DOMA and Prop 8. Both History.

[kandrathe]

Same superiority complex, different day.

I don't think you are a pre-teen girl, so I understand why you don't get it. JB, is not the kind of artist that appeals to the nihilistic beret wearing, smokey coffeehouse, college scene your commie friends might riff to. He does put it on the line, and go out to sing, dance, and entertain a very large audience. We might not like his style, but I respect what he does.

Besides, he's Canadian, so how can you not like him?

[FireIceTalon]

A libertarian capitalist calling me a nihilist? Oh, the irony. It is sociopathic Randroids that are the nihilists.

Nor do I wear a beret, hang out in coffeehouses (the occasional stop at Starbucks doesn't count), nor are even most of my friends, family or associates communists. I have two or three that share my views (to an extent) and the rest all range in their politics.

Is there a rule that says I have to like (or dislike) someone because of their nationality? You cappies sure love to divide people up into good and bad based on such things, but I like or dislike people based on their character - not on their race, nationality, gender, or other social construct. If that makes me an arrogant bastard with a superiority complex, I say so be it. I wouldn't have it any other way. I'd rather be that than a reactionary any day of the week.

As far as JB goes, it is one thing to make cheesy teeny bopper music that requires virtually no talent, but he also comes across as being a spoiled little brat that thinks he is the best thing since sliced bread. I not only do not like his music, but I don't care much for him as a person either, at least not from what I have seen.

Anyways, think I'm done with this convo. I just hit paragon 99 on my wizard last night, gonna go get 100 before the weekend is up instead of wasting my time on here, so adios.

[kandrathe]

If that makes me an arrogant bastard with a superiority complex, I say so be it. I wouldn't have it any other way. I'd rather be that than a reactionary any day of the week.

As far as JB goes, it is one thing to make cheesy teeny bopper music that requires virtually no talent, but he also comes across as being a spoiled little brat that thinks he is the best thing since sliced bread. I not only do not like his music, but I don't care much for him as a person either, at least not from what I have seen.

[eppie]

So what is it you respect about him? He stands for everything that is wrong with the music industry. The industry decides they need a new star and they create one. And because the masses are ignorant their plan works. And directly they have spoiled another generation by giving them a distorted opinion on what is music and what is crap.
Why would someone like that get your respect?
A fireman who tried to get people out of the wtc gets my respect. A doctor who travels to africa to treat the poor gets my respect.
Justin bieber does not! I count myself lucky i have never heard on of his songs.

[shoju]

Actually, (And I can't believe that I'm even doing this) The Biebs is a product of hard work, and discovery, but not because they wanted a star.

He was HUGE on Youtube before he got famous. He was actually discovered on Youtube, by the hardest working man in Show Biz, Usher Raymond. (who, despite being on the last season of the voice, I have a huge amount of respect for.)

Now, I can't stand his music, and I do think that he is a pretty big pain in the ass, but lets not perpetuate false information. He does have talent, he isn't just some pretty face with a mediocre voice. he is a musician. And while I may not like his music, or his personality, I can respect his musicianship. Now, that doesn't make what you said about the Industry incorrect "on a whole" Just in this specific case. They didn't decide to "make a star" out of the biebs. They decided to take a youtube star, and make him a global star. In essence, they just sped up the process. He was well on his way to being a huge star anyway.

I have a large amount of loathing for the RIAA, and those companies that comprise it. I hate what they do to artists, and I abhor what they do to young people by sucking them up, shoving them in front of the world, and grinding them into a pulp. My band came awfully close to getting a deal, and while I'm not rich, or famous now, I thank my magical being that sometimes grants me things that I would consider miracles that I didn't get signed. I've learned a lot since then, and one thing I learned is that I would have been dead inside 24 months.

[LemmingofGlory]

So I need to be gay or lesbian to make an assessment of the possible social consequences of a political decision regarding the issue? Right, because you provided all the insight to the issue that there is to provide, on this issue or any other political discussion that has taken place on this forum . And you have the audacity to call my "intuition" crap? Puuuulease. Go take a long walk off a short pier.

Think you herped before you derped on that post big time man. I'll tell you whats amazing - the idiocy and naivety of tools like yourself that think the social context of any issue exists in some separate vacuum from how the entire social order and its relationships are arranged. Hint: capitalism, the whole social order in which we live, is what encompasses all elements at play, and thus they are structured around the very social relationships intrinsic to it and its operations. They don't exist as static, individual entities external from one another. Learn to see the forest through the trees, educate yourself, then come talk to me. Hint#2: when that time comes, you would do well to approach me in a much less confrontational, more intelligent way.

The "forest for the trees" accusation is exactly what I was saying to you when I said that you view everything in terms of capitalism. Capitalism is your Yggdrasil, and it has grown so large you can't see any of the other trees around it. You, specifically, are at a disadvantage in assessing social situations because of this. For example, if you're going to make a claim that nationwide gay marriage will cause backlash, you need a basis upon which to make that claim. My guess here is that your basis consists of "The Capitalist power structure doesn't want it, so they will fight!" It is very easy to view this as plausible, but absent any other perspective on this issue (e.g., being LGBT and living in a bigoted area) it is a guess at best. I did not say to you that your lack of one specific perspective makes your point invalid but that your lack of any other perspective makes it unsophisticated and ignorant.

