• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

CEPS Well Hung Parliament (CEPS Social/Off Topic)

>opies suck

No....iPads and trying to type on a phone sucks!

I feel ya there...but I can't say they suck...on the other hand...bless Hatch and the thousands and thousands of people who worked to keep those criminal bastages DEa from taking kratom away.

Hmmmm...maybe I'll have to say hello to PS. Good folks there too. But this is definitely my home away from home and I intend to stay around...missed ya all
 
Last edited:
LOL, some Trump/GoT crossover:

goahead-tell-them-your-name-my-name-is-reek-that-7766359.png
 
I enjoyed pmsnbc's selection coverage but post selection these folks have gone mad. Rachel maddow seems like a nice little boy but her angry rants the past week are pretty bad. It took her a full seven minutes to get to her point tonight. Not sure I will watch their channel much longer...other than Chris Mathews.

/me switches back to foxnews.
 
Yeah..ive had a beer or two and i dont care. Theres no fun in what im not doing if shes not there. I get why my communist kalifornia college professor didnt go trump or or my boston attorney's friend but anyone else...how can you intellectually choose hillary? Come on!! We are all human here??
 
The fucking histrionics in the New York Times about Russians stealing the elections is unbelievable. I'm sorely tempted to do a fisking of the entire article; starting with the guy from the DNC saying "well, we didn't know that he was FBI," when everybody knows that you can call your local field office and verify an agent's credentials [besides obvious exceptions of being undercover, etc.] ... I mean everybody, not just lawyers, not just criminals like half of us who might have a something's chance to encounter with the FBI, but just about everyone who has watched any show that deals with our on-secret police-in-a-nation-that-doesn't-have-a-secret-police. The level of bias, I'd like to say is incredible, but is entirely credible; the Times and other usual media outlets which are pretty much wholly in the pocket of the U.S. international-manipulations complex, "democracy promotion" et al., and, ostrich-like, bury their heads in the sand and pretend that much, much worse (even if these accusations were true; even if I could not get a Russian IP and hack anyone who I was capable of hacking—which, I'd like to say otherwise, but it's pretty much nobody) than things like CIA fronts like USAID have (let alone more covert ops.) The recent Crimean dispute (one can hardly call it a war), of course, was sort of test-flight for meme-warfare, but (primarily) the CIA (but other parts of the US government) have been engaged in meme-warfare before it had a name. I firmly welcome it coming to our shores; all it can really do is show the self-evident, that Democracy is a shit ideology, rigged, self-contradictory, and so on; I just wish we could've adopted someone to the right of Trump, especially on Israeli/Jewish issues. But I'll take what I can get, even if served up in a Russian platter, thank you very much :)
 
skl said:
I just wish we could've adopted someone to the right of Trump, especially on Israeli/Jewish issues. But I'll take what I can get, even if served up in a Russian platter, thank you very much
dude, i'm about as pro-israel as Hamas - but seriously, what's the deal with this anti-semitic stuff you've been spouting of late?
it's not a good look.
if teh jews are such a problem, isn't it a tad ironic to have named yourself after a song written by a jew? i know the USA is basking in a revival of racist scapegoating, but is it really necessary to pollute the forum with this (explicitly prohibited) reactionary "race politics"?
with all due respect, this is not the place for racist ideology. creating an explanatory thread of your ideological perspective is one thing - but continually returning to this kind of rhetoric just seems like a particularly ham-fisted attempt at widening the "Overton window" past the point that is considered acceptable by the BLUA.
it's up to you if you want to hold and express those views - but if a non-staff member were to continually push anti-jewish sentiment, they'd be asked to refrain from doing so quick-smart :|
 
You are perpetually outraged. Dont be so angry...its not an attractive quality...its not sexy.

Anyways...... If democracy is a shit ideology (id agree) what system would you promote? A representational constitutional republic 2 party system...or something more authoritarian with one party...or one of those multiparty parliamentary systems?

