Dank n Edgy

The dorkest, edgist forums known to puny hoomans

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Welcome to DnE, the online psych facility. (Run by the inmates, for the inmates.)

#151 2012-08-06 01:46:36

TheWake
Illuminatus Sacerdos
From: Yankee-Occupied South
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 8,272

Re: Fascism

magikarp wrote:

It is still legal in parts of the US to fire people or refuse to rent to them for being openly gay.

Not to give the impression I'm anti-gay, which I'm not, but free people in their private capacities ought to have the right to rent or hire whomever they want, or refuse whomever they want, for whatever reason. Including stupid reasons. If we give people freedom we ought to let them make decisions we think are bad. as long as those decisions are peaceful.


The Grasshopper Lies Heavy

WsEkePS.png

Offline

#152 2012-08-06 01:51:06

loon_attic
Banned
Registered: 2012-06-08
Posts: 10,290

Re: Fascism

Wes wrote:
magikarp wrote:

It is still legal in parts of the US to fire people or refuse to rent to them for being openly gay.

Not to give the impression I'm anti-gay, which I'm not, but free people in their private capacities ought to have the right to rent or hire whomever they want, or refuse whomever they want, for whatever reason. Including stupid reasons. If we give people freedom we ought to let them make decisions we think are bad. as long as those decisions are peaceful.

That doesn't mean that it isn't pretty fucked to fire people or deny them housing just because of their sexual orientation.

I have an urge to ban these fascistsfags, as well as commies (YEAH BECAUSE I DISAGREE WITH THEM AND THINK THEIR OPINIONS ARE WRONG), but everyone else wants to have a textwall war so whatever.


sloth wrote:

Comfy does not provide challenge, challenge provides success, success provides happiness. Our world is not comfy, although we tried to make it so. Slaves of our own inventions, yada, yada. Not only on a technological level, also on a social and political level. Nothing more but apes. Apes with psychosomatic disorders.

Offline

#153 2012-08-06 02:04:29

TheWake
Illuminatus Sacerdos
From: Yankee-Occupied South
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 8,272

Re: Fascism

Lunatic wrote:
Wes wrote:
magikarp wrote:

It is still legal in parts of the US to fire people or refuse to rent to them for being openly gay.

Not to give the impression I'm anti-gay, which I'm not, but free people in their private capacities ought to have the right to rent or hire whomever they want, or refuse whomever they want, for whatever reason. Including stupid reasons. If we give people freedom we ought to let them make decisions we think are bad. as long as those decisions are peaceful.

That doesn't mean that it isn't pretty fucked to fire people or deny them housing just because of their sexual orientation.

I realize it's fucked, but something being fucked doesn't mean we get to make people do what we want them to do.


The Grasshopper Lies Heavy

WsEkePS.png

Offline

#154 2012-08-06 02:25:13

loon_attic
Banned
Registered: 2012-06-08
Posts: 10,290

Re: Fascism

I wouldn't see anything wrong with boycotting efforts and stuff, though.

...though that'd only work if enough people gave a fuck, but then that's what capitalism is all based on... right?


sloth wrote:

Comfy does not provide challenge, challenge provides success, success provides happiness. Our world is not comfy, although we tried to make it so. Slaves of our own inventions, yada, yada. Not only on a technological level, also on a social and political level. Nothing more but apes. Apes with psychosomatic disorders.

Offline

#155 2012-08-06 02:30:34

TheWake
Illuminatus Sacerdos
From: Yankee-Occupied South
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 8,272

Re: Fascism

Lunatic wrote:

I wouldn't see anything wrong with boycotting efforts and stuff, though.

...though that'd only work if enough people gave a fuck, but then that's what capitalism is all based on... right?

Yeah, I'd boycott a property owner that didn't rent to gays or a company that didn't hire them, if it was as clear cut as that. The case with Chick-fil-A, where the restaurants are locally owned franchises, is much less clear cut though. There was franchise operator that actually hosted a gay pride thing or something in response to the corporate meddling. It's hard to completely economically isolate oneself from intolerant political causes though.

But I don't think I have a right to make them hire gays, or blacks, or communists, or transsexuals, or atheists. But I do have a right to be pissed off about it.