It is absurd to me that you believe I see zero involvement of other elements in this issue when my point was that "This is not well-explained from just one perspective." Bump a few points of INT over to WIS and you'll take my meaning as intended.

You did not address why you didn't read the Supreme Court rulings, so I will assume I was correct in my prior assessment.

This also caught my eye:

People have little taste in anything these days. Otherwise, Justin Bieber wouldnt be worth millions with a shit ton of grammies.

Do you even understand who his demographic is? It's tween girls. Are you really extrapolating the interests of tween girls to the whole rest of society? Of course tween girls like terrible things! The capitalist-patriarchal power structure understands how gender is culturally conveyed to little girls and consequently markets to the interests with which they are indoctrinated. To assume that their tastes are completely independent of the overarching power structure seems completely unlike you.

I also factchecked your Grammy claim. It is false: the BeebZ has no grammies.

As for the original topic, I doubt it's completely over, but it is an important step.

SCOTUS seems to be playing it safe. They refused to hear a case about a same-sex marriage from Nevada which, like the Prop 8 case, was challenging the constitutionality of banning same-sex marriage. My understanding is it could have led to a Loving v. Virginia kind of ruling (which declared bans on interracial marriage unconstitutional nationwide), but SCOTUS decided to chicken out and kick the case to a lower court. I assume this means that, whatever the outcome of this case, its impact will be felt only in Nevada.

-Lemming

[FireIceTalon]

The "forest for the trees" accusation is exactly what I was saying to you when I said that you view everything in terms of capitalism. Capitalism is your Yggdrasil, and it has grown so large you can't see any of the other trees around it. You, specifically, are at a disadvantage in assessing social situations because of this. For example, if you're going to make a claim that nationwide gay marriage will cause backlash, you need a basis upon which to make that claim. My guess here is that your basis consists of "The Capitalist power structure doesn't want it, so they will fight!" It is very easy to view this as plausible, but absent any other perspective on this issue (e.g., being LGBT and living in a bigoted area) it is a guess at best. I did not say to you that your lack of one specific perspective makes your point invalid but that your lack of any other perspective makes it unsophisticated and ignorant.

If you go back and read my original post, I didn't say nationwide gay marriage would inevitably create backlash, but that it was a possibility, and one that I think is strong due to the backwards and reactionary political culture of the U.S. relative to other nations. So while such a prediction isn't inevitable, it is possible, and given the circumstances one could make the argument that it is even probable. I don't think any person, unless they have some sort of crystal ball that we are deprived of, is going to say such an outcome is inevitable. That would be overly deterministic. Systems of analysis (Marxist or non) aren't used to predict outcomes, but to show which outcomes are possible or not possible. Which of the possibilities will result is anyone's guess, it all depends on a variety of material factors and how they play out.

Capitalism IS the forest (it is the entire social order in which we live, you can't get much bigger than that), and in my case, I think your argument would be "you are missing the details in the big picture" is a more accurate and better way of trying to argue against my viewpoint (or a Marxist viewpoint in general). There are decent arguments out there against the Marxist standpoint, but I've yet to see anyone on this board provide one - all I see are the typical, average everyday arguments and misconceptions of what Marxism is, from pro-capitalist sources that have been debunked a million times already. Combined with a snide remark here and there. The whole point of Marxism is to look at things in a systemic totality (aka not missing the forest through the trees), and it understands social problems to be a product of and shaped by and around the current social order; not as individual, isolated static problems that exist in a vacuum independent of one another, or independent of the material conditions of which they developed. There is a class element to almost any given social identity and the problems it faces. Nor does it views these problems as a product of human nature (since human nature itself is a social construct, and not some fixed, innate concept that makes people behave or think the same way all the time, like most people have been led to believe it is). I just get tired of people pointing fingers and putting the blame and scapegoat on one group of persons for all our problems, or blaming government for everything.

If I had a nickel for every person who blamed all the problems of capitalism as being caused by government (rather than by the social relationships of the capitalistic system itself), or on who the latest fashionable scapegoat of the world is, I'd be filthy fucking rich and be able to start a new communist party. It is too easy to blame solely the state and its functions for all our problems, without examining WHY the state exists to begin with, and looking at the entire social order and mode of production, in context, as a whole. Want to blame government for the problems we face (or a particular group of people, perhaps Muslims)? Yes, because thats the trendy thing to do so it must be right! Capitalism is the problem? Oh no, capitalism is great, hands off my capitalism!! I want to solve the problem(s) by keeping or even having more of what caused the problem to begin with!! How genius is that!? *sarcasm mode off*

My friend, I'm not at any disadvantage in accessing the material conditions of society - quite the opposite actually. People like Hammer though, who are dumber than shit to begin with, are at a multitude of disadvantages when speaking on any intellectual based topic.