The fucking histrionics in the New York Times about Russians stealing the elections is unbelievable. I'm sorely tempted to do a fisking of the entire article; starting with the guy from the DNC saying "well, we didn't know that he was FBI," when everybody knows that you can call your local field office and verify an agent's credentials [besides obvious exceptions of being undercover, etc.] ... I mean everybody, not just lawyers, not just criminals like half of us who might have a something's chance to encounter with the FBI, but just about everyone who has watched any show that deals with our on-secret police-in-a-nation-that-doesn't-have-a-secret-police. The level of bias, I'd like to say is incredible, but is entirely credible; the Times and other usual media outlets which are pretty much wholly in the pocket of the U.S. international-manipulations complex, "democracy promotion" et al., and, ostrich-like, bury their heads in the sand and pretend that much, much worse (even if these accusations were true; even if I could not get a Russian IP and hack anyone who I was capable of hacking—which, I'd like to say otherwise, but it's pretty much nobody) than things like CIA fronts like USAID have (let alone more covert ops.) The recent Crimean dispute (one can hardly call it a war), of course, was sort of test-flight for meme-warfare, but (primarily) the CIA (but other parts of the US government) have been engaged in meme-warfare before it had a name. I firmly welcome it coming to our shores; all it can really do is show the self-evident, that Democracy is a shit ideology, rigged, self-contradictory, and so on; I just wish we could've adopted someone to the right of Trump, especially on Israeli/Jewish issues. But I'll take what I can get, even if served up in a Russian platter, thank you very much :)
 
... which I think isn't that unusual during U.S. election time, but a lot of those threads are, indeed, full of repetitive nonsense by the same people ... hence why I don't both reading or responding to them as I don't really have a lot to say about Trump himself or his putative policies; the only interesting story right now IMO is the media ... so perhaps a few different megathreads; but some threads that have truly gotten out of control might well be closed (the "Christan fundamentalist educational secretary") thread is or has gone through discussing about six different things, none of which have much of anything to do with Mrs. DeVos; although some of them would be valid discussions without even necessarily any significant amount of reference to Trump, even. That would be my take. A MEGATHREAD on the other hand would be a total meltdown of nonsense and Troll vs Troll. Something like "Trump on Immigration," "Trump on National Security," "The Media vs Donald Trump," and on for five or six large threads instead of the rancid mess of porridge we have now (that I'm not even really touching, as there's really not a lot of stuff that's all that interesting to be talking about; I celebrate the Trump election only for who it mobilized in the electorate and who it pissed off, not because of the man, or even his policies per se, few of which are controversial, and the controversial aren't going to happen; i.e. the Wall is going to be built like Al Gore invented the Internet.)
 
Yeah, if I see Trump in the title, I know its going to KSA fellating him, Ryan hating muslims, SKL advocating summary execution, spacejunk out there in his 8-ups and stomping facists, SHM telling cunts to fuck off, swilow being agressively reactionary. At least droppers has stopped trolling :D But you're right, its better to just avoid the threads.

Do you know much about Aussie politics SKL? Recent times have seen some intriguing events, we've had 5 prime ministers in about the same time period. We've seen the rise of our far-right party, One Nation, and the Greens (my party of choice) losing traction as their ideals become diluted. Australia likes to think of itself as a world power, but its low middle if anything. That said, I'm lucky to live here. A person like me should be destitute, instead I am undeservedly affluent (inheritance). I'm a mentally ill drug addict but you wouldn't know it. Eternal safety net (I hope)/
 
You are perpetually outraged. Dont be so angry...its not an attractive quality...its not sexy.

Life in general, this is advice well taken, and true of myself; about this stuff, I'm not actually that angry about most CE&P stuff, because all in the end it's just what you'd expect, even if there are some surprising results from time to time, like Trump, which did electrify me a bit; but one of the virtues of being a political/philosophical pessimist and being essentially apolitical in the casual sense is that I don't get too excited or too butthurt about the way these things go; although, I do get really, really outraged about one or two things ... the Times and other Democrat-mouthpiece media's histrionics about Russia are, more than anything else, funny. Although the absolutely blatant and grotesque nature of the propaganda currently involved and the degree to which it treats it's readers like idiots (most TV news does treat it's viewers like idiots, but I don't typically pick up the New York Times and expect to be written down to to that degree), is one-sided beyond belief (even in the Bush v Gore scenario, a genuinely disputed election and arguable constitutional crisis, we did not see this degree of bias and blatant propaganda … and that ought to show you something … about the media, and about Trump … and, as I've said elsewhere, one of the things that pleases me the most about Trump is the level of histrionics he sends some of my least favorite editorial pages, commentators, and "public intellectuals" into ... but this shit's not even just in the editorial page ... seriously! Check out the Times's coverage of the alleged Russian interference. It's bizarro-world. Truly.)

