Some discussion about American foreign policy...

[Guest]

ellis says:

"I use the 'small child' analogy to demonstrate effective 'domination'. Here in the USA, it is considered totally off limits to spank your children. They claim that beating on your kids isn't cool. To the point where you can be arrested if you do it in public and someone sees (or 'think' they see) you beating your kids. You're not 'beating' your kids. If you do, you should be arrested. You are 'spanking' them. ( or should be). It is the humiliation, not the pain, that is supposed to humble them into 'submission' "


Here I will decode some of your bible-thumping bullshit, ellis.

By implication, you think violence to young ones is okay. The LSD never explained to you that we perpetuate violence AS A WAY OF LIFE by doing things such as this?

It was explained to me.

Perhaps I had a better teacher.

To simplify this for you, in case you're having trouble assimilating, I say that what you are doing is teaching the child that violence is the ultimate solution, the last measure, to be used when all else fails.

The key phrase there is, "when all else fails". You must get the child to do as the parent says. No matter what. That is a bigger lesson.

Can you not see that this type of primate behaivour is completely counter to the lessons psychedelics are supposed to teach?

Why you can't see it is simple;

You are blinded by the bible, and your 'spare the rod, spoil the child' outlook.

How many people would you say are truly QUALIFIED to administer this 'spanking' discipline that you advocate?

By qualified, I mean:

How many people 'spank' when ANGRY?
I'll answer for you; About 97 out of a hundred.

How is that relevant?

I'll answer that for you too.....it is relevant because the anger is what separates 'discipline' from 'assault'.

Don't sit there and talk to us like we're fucking stupid, man.

You know damn well that 'spanking' and 'beating' are abstractions.

This is why it is, and should be, a crime to inflict violence on children.

It's called 'child abuse', bible-thump.

So, what, is it spanking when the hand is open, and only 'beating' when a fist
or inanimate object is utilized?

You'd be amazed at how much damage I could inflict on a grown man with an open hand, ellis.

You just can't debate without primitive name-calling, can you? Interesting. Is that what your psychedelic teacher taught?

 

[spice]

No, that's what you conservative, evangelical types taught me.


you weren't able to refute the thrust of my argument very effectively, either.

 

[Guest]

Look above. You 'answered' for me. You even say so yourself. Are you okay? I believe you are the troll here. You argue for the sake of arguing. I said I will attempt to genuinely answer questions, as long as they are asked civilly and without personal attack. And I'm not going to answer a long, rambling, ambigous, and accusatory post. Whether you agree with me or not, one can plainly see in the delivery and tone of your responses vs mine that you value style over substance.

 

[spice]

Maybe I just am tired of having to live with conservative, evangelical types, and watching them ruin everything.

Maybe my tolerance has been abused beyond my limits.

Maybe, just maybe, ellis, I am not alone in feeling this way.....only in expressing it in this manner.

 

[magickmumu]

@ Ellis
How can one argue with someone who is telling lies. And who doesn't answer questions :?:

You can tell a message in any tone and colour you like, I lie is a lie.

 

[spice]

See, ellis?


What is YOUR problem?

 

[magickmumu]

Ellis is telling straight up lies. And doesn't answer any question,s I post him.

 

[spice]

He is a very, very typical evangelical conservative, that's why.

Full of propaganda and wrong-headed, archaic notions.

He tries very hard to act like I am the only one here that feels a certain animosity towards him.

Ellis, you are a relic.....you don't have any business on a forum like this thinking the way you do.

 

[magickmumu]

Unfortunately I don't think he is a relic.
I wish he was.

@ Ellis Don't take it personally. When I Read you,re posts I get the impression that you are not honest with us and with yourself.
And it goes on and on.

Sorry man.
I feel bad to say this.

 

[spice]

You're right, of course......there are millions of 'sheeple' who still think just like him, unfortunately.


Call me what you will, I cannot comprehend how you can reconcile all THAT
(pointing to ellis' head) with psychedelics, expanded minds, and the like.

A quote from his ellis-ness:

"The key phrase there is, "when all else fails". You must get the child to do as the parent says. No matter what. That is a bigger lesson."

Sounds kind of paternalistic/corporal punishment/military/Catholic to me.


The bigger lesson, ellis, is that a dominance heirarchy can only take one so far.


You're mighty dense not to grasp such an elementary, self-evident concept.

 

[Guest]

Nevermind........

 

[Guest]

Thanks for your reply, Ellis.

If capitalism is allowed to operate unfettered, I believe it still is the best system there is.

Actually, economic studies show that capitalism works more effectively in countries that regulate the market to a certain extent than in countries where it is allowed to operate unfettered. Check out the work of Erik Olin Wright or Wolfgang Streeck for real world examples. And we are not talking about internal rules of capitalism but about state intervention.

Capitalism without government just turns over the keys to the most greedy bastard willing to exploit everyone and nobody noticing it because he controls the media.

I agree. But before someone says, "but you said unfettered", I meant without excessive governmental intervention. Again, some type of hybrid would work best as you described.

The last point is brilliant. Right on the mark.

 

[Guest]

@ Ellis
How can one argue with someone who is telling lies. And who doesn't answer questions :?:

You can tell a message in any tone and colour you like, I lie is a lie.

Sorry if I didn't answer any questions. I can only respond to so many. I'm getting a bit bombarded here. You're next. Yes?

 

[Guest]

So what do you think of the war on some drugs.