People have little taste in anything these days. Otherwise, Justin Bieber wouldnt be worth millions with a shit ton of grammies.

Do you even understand who his demographic is? It's tween girls. Are you really extrapolating the interests of tween girls to the whole rest of society? Of course tween girls like terrible things! The capitalist-patriarchal power structure understands how gender is culturally conveyed to little girls and consequently markets to the interests with which they are indoctrinated. To assume that their tastes are completely independent of the overarching power structure seems completely unlike you.

I know all this already. The point I was making to Kandrathe was that lists, awards, and other such things that measure how good or popular something is in our culture should be taken lightly, and that he shouldn't necessarily be using such things to try and drive his points home. I was using Beebs as an analogy to point out that Rand topping some novels reader list is meaningless. Marx's "Capital Vol.1" skyrocketed in sales after capitalism dropped over dead for the millionth time in 2008 and had to be resuscitated by the state, but it doesn't mean anything. That's all.

I also factchecked your Grammy claim. It is false: the BeebZ has no grammies.

Ok, so I was wrong that he didn't win any grammies. But I think the overall point I was getting at still stands.

[Hammerskjold]

Bump a few points of INT over to WIS and you'll take my meaning as intended.

From what I've seen so far. He really doesn't have that much points to shift around. Then again that's the price you pay for taking the 'Fanatical Radical Expialodocius' trait. -90% to your stat point pool. But taking the 'Red Bubble of Invulnerability (to common sense and logic)' might be worth it. It seems to be working out fabulously for comrade there.

After all, before commie-ism, did ice cream ever taste as sweet? No.

Before commie-ism, was sunshine ever that warm and bright? No.

Before commie-ism, was I ever so dashing, brillig, all a gymbre in my word saladry? No.

Before commie-ism, did I truly know who I was, what things were, how things should be, the way they truly -should- be? No.

I am Commie-ism. Commie-ism is me. Effulgent.


TL,DR version: My-topia is better than your-topia. But Mental Myopia is bestest Utopia.

SCOTUS seems to be playing it safe. They refused to hear a case about a same-sex marriage from Nevada which, like the Prop 8 case, was challenging the constitutionality of banning same-sex marriage. My understanding is it could have led to a Loving v. Virginia kind of ruling (which declared bans on interracial marriage unconstitutional nationwide), but SCOTUS decided to chicken out and kick the case to a lower court. I assume this means that, whatever the outcome of this case, its impact will be felt only in Nevada.

It'd be interesting to see what the longer term impact is. Every time I think humanity has taken a small step forward, something usually pops up that says 'not just yet...' Then again I'm a bit of a pessimist.

[Jester]

Actually, (And I can't believe that I'm even doing this) The Biebs is a product of hard work, and discovery, but not because they wanted a star.

Thank you. I tried to write that post about 8 times, but you nailed it better than I ever would have.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

A libertarian capitalist calling me a nihilist? Oh, the irony. It is sociopathic Randroids that are the nihilists.

Describe your moral compass comrade. None? See I knew that already. You hate too much.

Me, I'm steeping in a a steamy bath of morality daily, perhaps overly. Some day I may have to let loose and get to Bethel before I go mad.

Nor do I wear a beret, hang out in coffeehouses (the occasional stop at Starbucks doesn't count)...

But, you do man, you just don't do it physically. You are like a guy with a full body tattoo, and a ton of body mods who wonders why you're stuck working the late shift at the video store.

Is there a rule that says I have to like (or dislike) someone because of their nationality?

Yes, actually, we must love Canada. Wayne Gretzky says so.

You cappies sure love to divide people up into good and bad based on such things, but I like or dislike people based on their character - not on their race, nationality, gender, or other social construct.

At first I read, "Crappies" -- but, it doesn't make sense to call me a fish. You had me at "I dislike people..." C'mon, really, who do you actually, really like? You seemingly hate everybody.

[FireIceTalon]

Describe your moral compass comrade. None? See I knew that already. You hate too much.

See this is the problem with you reactionaries. You think because someone doesn't have the same morality as you, or even particular morality at all, that they must be a nihilist. You are not only very judgmental and bigoted, but you are flat out WRONG.

Morality is extremely subjective, and as a result, no society should be governed based on any particular set of morals, nor should a person have to live their lives based on a such a framework. To me, morality is just a code phrase for religious dogmatism. It is usually very authoritarian in nature, and wants to subject other people to its own views of how the world should be. This is a big reason why the GOP is in shambles right now - cause they want to force everyone else to live by their ways.

As far as my own moral compass goes, there is no particular way to describe it because I dont let any set of subjective morality guide my way of thinking. I simply try my best to do the right thing all the time, in any circumstance. This doesn't make me a nihilist by any means, and in fact, I usually consider the needs of others before my own. In many ways I actually have a privileged position in society - I am white, I am male, and I am heterosexual. But I also realize that my privileged position isn't right, and strongly believe that those different from should have the same rights, opportunity, and fair treatment as I or any one else. The difference between you and me is, you aren't willing to give up your privileged position, whereas I am. Then you turn around and try to justify a system that PROMOTES inequality at its very core. It is you who is the nihilist, not I. Derp.