Like I said before, I don't even really think Donald Trump is doing to do anything good for me, the office of the President just isn't that powerful; and if I had my pick of three issues, it would be anti-globalization, anti-Zionism, and anti-"social justice" identity politics (a pretty broad thing, granted; to just break it down into another couple of wishes I'd like to see our police empowered to deal with problematic groups without having to worry about being turned into villains without any sort of inquiry, and turn the pronoun-and-marriage revisionist tilt-a-whirl a good bit firm thumb placed on ontological reaity, and cut all "restorative" crap like "voting rights" [in a very specific U.S. sense, not literally the right to vote] and "affirmative action.") Trump is certainly better than Hilary on all of these, but not by far on certain of the issues, way too bellicose on Iran, with whom we should've been seeking rapproachment ten years or more ago and who's getting ahold of a nuclear weapon actually might serve the balance of power and the interests of peace in that part of the world quite nicely, and, as I said before, on Zionism, which got me told off for this being a particular preoccupation of mine, which it is (so I'll take the time for an aside)

dude, i'm about as pro-israel as Hamas - but seriously, what's the deal with this anti-semitic stuff you've been spouting of late?
it's not a good look.
"anti-Semetic" has been rendered more or less a meaningless term, mostly by overuse by Jewish defenders of Israel and other issues in Judaism and Jewish culture that have been subject to criticism; if "anti-Semitism" means that I hold an antipathy towards (e.g.) mgs here, much less anyone I meet IRL for that matter, because, and only because, he's a Jew, then that's ridiculous; if it's meant in the ca. 19th century political sense, then yes, much what I post could be construed as "anti-Semitic" (which is not really the greatest term anyway seeing as Semitic is a much larger category than Jew and Jews are not even a 100%-overlapping category with Semites); do I "hate Jews?" absolutely not. do I consider Israel to be genocidal, terroristic, colonialist, and in all respects worse than the South Africa that every liberal was beating their breasts about when I was quite young, yes. do I consider Jews to have disproportionate influence in various arenas, yes, do I consider this problematic, yes; if you do not see this, then your understanding of the degree of opposition and oppression and the overall barriers facing the Palestinian people (which I presume is the angle whereupon you come by your antipathy towards the Zionist state) is incomplete. But we've gone over all this before. nothing there is hate or promotion of violence (or any sort of unpleasantness) too anyone on the basis of their race or ethnicity; certainly no more so than, say, the media's constant harping on White police shooting Black men (usually petty criminals who give the police something to be alarmed about which is definitely taught in Petty Crime 101 ... as Jimmy McNulty said, in a disarmed moment of conviviality, to [my man!] Bodie Braudus, "…don't go making any furtive moves!")
if teh jews are such a problem, isn't it a tad ironic to have named yourself after a song written by a jew?
Not ironic in the least; probably the underlying perverse sexual content of that song would be considerably ironic, but on either charge, it's a work of art which I enjoy; I do not have to engage with the artist's ancestry to enjoy it (unlike some of the Nazis, although someone like Göring, of course, when more interested in being an aesthete, didn't care about Jewishness or any other *-ness anyway) ... besides, Lou Reed wasn't (as far as I know) an active Zionist or really involved in Jewish-oriented politics. I do not believe that art, of any kind, is inherently political. I have Hindu, African, South-American art in my home right now not to mention some prints of classic Modern Art (Miró and Kandinsky) as well as some much more typical and traditional Western art of more a devotional nature, and I'd gladly hang a lot of other different kinds of art, sacred or secular, as long as it, ars gratia artis, looked good and didn't actually offend.
i know the USA is basking in a revival of racist scapegoating, but is it really necessary to pollute the forum with this (explicitly prohibited) reactionary "race politics"?