Counter-productive. What happened when the USA had prohibition? The mafia got rich and powerful. I like how Britain has approached it. (compared to the USA). You're either fucked-up in public, or you're not. They don't care what 'on'. Here we have myriad laws to the point where you are guilty of 5 or 10 things when you really have done 1 thing wrong. Personally, I think just about all drugs should be legal, but that poses other problems as well. What about crack and heroin and crime, etc. Defininetly LSD and weed products should be totally available.

I have an interesting theory. Look at the sixties. Look at the music from then. Peace and love and all that. (even anti-war). People were taking LSD and such and weed was relatively new as far as common usage. The music was all upbeat, positive, clean. Most of it. Then the psychedelics were taken out of the equation and replaced by speed. Look at music now. A bit different, no? An entire generation has already been exposed to that kind of thing. If I could address the government, I would actually suggest re-introducing LSD as the primary 'drug-of-choice'. I actually think it would remove a lot of todays problems. In the sixties, I never heard of a gang shooting one another or a 14 year old with a gun at school. Instead, we would have people putting flowers in thier hair and writing some good, structured music that makes you feel good to listen to. 8)

 

[Guest]

What I've learned from capitalism/contemporary-fascism is that, certainly, the human mouth, is way bigger than its stomach.
Yes yes, the system regulates itself, this is why we now have the ecological crisis, and the thousands dying of hunger and preventable diseases every now and then.
The system regulates itself, this is why the kings of free market are pledging the quazillion tanzillion million dollar package, isn't it?

In the context of neoliberalism, we don't have a concept of humanity nor of community. What we have, instead, are competitive individuals mediated by a market apparatus incessantly producing winners and losers, i.e., humans and non-humans.

Anyone who thinks capacity-better yet in functionalist words: eficiency!- is encouraged through competition owns a very rational and logical way of killing the human spirit. Ego gratification kills every inspiration cell in my body.

When you were in school and had to read along with the class, did it ever bother you that someone read slow? It did me. I ended up fantasizing, and that gave the impression I wasn't paying attention. I couldn't. I needed to be allowed to go. I wanted to read ahead and accomplish a bit more. That is the part about capitalism I like. You wanna make more? You work harder. I do better under those terms. I had a union job once. There was no incentive. In fact, there was incentive to go slow, so we 'had work'. My days were never so long.

 

[st.bot.32]

I hate to barge into this topic, but I've always believed it to be a bit misleading that either side of the American political spectrum is completely pro or anti drug war. Both sides have had their respective supporters and dissidents.

As for conservatives, William F Buckley Jr anyone? Notoriously against the war on drugs. The American Libertarian stance, which is about as conservative as you get (deregulation of everything, pro life, etc), is very much against the war on drugs. The main obvious association with the republicans is their huge fanbase in the south where getting drunk and inhaling tobacco is ok but the church teaches pot is from satan or whatever.

Joe Biden for the democrats. Although he claims he is for stopping the federal raids on medical marijuana users, historically he has been a worst-case offender for the war on drugs.

At the moment it is really an issue of galvanizing the public in general to get a bit more progressive about this issue, and less partisan about it. There are reasons why legalizing at least say mj can appeal to both political sides, this is the message we should be pushing!

 

[st.bot.32]

I would actually suggest re-introducing LSD as the primary 'drug-of-choice'. I actually think it would remove a lot of todays problems. In the sixties, I never heard of a gang shooting one another or a 14 year old with a gun at school. Instead, we would have people putting flowers in thier hair and writing some good, structured music that makes you feel good to listen to. 8)

I can agree with you on this! Compare woodstock '69 to woodstock '99. The first was a peaceful gathering of hundreds of thousands with maybe a couple incidents that would basically be statistically impossible to avoid given that many people in one place at one time. The latter--the generation of feel-good drugs, not even really listening or understanding the messges in the music..what a disaster that turned into.

A generation of seekers (failed maybe) compared with a generation of angst

 

[magickmumu]

Thank you Ellis that's a clear Answer.

 

[Nomada]

When you were in school and had to read along with the class, did it ever bother you that someone read slow? It did me. I ended up fantasizing, and that gave the impression I wasn't paying attention. I couldn't. I needed to be allowed to go. I wanted to read ahead and accomplish a bit more. That is the part about capitalism I like. You wanna make more? You work harder. I do better under those terms. I had a union job once. There was no incentive. In fact, there was incentive to go slow, so we 'had work'. My days were never so long.

The evolutionary fundamentalists believe creatures compete with each other in a scenario. They don't, they cooperate. And in turn the scenario evolves with them.
It's not so much work by itself and what can you do with it; rather, it's work in the competitive mechanics what kills it for me, work in the logic of capital accumulation and the empire state of hegemony.
Competitive individuals mediated by a culture apparatus incessantly producing winners and losers, i.e., humans and non-humans.
The poems of mine I consider the most beautiful I'll never show to anybody.

Medals in the Olympics...

 

[Nomada]

There was no incentive. In fact, there was incentive to go slow, so we 'had work'. My days were never so long.

I'm sorry so long where you're days when you lacked capital incentive, as sorry as I am for you being so indoctrinated with thinking you really needed that incentive to happily pass the day in joyous work.
They serve coffee in workplaces, lot's of times for free.

Anyhow, it's not capital incentive, nor a competitive one the reason almost every worker in the world works. Rather, it's not dying; against all odds, in a system being emptied, if not already, of every social [human] right: to work, to a decent salary, appropriate medical attention, the list goes on.