Also, I disagree that I hate too much. There is NEVER too much hate for capitalism, and the inequality and alienation it espouses. In fact, there needs to be a lot more hatred of it.

But, you do man, you just don't do it physically. You are like a guy with a full body tattoo, and a ton of body mods who wonders why you're stuck working the late shift at the video store.

And this just proves my point. That isn't the guy with tattoos problem, that is SOCIETIES problem. Why should he be discriminated against because he happens to be a little more colorful than the average person? The answer: He shouldn't be discriminated against in the first place. The reason a guy with a fully tattoo body suit has to work the night shift at a video store is because the capitalist class says so, because he is "different" and doesn't adhere to THEIR morality, or their ideal person. Despite the fact he may be a talented, knowledgeable and productive, and in general, good-hearted individual.

As far as I'm concerned, you capitalists are every bit as authoritarian as Stalin, but as much as I abhor him and his actions, at least he didn't try to hide it. Your example just proves once again, that it is YOU that is the nihilist here.

Yes, actually, we must love Canada. Wayne Gretzky says so.

I don't have to love anything or anyone cause someone said so. I will decide that at my own discretion. So consider that rule broken as far as I'm concerned.

At first I read, "Crappies" -- but, it doesn't make sense to call me a fish. You had me at "I dislike people..." C'mon, really, who do you actually, really like? You seemingly hate everybody.

I don't hate everybody by any means. In fact, I think people, in general, are good. I think you should be asking yourself that question, since it is you, and not I, that has the cynical, Christian view of human nature. And it is you who is the subjective moralist that preaches freedom and liberty all the time but is really an authoritarian at heart. After all, it was you that just said guys with full body tattoos should be working graveyard shifts at video stores, was it not?

I myself have a lot of tattoos, not a full body suit, but quite a bit, and I get annoyed when bigoted people stare at me or make snide comments. Thankfully it very rarely happens. I had one lady come up to me a few years ago and tell me that I was going to hell because I wasn't a moral person for having all those tattoos. I scoffed at her and said whatever and walked away, but I really wanted to tell her to go fuck herself and shove her morals where the sun don't shine, and that I'd give her a grand tour of the place when she was sent there for being a judgemental douche bag. I was nice enough not to say it, though I certainly could have w/o there being any repercussions. But I chose not to. I certainly did think it though.

So save your authoritarian, subjective morality crap for someone who gives a fuck, or for other nihilists like you that love to make preconceived notions about people because they are different from you somehow. I don't talk to my own father for these very reasons: Cause he's a controlling, self-interested, materialistic, manipulative, conniving and judgemental jerk...that ruined my mom's and both my brother's lives because he ran his household like a fucking dictator (and attempted to ruin mine, but I was fortunate enough that I am as strong as I am to overcome the toxicity that he brings into any relationship), and in general, he is just a mean and despicable person. As most reactionary sociopaths and capitalists are.

[Hammerskjold]

Describe your moral compass comrade. None? See I knew that already. You hate too much.

See this is the problem with you reactionaries. You think because someone doesn't have the same morality as you, or even particular morality at all, that they must be a nihilist. You are not only very judgmental and bigoted, but you are flat out WRONG.

Morality is extremely subjective, and as a result, no society should be governed based on any particular set of morals, nor should a person have to live their lives based on a such a framework. To me, morality is just a code phrase for religious dogmatism. It is usually very authoritarian in nature, and wants to subject other people to its own views of how the world should be. This is a big reason why the GOP is in shambles right now - cause they want to force everyone else to live by their ways.

As far as my own moral compass goes, there is no particular way to describe it because I dont let any set of subjective morality guide my way of thinking. I simply try my best to do the right thing all the time, in any circumstance. This doesn't make me a nihilist by any means, and in fact, I usually consider the needs of others before my own. In many ways I actually have a privileged position in society - I am white, I am male, and I am heterosexual. But I also realize that my privileged position isn't right, and strongly believe that those different from should have the same rights, opportunity, and fair treatment as I or any one else. The difference between you and me is, you aren't willing to give up your privileged position, whereas I am. Then you turn around and try to justify a system that PROMOTES inequality at its very core. It is you who is the nihilist, not I.

Also, I disagree that I hate too much. There is NEVER too much hate for capitalism, and the inequality and alienation it espouses. In fact, there needs to be a lot more hatred of it.

But, you do man, you just don't do it physically. You are like a guy with a full body tattoo, and a ton of body mods who wonders why you're stuck working the late shift at the video store.

And this just proves my point. That isn't the guy with tattoos problem, that is SOCIETIES problem. Why should he be discriminated against because he happens to be a little more colorful than the average person? The answer: He shouldn't be discriminated against in the first place. The reason a guy with a fully tattoo body suit has to work the night shift at a video store is because the capitalist class says so, because he is "different" and doesn't adhere to THEIR morality, or their ideal person. Despite the fact he may be a talented, knowledgeable and productive, and in general, good-hearted individual.