with all due respect, this is not the place for racist ideology. creating an explanatory thread of your ideological perspective is one thing - but continually returning to this kind of rhetoric just seems like a particularly ham-fisted attempt at widening the "Overton window" past the point that is considered acceptable by the BLUA.
I simply mentioned one of the most serious and grave reasons why I cannot support Trump (…this being Zionist and economic-political Jewish connections; he is not Jewish, but he is arguably the most Jewish president we've ever elected; why people suppose him to be anti-Semitic I have no idea, nor do I know why people think he poses a threat to homosexuals, although I see both Jews and homosexuals acting as if Trump opposes them, which he doesn't, based on either ignorance or the desire to promulgate more hysteria, I guess, I don't really know.) As far as expanding the Overton window, I can't say this was an explicit design, but it's a good thing. There are certain things that are taboo to discuss, like harm reduction; there are also certain things that are taboo to discuss in politics. Now, I'm not considering we go ahead and start copying memes over from /pol/ or whatever, but if there is legitimate political content I think it's legitimate to discuss. Particularly, as regards this election (not general "Jewish question" discussion, but particularly as applies to the election, as above; and, actually, what touched off the entire anti-Semitism thread … I didn't actually start it, but just pointed out these facts about Trump, and people came flying out of the woodwork with a rather, as you say, hamfisted attempt to tar and feather me as an "anti-Semite" (again, a term that doesn't really mean anything) … with regards to the election, people are focused on various bad qualities of Trump that are more than anything rooted in the man's personality and certain off-the-cuff off-color statements he's made, while some things that really should get people upset about him (such as what's shaping up to be his Middle Eastern policies, despite criticism of his predecessors which history will probably prove hypocritical, and furthermore prove the President not to be the master of our foreign affairs particularly in that region) -- issues interesting both to the left and to the right. and if people get upset just because people point out that people have Jewish political/economic/etc. ties, then that ought to show you something, and it's not about the person doing the pointing.

Anyways...... If democracy is a shit ideology (id agree) what system would you promote? A representational constitutional republic 2 party system...or something more authoritarian with one party...or one of those multiparty parliamentary systems?

This is a tricky one. I think the Westminster system to be much, much better than the American one, and would like to see a more contemporary equivalent of the "House of Lords" as the upper and significantly more powerful house (cf. pre-1911 U.K.) which is composed of people who actually have power (i.e. military, corporate, union, Church, various types of academy, judges, and so on); this being in the original (Italian) Fascist sense of "incorporation" of these various interests into one "corpus" (this was at the time of course called "corporatism" ... not how the term is used now to describe the undue influence of international business corporations on government, which is actually something that would be put in check by corporatism in the original sense, as the corpora that would be represented would include (hopefully, since I assume this question means I'm getting to talk about my hopes and ideals) resurgent trade unions, even groups concerned with the environment, and so on, and so forth; the lower house being popularly elected, in some form similar to the U.S. congress and electoral college; where both population and geography are accounted for in representation, something like, say, [font="cambria math,cambria,georgia,times new roman"]2 + (Pstate / Σ(PUS))N[/font] seats allocated, but elected and operating again in a Westminster-type system; essentially consolidating the political functions of the Supreme Court and Presidency into this system, and the addition of an autocratic head of state who is not generally involved in day-to-day affairs but has a great deal of power in cases of necessity or in preventing radical political and social changes.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, if I see Trump in the title, I know its going to KSA fellating him, Ryan hating muslims, SKL advocating summary execution, spacejunk out there in his 8-ups and stomping facists, SHM telling cunts to fuck off, swilow being agressively reactionary. At least droppers has stopped trolling :D But you're right, its better to just avoid the threads.

Lol, that's a bit much … I do think, and have expressed, the only way the U.S. is going to get it's house in order is a coup d'état and a couple of bankers and media moguls against a wall might be a necessary part, but I don't quite think that I'd go that far in how I'd put it at least ...

