Divide and conquer, multiply and revolutionize.
6 2016-03-13 by wanab3
We're all so divided. Let's be honest about where we stand in this thread.
I'm a conspiracy theorist, believing just about everything but flat earth. I'm also a SJW, a person fighting for social equality. (After discussion I have realized it was a mistake to use this abbreviation because it casts the work of good people in a negative light. Much the way "conspiracy theorist" is used in a negative connotation, SJW has a negative connotation.) Vegan. Pro-gun. Anti-violence. Pro-choice. Agnostic. (Edit) Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. More I'm sure that I can't think of to mention at the moment.
I'll admit I appear on the surface as a bit of a contradiction. There are so many situational variables and intersectionalities in what we believe though. I really think we can unify, multiply and revolutionize the world. If we can sit down and calmly discuss our differences until we find our intersections of beliefs as a whole we can all win.
So where do you stand? List the first 5 or so that come to mind.
Trolls will be ignored.
37 comments
2 TallestSkil 2016-03-13
Bullshit. Objective truth exists, regardless of if you believe it does and regardless of your feelings on the matter. Compromise is the idiot’s way out. Not coward’s, not sheep’s, not freeman’s–IDIOT’S. The idiot believes that there is a compromise to any or every issue. There isn’t.
There is Truth and there are lies. That’s it. Either accept truth or you don’t matter. That’s a third person generic ‘you’, not you you (unless it applies). Truth will ALWAYS out. Always. That’s why conspiracies can’t stay so forever, and that’s why fakes can always be known.
This is also ludicrous. There’s no truth to an exceptionally large number of theories. You don’t believe in Flat Earth, so why?
-1 wanab3 2016-03-13
Why do you come in here swearing, 'screaming'(caps), insulting? How do you think this will help your cause? How will this method convince people to agree with you?
I don't believe in flat earth because, what the hell in nature is actually flat? Nothing, not a single thing. Get to the microscopic level everything is spherical-ish. Flat earth just does not fit the pattern at all. Hollow earth or the inverted earth are both more likely but, seriously just no.
1 TallestSkil 2016-03-13
So you base your beliefs on factual information. This one, at least. So why would you believe in the others, most of which have no such thing? Why do you believe in SJWism when it’s a self-defeating, cognitively dissonant, demonstrably false ideology? Why are you a vegan when reality proves that it is nutritionally deficient? Why are you pro-choice when it’s murder?
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
Ok. Just criticize my beliefs with out putting any of yours on the table. Nice talking to you. Edit: adding more out of boredom SJW is not a self-defeating ideology, racism and other -isms are very real. In fact racism the largest provable conspiracy of all, SJW is part of proving the conspiracy. Veaganism isn't nutritionally deficient, lots of body builders are vegan. I defiantly feel healthier and get sick less. Abortion may be murder I can accept that. But I'll leave that decision to the woman who's going to be caring for a theoretical child to decide if the child will have a good life or not.
I guess this means you're a flat earther, white supremacist, who loves to eat steak, and belives they own women's bodies. Feel free to correct me I'm just assuming based on your criticism of my beliefs.
0 TallestSkil 2016-03-13
Is. Even a cursory understanding of philosophy shows this.
And?
That’s scary.
You have absolutely no idea what a conspiracy is. At all. In any respect.
Is. Science shows so.
And there you go; you’ve instantly invalidated everything else you believe. What kind of psychotic monster are you?
PRO TIP: HOW ABOUT JUST NOT ENTERING INTO CONDITIONS THAT COULD CREATE A CHILD IF YOU’RE TOO MUCH OF AN INHUMAN MONSTER, FUCKING RETARDED, OR LAZY TO COMPREHEND WHAT PARENTHOOD ENTAILS, HUH?
Again, you have no clue what a conspiracy is and now apparently no clue what a strawman is.
0 wanab3 2016-03-13
hahahaha I can't. You're too much. You come in here screaming and flinging insults. Then accuse me of strawman. After having counterarguments strait off the elementary school playground.
It's been glaringly obvious since your first reply you're just here to troll and not talk, but I like to give people a chance before I ignore them.
We disagree. Enough said at this point. You can walk away from our discussion feeling victorious ok. You win.
1 TallestSkil 2016-03-13
Shouldn’t be too hard to disprove them, then. Why haven’t you done that?
If I’m wrong, prove it. Piece of cake. You said so yourself. And yet you won’t do it. Why won’t you do it?