The Grasshopper Lies Heavy

WsEkePS.png

Offline

#156 2012-08-06 03:28:17

Aya
Sweet Tits
Registered: 2012-06-11
Posts: 1,840

Re: Fascism

Wes wrote:
magikarp wrote:

It is still legal in parts of the US to fire people or refuse to rent to them for being openly gay.

Not to give the impression I'm anti-gay, which I'm not, but free people in their private capacities ought to have the right to rent or hire whomever they want, or refuse whomever they want, for whatever reason. Including stupid reasons. If we give people freedom we ought to let them make decisions we think are bad. as long as those decisions are peaceful.

Its really hard to prove discrimination in the leasing process. The land lord can reject who ever they want and it's the burden of the applicant to prove discrimination. Same with applying for a job. My father worked for a retail chain back in the 80's and he admitted to marking the resumes of black applicants with a tick mark by the name. Unless you actually worked for the company you wouldn't know any better.

Offline

#157 2012-08-06 04:13:07

TheWake
Illuminatus Sacerdos
From: Yankee-Occupied South
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 8,272

Re: Fascism

Aya wrote:
Wes wrote:
magikarp wrote:

It is still legal in parts of the US to fire people or refuse to rent to them for being openly gay.

Not to give the impression I'm anti-gay, which I'm not, but free people in their private capacities ought to have the right to rent or hire whomever they want, or refuse whomever they want, for whatever reason. Including stupid reasons. If we give people freedom we ought to let them make decisions we think are bad. as long as those decisions are peaceful.

Its really hard to prove discrimination in the leasing process. The land lord can reject who ever they want and it's the burden of the applicant to prove discrimination. Same with applying for a job. My father worked for a retail chain back in the 80's and he admitted to marking the resumes of black applicants with a tick mark by the name. Unless you actually worked for the company you wouldn't know any better.

So, not only from my standpoint is this undesirable, but from a practical standpoint it's hard to police. Of course, hard to police doesn't  necessarily equal that it shouldn't be illegal. There are lots of really damaging activities that are hard to police but should be illegal.


The Grasshopper Lies Heavy

WsEkePS.png

Offline

#158 2012-08-06 23:10:46

TheWake
Illuminatus Sacerdos
From: Yankee-Occupied South
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 8,272

Re: Fascism

This is relevant and totally serious:
scissors-beat-paper-churchill-hitler-12718681338.jpg


The Grasshopper Lies Heavy

WsEkePS.png

Offline

#159 2012-08-06 23:24:58

SaintVicious
Jewing Intensifies
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 7,029

Re: Fascism

Churchill swag.

Offline

#160 2012-08-07 22:45:05

TheWake
Illuminatus Sacerdos
From: Yankee-Occupied South
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 8,272

Re: Fascism

I believe this article is of importance to the debate on intelligence among different genetic groups like races and ethnicities: http://reason.com/archives/2012/08/07/n … h-creation

Here's an excerpt from the article:

Do higher IQs produce wealth, or does wealth produce higher IQs? This is the question that Ron Unz grapples with in his fascinating article, "Race, IQ, and Wealth: How Political Bias Distorts the Facts." Unz, publisher of The American Conservative, is taking on claims made in the 2002 book IQ and the Wealth of Nations that differences in national IQ account for the substantial variation in national per capita income.

The authors, emeritus University of Ulster psychologist Richard Lynn and emeritus University of Tampere political scientist Tatu Vanhanen, sought out IQ data they believe could plausibly measure the average IQs of the people of various nations and then correlated it with GDP per capita. Their conclusion is that countries populated with smarter people are the ones that become wealthier. Countries inhabited by stupid people remain mired in poverty. Lynn and Vanhanen further conclude that the connection between IQ and wealth is causal based on studies that show for individuals that “IQs measured in childhood are strong predictors of IQs in adolescence and these are strong predictors of earnings in adulthood.” They then generalize, “From this it follows that groups with high IQs would have higher average incomes than groups with low IQs because groups are aggregates of individuals.”

In his article, Unz uses the data collected by Lynn and Vanhanen and argues that they actually show the opposite—that rising wealth boosts intelligence. In order to avoid getting stuck in the quagmire of race, Unz looks only at the IQ data for European populations. All of the data are adjusted for the universal Flynn effect in which average IQ scores have been increasing in the modern age by 2 to 3 points per decade depending on which IQ measure is used. The data are standardized such that the average British IQ at any time is set at 100.