As far as I'm concerned, you capitalists are every bit as authoritarian as Stalin, but as much as I abhor him and his actions, at least he didn't try to hide it. Your example just proves once again, that it is YOU that is the nihilist here.

Yes, actually, we must love Canada. Wayne Gretzky says so.

I don't have to love anything or anyone cause someone said so. I will decide that at my own discretion.

At first I read, "Crappies" -- but, it doesn't make sense to call me a fish. You had me at "I dislike people..." C'mon, really, who do you actually, really like? You seemingly hate everybody.

I don't hate everybody by any means. In fact, I think people, in general, are good. I think you should be asking yourself that question, since it is you, and not I, that has the cynical, Christian view of human nature. And it is you who is the subjective moralist that preaches freedom and liberty all the time but is really an authoritarian at heart. After all, it was you that just said guys with full body tattoos should be working graveyard shifts at video stores, was it not?

I myself have a lot of tattoos, not a full body suit, but quite a bit, and I get annoyed when bigoted people stare at me or make snide comments. Thankfully it very rarely happens. I had one lady come up to me a few years ago and tell me that I was going to hell because I wasn't a moral person for having all those tattoos. I scoffed at her and said whatever and walked away, but I really wanted to tell her to go fuck herself and shove her morals where the sun don't shine, and that I'd give her a grand tour of the place when she was sent there for being a judgemental douche bag. I was nice enough not to say it, though I certainly could have w/o there being any repercussions. But I chose not to. I certainly did think it though.

So save your authoritarian, subjective morality crap for someone who gives a fuck, or for other nihilists like you that love to make preconceived notions about people because they are different from you somehow. I don't talk to my own father for these very reasons: Cause he's a controlling, self-interested, materialistic, manipulative, conniving and judgemental jerk...that ruined my mom's and both my brother's lives because he ran his household like a fucking dictator (and attempted to ruin mine, but I was fortunate enough that I am as strong as I am to overcome the toxicity that he brings into any relationship), and in general, he is just a mean and despicable person. As most reactionary sociopaths and capitalists are.

...Oh where to begin. Kinda hard when rouge douche is so literal.
Well let's try to keep it nice and simple.

It's not about idealogy, it's about behaviour.

It's not about tattoos, it's about behaviour.

When you have a problem with 1 person, that's nothing special. When you have a problem with 3, you might have bad luck. When you have a problem with 10+, it might not be others that's the problem.

Then again, you seem to be great at making friends and winning hearts and minds. Carry on comrade. What's next on the 5 minutes of hate?

How about...that pillow tag that says 'do not remove'? That's obviously authoritarian and capitalistic to the extreme! OOOhhh, Serta Tempurpedic, you have made a powerful enemy today my friend.

Also, I hate, hate, HAAAATE Coke and Mentos. They're soooo...reactionary!

[kandrathe]

After all, it was you that just said guys with full body tattoos should be working graveyard shifts at video stores, not I.

Did I say that? Nope. I have many friends who are tattooed, and modded. Morality was invented before Christ. Ever hear of Nicomachean Ethics? Aristotle? We have a very long history of contemplations on right versus wrong. Or, perhaps an Eastern flavor, Han Feizi? Morality is not relative, nor is it a negotiable quantity in a society based upon an agreed upon set of mores. The funny thing (to me) is that you flat out reject being a nihilist, and then in describing yourself almost classically define nihilism.

Merriam Webster says, a. "a viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless" -- maybe not so much the last part, but we've not really explored your life's purpose much.

But, man, you really are a bag full of external projections. Your condescension tends to ring hollow when you use that "You reactionaries" or "you cappies", or "you authoritarian, moralist, bigoted", blah blah blah... phrase to try to label people. So, full of labeling others and projecting your prejudices on others, but an incredible shortage of mirrors there I guess. Would you say you might be bigoted against "us cappies" and that there is no hate strong enough to express your prejudice?

See, what I said was... You are acting like (but I did hit the nail on the head too closely then ) a guy who is all pissed off at the world and shows the world you are pissed off by creating barriers -- in my example it was extensive tattoo's and body mods, but anything would do, including a furry bear costume. Of course the body tattooed guy shouldn't be discriminated against -- but realistically, he will. Why? Because he's created an intentional barrier between himself and that VP of sales position he deserves. He could do it by cross dressing, or wearing a pink spiky Mohawk. Is it right? No. Will it happen, undoubtedly. Did he have any control over the outcome? You bet.

I would say you have chosen the prickly demeanor because you feel rejected by the society. But, you subconsciously have telegraphed your rejection of the society that rejects you because you have made yourself all prickly. A catch-22, until you change the society, or change yourself to become "more normal". Which is more likely? Sometimes normality is not possible, when one is handicapped, or otherwise a minority, but often we scarify ourselves to make ourselves different. I gotta be me, but then, we ask ourselves why we're all alone. Because, you are different and have rejected society by choice. You are not the Elephant Man, so you can choose a different path. I'd start by eschewing the name calling. It's off putting.