1 flyyyyyyyyy 2016-03-13
one of the biggest divide/conquer, at least for the awake, is the threat that other users, even other people irl, might be working for the enemy. really makes it hard to form a cohesive resistance.
like if somebody wanted to do a /r/conspiracy meetup, i dunno if anybody would show up
0 wanab3 2016-03-13
This "meetup" you speak of. How does one do this?
1 flyyyyyyyyy 2016-03-13
you could make a post about it here.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
So there isn't like a special submission or anything? I would just say "lets have a r/conspiracy meet up to discuss our ideologies and why we have them." That's what I was going for kinda with this thread.
1 flyyyyyyyyy 2016-03-13
you might want to specify the city. and i have no idea whether the mods will allow it or what. i'm just another user.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
Oh a physical meet up. That would be good. But I have no money to travel. I Imagine that's the case for a lot of people.
Thanks for the info. Still learning reddit vocabulary.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
It's disappointing that people have not shared their ideological backgrounds like I have. But hey, I wasn't expecting a miracle.
0 Putin_loves_cats 2016-03-13
...and we will always be. This (life) is not and never has or will be a utopia. Humans are humans. One only has to look at nature to realize unity is not the point of this experience.
1 The_Noble_Lie 2016-03-13
You've fallen victim to the idea that there can be no hope for a utopia. I wonder who benefits from such an idea?
But seriously, I hear this occasionally and it's quite interesting to make such claims about the future. What do you think? How do you come to this dastardly belief that there can be no utopia?
Note: Perhaps you should explain your definition of utopia first.
My definition is something like all Peace, Wisdom and Love. No Hate, War, Violence, Greed, etc. And yes, none of the latter would exist, but the former is less important to exist in totality amongst all individuals, since I might still consider a utopic environment if some small percentage are simply apathetically neutral, and do no harm.
2 TallestSkil 2016-03-13
By definition.
NOT THE GLOBALISTS. NOT THE OLIGARCHS. Who do YOU think benefits from lying to people about the fundamental nature of humanity?
1 The_Noble_Lie 2016-03-13
Look. It seems as if you are beyond willing to participate in a debate on this. That's OK.
But let's agree to disagree. At best, utopia can be a reality.
At worst, it's the most noble of noble lies I can think of. There aren't many true noble lies out there. But the moment people are convinced utopia is fiction, then I would agree wholeheartedly that it is what people believe it.
1 Putin_loves_cats 2016-03-13
You use the word hope. That's the key. Hope is not real, it's just an idealistic thought. Sure, I wish we could, but it's not reality.
I'm a realist, and live with nature. I also know history.
Not sure I understand your last bit, but all I can say is, how does one achieve peace, love, and wisdom, when they are subjective to one's self? My love, peace, wisdom, may not be the same as yours. Also, violence, greed, war is a part of nature. Live in nature for sometime, and you will see. When looking at a predator like a wolf, are you going to speak kind words? Or, are you going to eliminate it, before it eliminates you?
People want to talk about lovey dovey shit, but it's not reality.
2 The_Noble_Lie 2016-03-13
History is not the future. Hope is (perhaps one of many) requirements for the shaping of a different, better future.
When you make statements about reality and the future, I can't follow. The future isn't real yet. It's not reality. How exactly does current or past reality restrict the geopolitical, societal, and individual potential(s) of the future?
Does this make sense to you?
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
Never say never. Never say always.
Nature does not necessarily move to unity right away. All science tells us that everything that exists now started as a Universal singularity. I think of the universe as a living organism. And so moving towards a singularity is not completely unplausible if that's how it all started, just another phase of life.
0 CantStopWhitey 2016-03-13
SJWs are useful idiots in undermining the West and lead toward a one world government.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
Why is this?
2 CantStopWhitey 2016-03-13
Intersectionality politics inherently separate people into different factions more than they already are. It's working 100% against your goal of ending divide and conquer. Once everyone is divided by this is when tptb can rule even easier as there's no single body to oppose them.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
Why? As I understand intersectionality it means finding common ground within differing oppressed groups.
Oh I remember you...
2 CantStopWhitey 2016-03-13
You understand incorrectly. Look at OWS it all fell apart because of their "platforming" strategy. Prioritizing one group over another when giving the ability to speak.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
What do I understand incorrectly?
No. OWS 'fell apart' because of cointelpro type insiders and cops beating the crap of out people or just killing or imprisoning them, then sealing areas off. My guess is you watched the news to arrive at your conclusions. Reality was very different.
1 CantStopWhitey 2016-03-13
Lmfao. If you say so.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
I mean, I was there. So yea I say so.
1 CantStopWhitey 2016-03-13
Then you're still part of the problem.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
What are you doing to correct "the problem?"