Let’s look at Germany. Lynn and Vanhanen cited four studies that found that West German IQ scores ranged from 99 to 107, whereas East German IQs were as low as 90 back in 1967, and later studies pegged their scores at 97 to 99 points. Taking the extremes, these data imply a gap as big as 17 IQ points between West and East Germans. How to account for the rise East Germany in less than a generation of 7 to 9 points? After all, East and West Germans are not all that genetically different. Lynn’s data now show an average German IQ of 102 points.

Now, I grant that there are limits to this study due to the fact that is was only done using data only from countries of primarily European descent (even Mexico, which is most inhabited the mixed European-Native "mestizo" race). However, it is abundantly clear that there is a correlation between wealth and IQ. But, the article argues that the causation is that wealth makes IQ go up. European countries are primarily richer, thus white Europeans will be "smarter."

Which brings us to the point that these differences among race so often cited in the Nazi arguments, and to a lesser degree in the Fascist arguments, are based heavily on what is, very probably, false. That one race isn't not superior to other races, at least not concerning IQ and at least not substantially in this regard. No doubt there are genetic influences, but they're minimal.

Now, there is still the question of what I'm going to call the "culture clash." That, supposedly, two different cultures (or races, came thing in most respects really) cannot integrate with each other. This will be addressed at a later date.

Last edited by TheWake (2012-08-07 22:47:40)


The Grasshopper Lies Heavy

WsEkePS.png

Offline

#161 2012-08-07 23:04:18

RAWN PAW
Member
Registered: 2012-06-08
Posts: 2,171

Re: Fascism

The reason that developed countries have higher IQ scores than undeveloped countries is that people in developed countries have access to a much better education than undeveloped countries. This does not mean what you might think it means. As I have said and will continue to say, an IQ test tests your ability to solve the problems on an IQ test. These problems involve things like maths and anagrams. You could be the smartest motherfucker in the world, but if you don't have access to education past the first grade, you're not going to know what relativity is or how to solve differential equations.

Offline

#162 2012-08-08 06:07:36

Efs
Member
From: Australia
Registered: 2012-06-11
Posts: 3,235

Re: Fascism

Wes wrote:
Lunatic wrote:
Wes wrote:

Not to give the impression I'm anti-gay, which I'm not, but free people in their private capacities ought to have the right to rent or hire whomever they want, or refuse whomever they want, for whatever reason. Including stupid reasons. If we give people freedom we ought to let them make decisions we think are bad. as long as those decisions are peaceful.

That doesn't mean that it isn't pretty fucked to fire people or deny them housing just because of their sexual orientation.

I realize it's fucked, but something being fucked doesn't mean we get to make people do what we want them to do.

That's actually illegal. You can't fire someone because of their age, race or sex. There are ways to get around it - obviously.
But it's sexual discrimination. In Australia, we have the Sexual Discrimination Act, enacted in 1984 which came after the Racial Discrimination Act in '75.

Offline

#163 2012-08-08 06:20:14

Swift
retired commo
From: Australia
Registered: 2012-06-10
Posts: 4,653

Re: Fascism

Wes wrote:

Not to give the impression I'm anti-gay, which I'm not, but free people in their private capacities ought to have the right to rent or hire whomever they want, or refuse whomever they want, for whatever reason. Including stupid reasons. If we give people freedom we ought to let them make decisions we think are bad. as long as those decisions are peaceful.

Holy shit it just got retard up in here. Not hiring certain groups of people because of their race, sexuality etc. is complete bullshit. It encourages discrimination, can prevent people from finding a job and is just plain stupid.

Business needs regulation in order to function properly and with the least corruption and discrimination.

CAPITALIST SCUM

Offline

#164 2012-08-08 13:58:51

TheWake
Illuminatus Sacerdos
From: Yankee-Occupied South
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 8,272

Re: Fascism

SwiftEscudo wrote:

Holy shit it just got retard up in here. Not hiring certain groups of people because of their race, sexuality etc. is complete bullshit. It encourages discrimination, can prevent people from finding a job and is just plain stupid.

