Dissident Voice

[Vyn]

As I was reading this article off of Dissident Voice I could not help but think of Billy!

[Billy Underdog]

  Howerver true some of the points in the last paragraph are, trying to get a point across by using half-thruths, oversimplifications and bad, borderline childish rethorics is simply just using the same tactics as the so-called "right" side have been doing for years now. It's basically just Rush Limbaugh with a "left side" point of view...

Worst thing is that this stupidity just puts fuel on the fire for the excuses used to turn what used to be extreme point of views into mainstearm point of views over the last years.

If i'm perceived as being this thoughtless when trying to present my thoughts and ideas i have to seriously reconsider the way i communicate them.

I really hope this is just a joke site and i'm still too fresh out of bed to get it... It doesn't help having the right set of ideas if they're conveyed in the same way the wrong ones are...

[Billy Underdog]

Edit: But i can see how you connected such an article to me, though, by which you earned an awsome point...

It's easy to paint the world in a black & white picture, because in many ways it is, but there's so damn many shades of grey in there (even more than 50) that in the end it's counterproductive and lazy.

I'm often lazy when expressing thoughts, because i'm exhausted after having gone through the thought process...   

It's not my fault you can't follow my string of thoughts. It's not my fault i'm better than... 

[Vyn]

 

[Typhon]

It doesn't help having the right set of ideas if they're conveyed in the same way the wrong ones are...

Every once in a while you do say something profound like this.  I guess there's hope for you yet. 

[Typhon]

As I was reading this article off of Dissident Voice I could not help but think of Billy!

You think these people think the holocaust is fake too?   

[Billy Underdog]

It doesn't help having the right set of ideas if they're conveyed in the same way the wrong ones are...

Every once in a while you do say something profound like this.  I guess there's hope for you yet. 

Yeah, you seem to know quite a bit about how the "wrong side" convey things, and how easily one can be fooled by it

As I was reading this article off of Dissident Voice I could not help but think of Billy!

You think these people think the holocaust is fake too?   

Now, that's more your side of the table, isn't it?

[Billy Underdog]

A voice we all should listen to...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pknmFHNLEJc

When did we stop listening to our elders' wisdom anyways? Been doing so for ten-thousands of years, so why stop now?

[Zzzptm]

I found him an interesting perspective overall, but naive in his view that technology solves all problems. My job involves dealing with where technological solutions create more problems.

Laws don't completely solve all problems, but put laws with technology, and you have two layers that provide more complete coverage of a problem to get closer to a complete solution.

Say I want to protect my home. A law that forbids robbing of homes will get most people to say, "Right, I can't rob homes to solve my problem." If I have an alarm system advertised, that will cause most people in the group that still chooses to rob homes to rob somebody else's home. The large dog that growls will deter yet more people who chose to disregard my advertised alarm system.

Then the armed Tesla coil finishes off anyone that tossed a steak to my dog... but it's real hell when I forget to shut it off in the morning and it fries another overnight guest...

There are technological solutions to many problems, but trying to get a technological solution for all problems simply won't work.

[Billy Underdog]

Well, technology was just a small part of his point, laws and the futility of politics was rather the main one (the way i heard it atleast).

As for house robbery, despite using all kinds of alarm, dogs and weapons, in the end there would always be someone who for whatever reason still would feel a need to do it. Wouldn't it be better to get rid of the reasons someone would feel the need to break the law and risk their life to do that robbery instead?

And i've said many a times: a technocracy governed by a peoples committee would probably be of the better solutions.

[Zzzptm]

We still have scarcity - this time managed by a panel of experts and a committee, sort of like I've seen in many corporations... and they're no better than other humans. Still capable of faults, foibles, corruptions, temptations, and so forth. And what do we do with technocrats that don't understand each others' specialties? What do we do when two different experts each propose two different power plant designs and criticize the other's as unsafe? How do we judge if we're not experts ourselves?

[Billy Underdog]

I shouldn't have done that edit, i was really hoping you would answer my question there...

[Vyn]

Wouldn't it be better to get rid of the reasons someone would feel the need to break the law and risk their life to do that robbery instead?

Of course it would.

Getting rid of reasons like thirst, hunger, and shelter is the easy part.

Getting rid of reasons like envy, pride, and selfishness is not the easy part. In fact, thus far in human history they have made the "easy part" impossible.

[Zzzptm]

I agree. We can have plentiful resources as far as food, water, shelter, clothing - enough for everyone and more. Free stuff for one and all.

But... not everyone can live at the same address. There is a scarcity of location.

We do not live forever... there is a scarcity of time.

I may want to be with someone that does not want to be with me... there is a scarcity of love and/or companionship.

If someone places inordinate importance on one of these things to the point where they would be determined to solve their problem through crime, then that selfishness results in lawbreaking.

[Billy Underdog]

Wouldn't it be better to get rid of the reasons someone would feel the need to break the law and risk their life to do that robbery instead?

Of course it would.

Getting rid of reasons like thirst, hunger, and shelter is the easy part.

Getting rid of reasons like envy, pride, and selfishness is not the easy part. In fact, thus far in human history they have made the "easy part" impossible.

That's very true. But that's also not your typical house robber, in many cases they're rather in a position that allow them to avoid the law.

I believe we're at a point where we can change the human condition. The last 6000 years (to put it mildly) we've evolved more psychologically than physically, at the same time it's also around the same timeframe we've had organized religion, basically the first set of laws. So, now we've tried that, we've seen it doesn't work, so it's time to try something else.
Ofcourse it's not done quickly, it's impossible to say how long it will take, but we gotta start somewhere.
Envy, pride and selfishness is something all of us feel, but most of us are able to overrun. I think it's possible to set up a society that can enable everybody to do that. Yeah, getting very utopian now.

I agree. We can have plentiful resources as far as food, water, shelter, clothing - enough for everyone and more. Free stuff for one and all.

But... not everyone can live at the same address. There is a scarcity of location.

We do not live forever... there is a scarcity of time.

I may want to be with someone that does not want to be with me... there is a scarcity of love and/or companionship.

If someone places inordinate importance on one of these things to the point where they would be determined to solve their problem through crime, then that selfishness results in lawbreaking.

Once again, emotions like fear of death and loss of love can be overrun. With an equal distribution of resources there wouldn't be any need for envy about location either.