world cannot conceive anything beyond the gross utilitarian because it has no point of reference. Its only objective point of reference is that “there are no points of reference and everything is subjective and relative”.
    This leads, inexorably to one consequence, which is very visible in the world of today, is that everything original, new, unseen before today, is judged, automatically as good, progressive, the “next best thing”.

    Music, clothing, architecture, name any domain you like- every possible aberration, schizophrenia and random mixtures are considered good and embraced by the majority just because they are the most recent. These days, all you have to do to be considered a great artist is paint some strings at random or write some random words and paper and give them a pompous title.
    Fashion is also a good indicator- by definition, fashion is nothing but useless, continuous and arbitrary change.

    It is a world where nobody questions the quality or the existence of any significance behind anything- because there are “no objective values”.
    The post-modernism mentality is that being the most recent, the new, the modern, is a value in itself.
    Change-good, objective values- bad and reactionary.

    PS: I see that Joo-what’s-his-name has got himself a new username around here :)) I wonder how long can he keep until he makes a fool of himself under this new title….

    1. crow says:

      He already has. It’s what he does.
      Your observations ring very true: and in addition: anything not-new is ridiculed and discarded as worthless.

      1. JooPe says:

        Make retarded and false assumptions is what you do best crow. ;)

        1. Make retarded and false assumptions is what you do best crow.

          I’m not sure speaking that way will get us anywhere. I can set up a separate post where we can all call each other retarded gay Nazis if you like, but it’s not high-productivity behavior.

      2. Mihai says:

        Yes, because the post-modern world defines itself solely on the idea of time. And since time means constant dissolution, there can be only one “virtue” remaining: to live up to the times.

    2. Ah-ha says:

      @Mihai

      Actually, it’s JooPe and no, I’m not him/her.

      1. crow says:

        Well then. If a leftist says it, it must be true.

        1. JooPe says:

          And if you call us ‘leftists’, it must be true.

          Idiot.

          1. crow says:

            I imagine it must be hard to be so clever.
            As you keep reminding me: I am an idiot.
            Yet I can get along just fine.
            Can you?

        2. JooPe says:

          It comes naturally to me, but your behaviour on this site is NOT ‘getting along fine’, you deliberately demonize others for the mere act of expressing truths/ideas which contradict your worldview, but then that is where it usually comes from.

          I can get along fine, better than fine with those who also intend to do so. Those who willfully deceive themselves, unconsciously act out their lizard brain and deliberately shut down argument/discussion because they know where it is going i have no desire not will to ‘get along fine’ with.

          1. Mihai says:

            All jokes aside, I seriously believe that the comments sections are becoming a circus, by playing into the childish games of a 16 year-old.

            I have tried to explain my stance and why it doesn’t fit fascism and nazism or whatever, but it is no use. the joo thing actually thinks that a “rule by an elite meritocracy” is a sign of fascism. I guess guys like Plato, Aristotle and Dante were die-hard fascists and nazis.
            The fact that they continue with this assumptions shows that it is useless to keep responding to them, because it turns this place into a mess.

      2. Mihai says:

        Good to hear that.
        I sure hope you’re not a second personality or something, either.

    3. ferret says:

      About names:
      I’m Kirill Nenartovich, but, after crow called me “Inspector” couple of times, I evolved to “Inspector Ferret” (because of one meaning of ferret as a detective or something like that, and also because crow wanted see more animals among commenters), and then to “ferret” in order to become more animalistic.
      No conspiracy, as you can see, at least in my case.

    4. JooPe says:

      Contrary to what you think, I am NOT ah-ha, you can ask the site mods for the IP addresses, i doubt we live in the same country.

      1. crow says:

        “Site Mods”?
        That’s the language of a hardcore forum-ruiner, and career troll.
        Which reminds me…
        “Do Not Feed The Trolls”. Always good advice.
        Hope you’re full, now, ’cause that’s your lot.

        1. JooPe says:

          “Site Mods”?
          That’s the language of a hardcore forum-ruiner, and career troll.

          About as sound logic as anything else you’ve said. And contrary to what you assert, I articulate my ideas well enough and acknowledge what is true in what is spoken on this site which is apparent to others. Although my comments may be designed to inflame, it is not purely for the purposes of agitation.

          “The man who never changes his opinion, is like standing water and breeds reptiles of the mind.” – William Blake.

          1. “The man who never changes his opinion, is like standing water and breeds reptiles of the mind.” – William Blake.

            Even you would admit, however, that the man who changes his mind constantly has never changed his mind. He made up his mind to not make up his mind about anything else, and so now his mind is open forever. This is just as inflexible as someone who refuses to let in any new ideas, but more convenient, because by letting in all new ideas, he never has to make up his mind and then act. He can just sit back and enjoy all those new ideas taking over his mind, like watching a movie.