Business needs regulation in order to function properly and with the least corruption and discrimination.

CAPITALIST SCUM

Okay, first off, I find it utterly reprehensible that a government, or any group of people for that matter, has the right to dictate what private people have a right to do in their private capacities. I realize not hiring certain people because of their race, gender, or sexuality is stupid and (personally) I think it's morally wrong. However, what I find as more morally wrong is that anybody could decide what peaceful (yet stupid) people can do.

But there are also reason's why you're wrong not just from a perspective of what a person has a right to do, but how the world really works. Take a look at this excerpt from the econlib.org page on "Discrimination":

Many people believe that only government intervention prevents rampant discrimination in the private sector. Economic theory predicts the opposite: market mechanisms impose inescapable penalties on profits whenever for-profit enterprises discriminate against individuals on any basis other than productivity. Though bigoted managers may hold sway for a time, in the long run the profit penalty makes profit-seeking enterprises tenacious champions of fair treatment.

To see how this works, suppose that male and female hot-dog salesmen are equally productive and that bigoted stadium concessionaires prefer to hire men. The bigger demand for male employees will raise men’s wages, meaning that the concessionaires will have to pay more to hire men than they would to hire equally productive women. The higher wages for men cause employers who insist on all-male workforces to be higher-cost producers. Unless customers are willing to pay more for a hot dog delivered by a man than by a woman, higher costs mean smaller profits.

Concessionaires interested in maximizing their profits will forgo prejudice, hire women, reduce their costs, and increase their profits. Even if all concessionaires collude in refusing to hire women, new woman-owned firms can exploit their cost advantage by selling hot dogs for less, an effective way to take away customers. Unless government steps in to protect the bigots from competition, market conditions will end up forcing firms to choose between lower profits and hiring women. Though it may take decades, lower costs for female labor will result in the expansion of equal-opportunity employers. This will increase the demand for female labor and increase women’s wages. Some antiwomen owners may contrive to remain in business, but competition will make their taste for unfair discrimination expensive and will ensure that less of it will occur.

An example of the effect of market penalties on prejudicial hiring occurred in South Africa in the early 1900s. In spite of penalties threatened by government and violence threatened by white workers, South African mine owners sought to increase profits by laying off high-priced white workers in order to hire lower-priced black workers. Higher-paying jobs were reserved for whites only after white workers successfully persuaded the government to place extreme restrictions on blacks’ ability to work (see apartheid). Market penalties for discrimination also mitigated the effects of prejudice in the McCarthy era when profit-maximizing producers defied the Motion Picture Academy’s blacklist and secretly hired blacklisted screenwriters.

The article goes on to cite other examples and give more explanation.
Full article: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Discrimination.html

Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it should be, or that it even has to be to make things work out the right way.


The Grasshopper Lies Heavy

WsEkePS.png

Offline

#165 2012-08-08 22:03:57

Swift
retired commo
From: Australia
Registered: 2012-06-10
Posts: 4,653

Re: Fascism

tl;dr

Offline

#166 2012-08-09 02:27:00

TheWake
Illuminatus Sacerdos
From: Yankee-Occupied South
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 8,272

Re: Fascism

SwiftEscudo wrote:

tl;dr

Which is a perfectly adequate rebuttal. Therefore, I must concede the debate.


The Grasshopper Lies Heavy

WsEkePS.png

Offline

#167 2012-08-09 06:24:47

Swift
retired commo
From: Australia
Registered: 2012-06-10
Posts: 4,653

Re: Fascism

Offline

#168 2012-08-26 05:48:03

Blut und Boden
Vanguard.
Registered: 2012-08-04
Posts: 58

Re: Fascism

Hi.


"The Americans' 'open-mindedness', which is sometimes cited in their favor, is the other side of their interior formlessness. The same goes for their 'individualism'. Individualism and personality are not the same: the one belongs to the formless world of quantity, the other to the world of quality and hierarchy. The Americans are the living refutation of the Cartesian axiom, "I think, therefore I am": Americans do not think, yet they are. The American 'mind', puerile and primitive, lacks characteristic form and is therefore open to every kind of standardization."

Offline

#169 2012-08-26 05:51:33

TheWake
Illuminatus Sacerdos
From: Yankee-Occupied South
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 8,272

Re: Fascism

'Sup. Welcome back.