I myself have a lot of tattoos, not a full body suit, but quite a bit, and I get annoyed when bigoted people stare at me or make snide comments. Thankfully it very rarely happens. I had one lady come up to me a few years ago and tell me that I was going to hell because I wasn't a moral person for having all those tattoos. I scoffed at her and said whatever and walked away, but I really wanted to tell her to go fuck herself and shove her morals where the sun don't shine, and that I'd give her a grand tour of the place when she was sent there for being a judgmental douche bag. I was nice enough not to say it, though I certainly could have w/o there being any repercussions. But I chose not to. I certainly did think it though.

That'd show her. You'd have surely proved her wrong then, right? We rise above small mindedness by rejecting small mindedness, not by embracing a different small mindedness. Sort of like road rage. You show the other driver who did something stupid, by doing something equally or more stupid. Who wins?

So save your authoritarian, subjective morality crap for someone who gives a fuck, or for other nihilists like you that love to make preconceived notions about people because they are different from you somehow. I don't talk to my own father for these very reasons: Cause he's a controlling, self-interested, materialistic, manipulative, conniving and judgmental jerk...that ruined my mom's and both my brother's lives because he ran his household like a fucking dictator (and attempted to ruin mine, but I was fortunate enough that I am as strong as I am to overcome the toxicity that he brings into any relationship), and in general, he is just a mean and despicable person. As most reactionary sociopaths and capitalists are.

Wow. Now we get to the roots of the problem. You'll only free yourself by forgiving him, and moving on. Until you bury it, for your own sake, it'll haunt you and ruin your life.

[FireIceTalon]

Yea, I do not believe that life is meaningless or useless by any means. The truth is, I have no idea what the meaning of life is, and anyone who claims to know it is lying, cause it is one of those questions that probably will never be answered. For the simple fact it can't be. But I don't think that makes me a nihilist in any sense. Nihilists are generally apathetic towards life, selfish, and unwary about the needs of others. I am the opposite of all these things, to a fault almost.

I do reject traditional values and beliefs for the most part, because of their authoritarian nature and the objective of those who hold those views to subjugate others. Am I discriminatory against capitalists? Perhaps, but rejecting the values and beliefs of a given ruling class, and not wanting to subject myself to how they see the world is a VERY different thing than discrimination against people of a different race, gender, sexual orientation, creed, or any other social identity. I do not care to take part in this society, because I reject its values and its social relationships. But I am forced to in order to survive. The freedom to starve is not freedom at all, and wage slavery is little different from regular slavery. The only difference is that the former carries the illusion that one is free. We are living in a society that is fairly close to your libertopia (I know it isn't the ideal version of it, but its relatively close enough), and I absolutely hate it, but I can't leave cause there is nowhere for me to go. I am stuck in it, no matter what nation I choose residency in.

I cannot forgive him, cause I've given him far too many chances and tried to have a relationship with him even when I SHOULDN'T have, because it only ended up hurting the other people who I care about. But no longer. I will not let his toxicity continue to make me or the rest of my family miserable. He will die a lonely, miserable old man, but its all his own fault - he has no one to blame but himself. Do I still love him? Yea, how can I not? He is my flesh and blood. But do I LIKE him? No. It is possible to love someone, but not like them, if that makes any sense. I don't care to get into the story, because 30 years would be way too long, and painful, to discuss here.

[kandrathe]

I cannot forgive him, cause I've given him far too many chances and tried to have a relationship with him even when I SHOULDN'T have, because it only ended up hurting the other people who I care about.

You don't need to repair the relationship, or have anything to do with that guy. You need to unburden yourself. It takes energy to love, and likewise, it takes energy to hate. Give yourself the gift of a peace of mind -- let go of this baggage. It's not yours unless you choose to carry it.

You aren't the only one who's ever been crapped on by a bad parent. It's not your fault, so move on. You don't even need to confront him. Just write a letter, without malice, that states the facts as you see them. That you believe he was wrong, and that in spite of it, you've forgiven him and buried the proverbial hatchet. Then, take the letter, and put it in a drawer until some day when he dies, then take it out and burn it.

[eppie]

Actually, (And I can't believe that I'm even doing this) The Biebs is a product of hard work, and discovery, but not because they wanted a star.

right

He was HUGE on Youtube before he got famous.

Which is proving a point?

He was actually discovered on Youtube, by the hardest working man in Show Biz, Usher Raymond.

Don't know who he is, don't care.

(who, despite being on the last season of the voice, I have a huge amount of respect for.)

The what?

Now, I can't stand his music, and I do think that he is a pretty big pain in the ass, but lets not perpetuate false information.

I don't know his music, or that he is a pain in the ass

He does have talent, he isn't just some pretty face with a mediocre voice. he is a musician.

If anyone with a voice and some dance moves, and the ability to play cords would be famous, where would that bring us.

And while I may not like his music, or his personality, I can respect his musicianship.

Yeah, we probably have different scales which we use to decide if someone gets our respect.

Now, that doesn't make what you said about the Industry incorrect "on a whole" Just in this specific case. They didn't decide to "make a star" out of the biebs. They decided to take a youtube star, and make him a global star. In essence, they just sped up the process. He was well on his way to being a huge star anyway.

O yeah, he obviously is the next Bob Dylan.

I have a large amount of loathing for the RIAA, and those companies that comprise it. I hate what they do to artists, and I abhor what they do to young people by sucking them up, shoving them in front of the world, and grinding them into a pulp.

Well my problem is more with all the poor teenagers that get pressured in to spending their money on this crap.....well, one positive thing; you just told me he used to be on youtube and that is free. (yeaaaa 1 point for Bieber)

My band came awfully close to getting a deal, and while I'm not rich, or famous now, I thank my magical being that sometimes grants me things that I would consider miracles that I didn't get signed. I've learned a lot since then, and one thing I learned is that I would have been dead inside 24 months.

Anyway, after reading your post; I don't know who is to blame, Bieber or his record company but I still don't get feeling of respect for them sending crap into the ether. And yes I have never heard one of his songs. and yes I am prejudiced against musicians

[Jester]

And yes I have never heard one of his songs. and yes I am prejudiced against musicians

You're offering terse, content-less replies that you acknowledge yourself are based on absolutely nothing but a series of crude prejudices about musicians.

Apparently, what we're supposed to take away from this is that musicians aren't worthy of respect, on first principles. What kind of ridiculous conclusion is that? Respect is not a finite resource. I don't have to respect Gandhi any less because I think Ravi Shankar is pretty awesome.

-Jester

[shoju]

Actually, (And I can't believe that I'm even doing this) The Biebs is a product of hard work, and discovery, but not because they wanted a star.

right

He was HUGE on Youtube before he got famous.

Which is proving a point?

Yes. It proves the point that he wasn't a product of the Music Industry wanting another star. He wasn't pre-fabricated. He wasn't "Mass Produced". He wasn't American Idol, or the Voice, or America's Got Talent, or a Boy Band. He was a musician.

He was actually discovered on Youtube, by the hardest working man in Show Biz, Usher Raymond.

Don't know who he is, don't care.

I find it hard to believe that you are under the age of.......... 50, and have no idea who Usher is. I don't listen to R&B, and I know who he is.

(who, despite being on the last season of the voice, I have a huge amount of respect for.)

The what?

The Voice. Imagine American Idol, but without the trappings of being discovered based on the overall look. It's purely based on your voice. The judges can't see you when they hear the audition.

Now, I can't stand his music, and I do think that he is a pretty big pain in the ass, but lets not perpetuate false information.

I don't know his music, or that he is a pain in the ass

I'm beginning to wonder who you are, what planet you live on, or if you really do get on the internet.

He does have talent, he isn't just some pretty face with a mediocre voice. he is a musician.

If anyone with a voice and some dance moves, and the ability to play cords would be famous, where would that bring us.

But it's more than dance moves, a voice, and the ability to play chords. At the age of 15, he was writing, self recording, and publishing, quality pop songs. Yes, they are pop songs, but there is an artform to carefully crafting a pop song.

He has talent. Those three words burn my flesh as I type them. But it doesn't make them any less true.

And while I may not like his music, or his personality, I can respect his musicianship.

Yeah, we probably have different scales which we use to decide if someone gets our respect.

Probably. I'm a musician. A Classically trained Musician capable of playing Violin, Viola, Cello, Upright Bass, Percussion, Guitar, Electric Bass, Mandolin, and I'm sure a few other instruments with strings if given enough time to sit with it.

I don't respect him as a person. I'd never be friends with him. But as a Musician, I can look at his ability, and respect that. In today's day and age, people get so drawn into the rest of the shit, that they forgot that you respect an artform, or a craft.

Now, that doesn't make what you said about the Industry incorrect "on a whole" Just in this specific case. They didn't decide to "make a star" out of the biebs. They decided to take a youtube star, and make him a global star. In essence, they just sped up the process. He was well on his way to being a huge star anyway.

O yeah, he obviously is the next Bob Dylan.

Probably more so than you think. Bob Dylan was hated by the parents of the generation that loved him. He wrote terrible music, He was hard to understand when he sang, he sang about things that didn't make any sense, he wasn't "that good" at playing guitar.

Those were all complaints about Dylan from the "older generation".

Tell me again how that description is different than how people feel about the biebs?

Oh... You meant Lyrical Content? Tell me once again about Wagon Wheel, a Bob Dylan song that has been remade twice in the past 5 years is so deep and meaningful.

I have a large amount of loathing for the RIAA, and those companies that comprise it. I hate what they do to artists, and I abhor what they do to young people by sucking them up, shoving them in front of the world, and grinding them into a pulp.