  9. JooPe says:

    “Unlike function, beauty does not deconstruct.”

    Not entirely i guess, but have you not heard of the golden ratio?

  10. Decimator says:

    Physiologist once asked me to take an IQ test. I told him noway and he asked why. I told him that there are two thing a man should never do. Measure his penis or take an IQ test. He laughed and asked me to explain. I told him, that for me it would leave me a loser either way. How so? I’ll be an under achiever or realize I never lived up to my potential. :)

    Thought the humor was needed, the subject was too heavy.

    1. LuxLibertas says:

      Measuring one’s penis is an American rite of passage. I thought this site was about facing reality!

      1. JooPe says:

        No no, in this case i think Decimator has a real point. It is equally nauseating to have us all running around screaming ‘MY intellect is bigger than YOUR intellect!”, regardless of whether it is true or not.

        1. ferret says:

          I understood differently:
          first case: if my IQ is lower than somebody else’s, I feel I’m looser.
          second case: if my IQ is higher (but my position is lower), I’m looser since I didn’t use my superior IQ to achieve what somebody with the lower IQ did.

          1. JooPe says:

            Yeah, but that assumes an individual’s capacity for success is not at all hindered by factors outside innate capabilities, an idea this site tends to shun in reference to the ‘failure’ of the ‘proles’, but then endorses when it complains how the almost inevitable oncoming collapse will make life ‘not fun’ for them.

  11. LuxLibertas says:

    Let’s move past ideology and towards practicality. What specific policies do the writers on this site envisage? What kind of civilization? Political system? Methodology? We need to separate the wheat from the chaff. I’ve read the platform on the homepage, obviously, but would like to hear more.

    1. JooPe says:

      One policy i can think of off the bat to solve the organ deficiency: Make organ donation/collection at death the default status, but not mandatory. That way nobody can complain about having their ‘rights’ violated since they have the power to make sure their body isn’t ‘defiled’ after death. And in reality it is mere complacence that stops people from ticking a box on an organ donar form, as it has the state from enacting the solution (unless there is someone with wealth and power who profits from it not being enacted). I suspect a similar solution can be applied to many/most problems in a democratic state, the question is do we want reform or revolution?

      1. LuxLibertas says:

        You must be joking.

        1. JooPe says:

          How so? I was under the presumption that organ donarship must be instigated by the donar?

  12. A white guy says:

    All this angry arguing over the internet is pointless. Life, success, and therefore happiness is dominated by power. It doesn’t matter who is right, only who is more powerful. An action in reality is more important than 1000000000 words written on the internet. All this intellectual masturbation will lead to nothing.

    1. Every day I ask myself this same question, and every day I have to fall back upon the same answer. It is true that arguments over the internet will never get anything done. And it is also true that some post under the guise of love for a harmonious / hierarchic / organic society, while the posts point towards an antagonizing direction.

      But it is also true that if it is only about actions and only about power, that, at the end of the day, the value, usefulness and purpose of those very actions and purposes fizzles into a vacuum of nothingness. It is because we cannot know the point of our actions unless we have first rationally examined on them. Else we would merely be acting on instinct, on subjective whims, on what others have told us. Our efforts would go undirected if we had not first reflected on the purpose of that effort. Without rational consideration there is a large chance that the power is spent on goals that are in fact not the right goals. We might be confusing symptoms with causes.

      Also, no change can be made into the right direction, unless that direction is first assessed. It cannot succeed unless people first understand the situation. Therefore it is useful to spread awareness.

      Due to these reasons I always come to the conclusion that it is wortwhile to write posts and articles, even though it does not always lead to an objective, rational discussion.

      1. A white guy says:

        I wasn’t trying to be antagonistic, i’m 100% on the side of amerika.org and its friends. I have been reading and commenting on this site for well over a year, and i must say i enjoy the people, ideas, and discussion that i find here. Whenever i finish reading a particularly good article, i leave the site with such a feeling of hope, and a desire to go out and change things for the better. However, the one thing that spoils those feelings of hope, is the question that lingers in the back of my mind whenever i read something on this site. “Well, what am I going to do about it? What CAN i do about it?” As always, that question is unanswered. For all the inspiration and wisdom i find on this site, that question persists. I think it’s time we start changing things in our society rather than discussing them endlessly. I honestly believe that this is the time of reckoning for our western civilization. If we fail to act, then there wont be a western civilization in 30 years. I’m a young man, and i don’t know much, but i do believe we need to start taking peaceful and intelligent action to preserve our way of life.

        1. Nicholas Marville says:

          It is beautiful to know that our writing inspires people. It is also true that every discussion must naturally reach an end, when all arguments have been brought forward and weighed. It is why I prefer to link back to my previous articles instead of writing the whole thing again.