NSFW:
330px-Eat_The_Rich_%28song%29.jpg


Do you know much about Aussie politics SKL? Recent times have seen some intriguing events, we've had 5 prime ministers in about the same time period. We've seen the rise of our far-right party, One Nation, and the Greens (my party of choice) losing traction as their ideals become diluted. Australia likes to think of itself as a world power, but its low middle if anything. That said, I'm lucky to live here. A person like me should be destitute, instead I am undeservedly affluent (inheritance). I'm a mentally ill drug addict but you wouldn't know it. Eternal safety net (I hope)/

I don't know very much about aussie politics; what I do know, mostly, is actually from more Left-oriented publications, although it's still less than I'd probably ought to. Extremities being diluted, I suppose, could be seen as one of the advantages of democracy (particularly, as I talk about above, the Westminster system) but ANZ (and particularly NZ) were really used as testing-grounds for neoliberalism a pretty good while ago, before it was even a popular term (much less a term of abuse) around here. You are fortunate, I guess; your reaction is interesting ("I shouuld be destitute, I'm lucky, I hope ...") more or less reflects the anxiety of the times, I think, in most of the Western world (yes, I know, technically...) ... it's a strange time and all all of us can do is hope that things come out on our sides; or, really, realize that we have common enemies, enemies who our common enemies are inciting against us, and natural enemies, and we have to unite against them. The flaw in liberal universalism is that it won't admit to this, and this, I fear, will be our downfall (national, either here, there, or anywhere in Europe; racial; and civilizational.) Someone will be along to replace us as has been the history with empires but it will not be a pleasant interval; the sad thing is that so many of the forces of "wickedness in high places" in our world today are oriented more towards stasis than change; which is not to say conservative, because our current status is far from it; meaning our only civilizational options are radical. Centrism, progressivism, and Bucklyean athwart-the-world conservatism aren't enough in the face of the truly apocalyptic.

Thing is, there's not a lot that you guys can do without us, and that we can't do without you, when it comes down to staring down the real forces of evil in the world today (that is, excepting Divine intervention, of course, and I'm not of the nutty chialistic ideals of a lot of the evangelical Protestants in the U.S.) ... that's why we need strong leadership, strong and sometimes anti-democratic measures, and to give up a lot of these petty things are pretty much invented to divide us (as a great example, look at prison gangs—officially, of course, very severe methods are used against them, even many violating international norms—but they are encouraged by the prison as they make the prisoners, who outnumber the guards by huge numbers, able to be controlled. Party politics in a nutshell.
 
Last edited:
^^^^

Good read. Ill concede Im not smart enough to suggest a better system. I prefer reform from within the 2 party system...and more local participation. We all have our pet issues and mine is mostly about the drug war...I dont feel overthrowing the constitution is needed to stop the drug war.
 
You are perpetually outraged. Dont be so angry...its not an attractive quality...its not sexy.
Oh please.
Could you be more patronising? I don't care if you agree with me, but simply because i happen to disagree with your persopective on most things political (it would seem) - does not mean i'm "outraged". Please don't project shit on me. Maybe you don't get exposed to opposing viewpoints in the world you inhabit?
If i was angry, you would know about it.
It's not really a concern of mine whether or not you think i'm "attractive".
 
I thought mgs was talking to SKL. He has that unique tendency to embed quotes after his own reply to them.

I could be wrong.

Never fear spacejunk, i think you've a great ass. I mean arse. <3
 
I thought so, too, but I think he could've been referring to either or both of us, TBH; left and right buttcheeks can hurt alike.

also; I don't think I can take seriously posts made by people with marijuana-related avatars, ever, even posts that make sense. ("anti-PC is about being butt hurt that people are being butt hurt" is a silly and reductive statement; if I'm anti-PC it's because I prioritize, you know, reality, over people's feelings, and, not for the sake of offensiveness, but for the sake of Truth, seek to engage in dialogue that's free from ideological restrictions on areas where I dare not trod (cf. the differing "bell curves" of racial IQs, just about anythin to do with the Jews) ... which is what restrictions the "PC movement" (although nobody would really call themselves that; it's yet another mirage of a movement that's created entirely by it's ideological opponents, just like "SJW," but yet we know what they mean, even if the terms are silly; "PC" actually has resonant meanings in orthodox academic M-L[-M] type democratic-centralist party line oriented politics, and has mutated into meaning "prizing feelings over ideology and ideology over ontology.") represents.)
 
Well you are projecting...i was talkin to skl. ?
Oh please.
Could you be more patronising? I don't care if you agree with me, but simply because i happen to disagree with your persopective on most things political (it would seem) - does not mean i'm "outraged". Please don't project shit on me. Maybe you don't get exposed to opposing viewpoints in the world you inhabit?
If i was angry, you would know about it.
It's not really a concern of mine whether or not you think i'm "attractive".
 
Top