Well my problem is more with all the poor teenagers that get pressured in to spending their money on this crap.....well, one positive thing; you just told me he used to be on youtube and that is free. (yeaaaa 1 point for Bieber)

The marketing today is no different than it was before. Youtube is replacing the old way of playing shows, and selling your soul to open up for a band and play one song.

Marketing is a powerful tool. It's always been a powerful tool. Kids were bombarded by it "back in the day" as much as they are today, The avenue with whichh is happens is just different.

My band came awfully close to getting a deal, and while I'm not rich, or famous now, I thank my magical being that sometimes grants me things that I would consider miracles that I didn't get signed. I've learned a lot since then, and one thing I learned is that I would have been dead inside 24 months.

Anyway, after reading your post; I don't know who is to blame, Bieber or his record company but I still don't get feeling of respect for them sending crap into the ether. And yes I have never heard one of his songs. and yes I am prejudiced against musicians

Pop Songs have always served a purpose in our culture. It isn't "amazing" it isn't deeply meaningful. That isn't the purpose. Some times, music is just meant to have a catchy beat, and repeatable lyrics to make us feel better. This isn't a product of the 1900's. This is what music has been throughout history. Look back. Even in the "way back times" you had people like Mozart, and Beethoven, but you also had street minstrels, who played songs that people could catch on to the words of, and just sing along and feel better.

That is the type of music that Pop Music is today. You shouldn't blame them for making music. Blame the record companies for selling to the lowest common denominator, and dumbing down his music. I have kids. I've heard both of his albums. The first album, is musically superior to the second album. Because the first album was completely written by Biebs, and Usher. The second album was record company influenced.

I am a little sad to hear that you are prejudiced against musicians. Music is the universal language. It communicates with parts of the brain in ways that nothing else can. Just because his music isn't "high brow", doesn't mean that it doesn't serve a purpose.

And now, I want to vomit, because I've defending him twice.

I have my own reasons for not liking his music. but they are more based on the musician side of it. Not something that you can just whip out and have an in depth conversation about.

[Hammerskjold]

I am a little sad to hear that you are prejudiced against musicians. Music is the universal language. It communicates with parts of the brain in ways that nothing else can. Just because his music isn't "high brow", doesn't mean that it doesn't serve a purpose.

You made great points, but I'd like to single this one out because I think it's worth repeating for it's excellence.

It's one thing to say maybe society's priority is mixed up sometimes, where empty celebrity-ness is rewarded. But it's quite another to say in effect, things like music\musicians are worthless. Based on un-informed prejudice.

There seems to be a parallel to the original topic here. Maybe something to do with ignorant biases...

If history is any indication, that kind of un-informed prejudice can lead to, at it's extreme, but logical endgame conclusion. Book burnings. Record burnings. 'Cultural' revolution. A ban on dancing. A ban on music. Not just the 'bad' kind. Not just the ones you don't like. Nope, all music, is bad music. Music=fluff frivolity and empty decadence. (Though der great leader and his cadre can listen to and watch anything they want of course.)

So Smash a Stradivarius for FREEDOMZ!111 Break the hands of the violinist! He is a wastrel for wasting his time playing instead of working! Oh right, people can never go -that- far. But the fire...oh the lovely bonfire of forbidden books and music...oh how lovely the flames dance...

TL,DR: Here's Kevin Bacon talking some real sense for the ironically\satirically challenged.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EdkUt4f5wg

[eppie]

I am a little sad to hear that you are prejudiced against musicians. Music is the universal language. It communicates with parts of the brain in ways that nothing else can. Just because his music isn't "high brow", doesn't mean that it doesn't serve a purpose.

You made great points, but I'd like to single this one out because I think it's worth repeating for it's excellence.

It's one thing to say maybe society's priority is mixed up sometimes, where empty celebrity-ness is rewarded. But it's quite another to say in effect, things like music\musicians are worthless. Based on un-informed prejudice.

I like music, of course. I don't say musicians are worthless. I just think that someone who makes millions by singing crappy songs does not earn my respect.

Of course Bieber will not care if he has my respect, so you should also not.


People earn my respect if they act out of 'good' and not out of self interest. So good for him....he makes millions....that has always been his goal, but getting my respect? No sorry forget it.

Same things goes for professional sports.....I am a big football fan. But I don't respect the players. Why would I? They have the best job in the world, playing a game and making loads of money, so I don't see where the respect should be based on?
So I am not sure the fact that you are a musician changes things. I think the issue is with why you respect people and what you call respect.
Why would I respect Bieber because he is a talented musician?


By the way; the artist 'Usher' I know off, probably heard his songs but can't remember.
The thing is I have lived abroad for 7 years or so, and stop listening radio. I only listened to my own CDs and things I picked up here and there.
Now I just don't put on the radio anymore. Another example, the artist Rihanna. I know of her because the papers are full of articles about her every time she wears a strange dress or farts......but I have never heard a song. And contrary to when I hear the name of a punk band I didn't know yet I don't feel like going to check the songs out.

---