          There are in fact some steps we can take. For one I’ve been working on a book. However I could use some help with finding the appropriate persons to publish it. This is to create more attention for our theme.

        2. crow says:

          You can do a great deal to change things, by the simple act of changing yourself.
          Make yourself healthy and functional, and you’ve done your bit.
          Society is you, and you it.
          Others may follow in their own time.
          Maybe too late, but that’s the reality of life.
          It is always, at some point, guaranteed to end.

  13. Kieran says:

    I like JooPe and Ah-Ha. I love this site, I have learned alot, but sometimes it dearly needs a devil on its (left?) shoulder.

    Argument is wonderful. There has been some petty name-calling, but for the most part, points have been articulated well, hopefully leading some to reassess their values – even if only to strengthen their trust in them.

    Certainly, there’s more to be had from a good debate, as above, than simple back-patting. Perhaps this site should create a forum? The discussion does seem to get off topic awfully quickly.

    1. crow says:

      You’re young and it shows.
      Debates are ruinous affairs, and arguments destructive.
      Reasoned discussion is win/win.
      It’s not about agreement, it’s about respect and consideration.
      Neither of which are displayed by the characters you “like”.

  14. Ouroboros says:

    Almost 100 comments!? Day going down in history for Amerika.

    1. Bert says:

      Quality matters much more than quantity.

      1. Ouroboros says:

        Of course, although it is nice to see the increased readership.

        1. I think the street brawl atmosphere is enjoyable, but it will displace the more reasoned debate we saw in the past. In brawls, communication is not possible; in fact, by definition, the time for communication has passed. My hope is that in different threads we can preserve different visions of Amerika.org: the street brawler, the tweed-wearing pipe-smoking solemn reader, the savant ingenue, and so on.

          We probably do best when we avoid calling each other retarded gay Nazis, but I could be wrong on that.

          1. Ted Swanson says:

            You’ve insulted my intelligence, Brett, you retarded gay Nazi!!1! I demand satisfaction!

          2. Nicholas Marville says:

            Street Brawlers have overtaken the comment sections. It all proves again how only very, very few people are able of objective perception. I mean they cannot draw the line between objectively examining an argument and personal taunts and insults. They don’t write: “Fair enough, but how would you deal with the following possible objections?” Instead, they write: “Your IQ must be so low. You must be a Liberal. I’m tired of arguing with your small-minded ego.”

          3. Ouroboros says:

            I have a feeling a lot of it would stop if Joopee was exiled to Siberia.

  15. Organicist says:

    I like how so many of the commenters here complain about being labeled ‘liberal’ for criticizing this site, then immediately assume that Amerika.org is a ‘fascist’ site because it criticizes liberalism. Tu quoque, my friends.

    1. Ah-ha says:

      It’s a cheap shot. It’s pretty much the “you guys started it argument”. I’ve read a few comments from supporters here and they say that there’s nothing to gain from name calling but really, who started it.

      What do you expect to get from calling someone a “liberal” who isn’t a liberal?

      1. crow says:

        So “liberal” is the new “racist”? That’s funny.
        Soooooooooo funny…
        You’re unaware, I suppose, of all the abuse you two were hurling around. That’s a liberal trait. Act like monsters from the Id, with a free pass, because somebody called you a liberal :)
        Hahaha! What a joke.
        I didn’t get it, but now I do. You’re comedians.
        I have to say though, not very good ones.
        If you have a day job, keep it.
        Tough times they are a’ comin’.

        1. Ah-ha says:

          It’s funny that you’re so offended. If we’re comedians, then you’re just a court jester. If we’re that bad, then you must be far worse stooping down below our level and all; resorting to name calling when you’re supposed to be more divine than a mere human.

          You conceitedness humors me, and for that, I will never take you seriously. Now fly away crow, you’re bothering me.

          1. crow says:

            Offended? Me? Projecting again are we?
            Indeed I am a jester. I jest often. I am better at it than you are, in too many ways to mention.
            What level are you on, exactly? Care to tell?
            Name calling? Me? Projecting yet again?
            More divine than a mere human? You’ve been reading too much new age stuff.
            My conceitedness humors you? See? I told you I was a better jester than you. You are not funny at all. You don’t se3e to understand what humor is.
            Fly away? No I don’t think so. I live here you see. And you don’t.
            SQUAWK :)

  16. Nestorius says:

    Your point about beauty is correct.
    However, conservatives have a great contribution in the destruction of beauty.

  17. [...] is evil, because extensive research has proven that this involves inequality. Beauty is evil, for it implies ugliness, and judging people or things in this way makes them unequal. [...]

Leave a Reply

42 queries. 0.972 seconds