Figured out what you're saying I understand incorrectly. Intersectionality: is a concept often used in critical theories to describe the ways in which oppressive institutions (racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, xenophobia, classism, etc.) are interconnected and cannot be examined separately from one another..
Also, in every experience I had in public discussions while doing OWS stuff anyone who had something to share was allowed to speak. It wasn't about race, it was about knowing something about what was being discussed.
1 CantStopWhitey 2016-03-13
Critical theory came out of the Frankfort School. The members infiltrated the highest eschelons of academia to brainwash gullible young kids such as yourself. It's not about equal rights, it's about molding the mobs into a giant blob rather than individuals; it seeks to create the underclass for the ruling class. And now we've just come full circle to my very initial comment. I don't think you've thought any of this through; you just are doing what you've been taught to do in university, which you're very likely still in.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
Right, fact. Right, could be true; except people have been steadily getting more social equality as time goes on. Making blobs, there's always been an underclass for the ruling class that's how hierarchy works. So in a few sentences you think you have proven that "SJWs are useful idiots in undermining the West and lead toward a one world government."
I'm not simply parroting what I learned at university. I'm using an effective strategy that helps reasonable people to discuss problems they have to help work towards a collective solution, because were all fighting against the same power structure.
I'll ask again. What are you (have you done) doing to correct the problem?
1 CantStopWhitey 2016-03-13
I don't think anyone could convince you otherwise so I'm really not going to bother. If you want more, then you have to meet me halfway by admitting at least some of the problems with the theory. You have to be honest.
And what problem are you talking about?
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
The problem of government oppression of course.
I think you have a gross misunderstanding about what social justice is, and those who fight for it.
"SJW" is used as a way to degrade a community. (I only used the term because it's a convenient abbreviation, I regret doing this now in the OP.) Much the way "conspiracy theorist" is used to degrade people who question the power structure. Just as the case with any group there are of course "useful idiots." That does not mean anyone who shares similar beliefs is an unthinking fool.
I really don't see any glaring problems with social justice work. Honest. You say it's leading to a one world government. I could understand how you think that because once there aren't ethnic, ability or gender divides, what's to stop people from forming a single world government? This is a reasnable question to ask for the long term. The government created by social justice work this could be beneficial however because it would have been formed by the people. Much the way the constitutional governments were in the beginning of the US's history. I personally don't think it would stay that way for long, just like real freedom didn't last for the US.
I also wouldn't support any world government, I'm sure few other SJWs would either. Collections of power are inherently dangerous, no one knows this better than 'minorities.' But all of that is a long way off. In practice 'minorites' are still largely disenfranchised socially, politically and economically. Thus the increase in public action by SJWs. Governments simply are not facilitating the necessary social remediation. They are too busy consolidating military and economic power to be concerned with social ills. Thus the increase in public action by SJWs.
TPP and the like are the things you need to be worrying about creating a world governments. Those wold be nefarious at the outset.
Intersectionality admits the differences honestly so we are aware of the source of the problem, it's not creating the divides. Those divides existed long before SJWs came into the picture.
1 CantStopWhitey 2016-03-13
What you say makes sense. When I think SJW, and you definitely shouldn't have used the term for yourself as you've said, is the notion that all straight white European males are inherently evil. That's what I've seen everywhere and it's increasing somewhat exponentially. For that I will never stand. It's just as racist, sexist, and oppressive as anything SJWs are claiming to be trying to stop.
I also think all cultures should be preserved.
1 wanab3 2016-03-13
Well. I'm glad that's cleared up then.
2 The_Noble_Lie 2016-03-13
History is not the future. Hope is (perhaps one of many) requirements for the shaping of a different, better future.
When you make statements about reality and the future, I can't follow. The future isn't real yet. It's not reality. How exactly does current or past reality restrict the geopolitical, societal, and individual potential(s) of the future?
Does this make sense to you?
1 TallestSkil 2016-03-13
Shouldn’t be too hard to disprove them, then. Why haven’t you done that?
If I’m wrong, prove it. Piece of cake. You said so yourself. And yet you won’t do it. Why won’t you do it?
1 CantStopWhitey 2016-03-13
What you say makes sense. When I think SJW, and you definitely shouldn't have used the term for yourself as you've said, is the notion that all straight white European males are inherently evil. That's what I've seen everywhere and it's increasing somewhat exponentially. For that I will never stand. It's just as racist, sexist, and oppressive as anything SJWs are claiming to be trying to stop.
I also think all cultures should be preserved.