The Grasshopper Lies Heavy

WsEkePS.png

Offline

#170 2012-08-26 06:24:07

Blut und Boden
Vanguard.
Registered: 2012-08-04
Posts: 58

Re: Fascism

Thank you. I intend to return to our original subject at some point.


"The Americans' 'open-mindedness', which is sometimes cited in their favor, is the other side of their interior formlessness. The same goes for their 'individualism'. Individualism and personality are not the same: the one belongs to the formless world of quantity, the other to the world of quality and hierarchy. The Americans are the living refutation of the Cartesian axiom, "I think, therefore I am": Americans do not think, yet they are. The American 'mind', puerile and primitive, lacks characteristic form and is therefore open to every kind of standardization."

Offline

#171 2012-08-26 06:52:11

RAWN PAW
Member
Registered: 2012-06-08
Posts: 2,171

Re: Fascism

Blut und Boden wrote:

Thank you. I intend to return to our original subject at some point.

To be frank, I don't really see the point. No one's opinions have changed and there's no sign that they will.

Offline

#172 2012-08-26 14:45:48

HeartofShadows
What do you know of... Cthulhu?
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 505

Re: Fascism

RAWN PAW wrote:
Blut und Boden wrote:

Thank you. I intend to return to our original subject at some point.

To be frank, I don't really see the point. No one's opinions have changed and there's no sign that they will.

Yeah why arguments here are basically little more than a group circle jerk of mental masturbation.
Wait what?


"I was dead for millions of years before I was born and it never bothered me a bit."

Mark Twain

Offline

#173 2012-08-26 16:53:51

absentinsomniac
Administrator
Registered: 2012-06-09
Posts: 16,809

Re: Fascism

Yeah, I jumped in here way too late, and I'll be fucked if I'm going to read 7 pages of argument with someone who thinks "Gay parades" are something to do away with, and there's a "moral degredation" going on that must be stopped or some shit lol. I do, however, feel the need to debunk some of the Op's, and the second poster's ideas about /ss/, because every time someone insults us most of you niggers forget that they are wrong. We make up steryotypes about ourselves to be funny, and then when someone takes them seriously everyone forgets they are steryotypes that are wrong.

Yet, the majority of people here would give him the right to vote in their societies.

The majority of people everywhere would let him vote...

I don't understand why the majority of people here are anarchists.

Very few people here are anarchists, IIRC. Rebel was, and like 2 other guys, but most of the /ss/ population consists of republican capitalists or libertarians or somethign along those lines. I think, when we were in arguments over it back in the day, most of us conceded it probably won't/wouldn't work today.

I know many of you have called people you did not like 'fascists & racists' before in your lives; it's obvious from the type of people you are.

I have never in my life called someone a "fascist and racist". I've called someone a racist, and I'm pretty sure I've called a few people who self-identified as fascists a fascist, but other than that, no... Plus, I can't recall too many people on here calling peopel facists in debates or whatever. I have no idea where you got that idea... Plus what do you mean by "the type of people you are"? We're a pretty diverse group with varying opinions on a lot of shit.

The form of social anarchy you people promote is both decadent and - quite frankly - stupid.

What form of social anarchy? Wat? You mean no compulsory school, and more freedoms? Do you mean allowing people to do what they want in their spare time if it doesn't harm others? You're calling that "social anarchy?" Because that's about the only thing we agree en mass about. More freedom...

There is no sense in even believing an ideology which gives Humans (HUMANS, OF ALL CREATURES) total freedom from law & civility could work; it's stupid, in all manners.

See above lol.

Were you given the freedoms you so wish for, you would not do what to do with them for you are the lesser of the social food chain, and would thus come under harm in an anarchist society, where nothing but the rules of raw animalism apply.  Do you people honestly believe you are capable of fending for yourselves, without external aid?

Even the 3 anarchists that I know of on here don't think we should just kick the government out and have mass riots and shit lol. You clearly have lacking understanding in anarchism. You think we lack idiological knowledge in Facism, yet you don't even know what forms of anarchy people on here promote...

This website being in existence contradicts that idea.

To that idea? Maybe... To the ideas people have here? Yeah, no, this website is more or less in perfect allignment.


Fucc

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB