Violence and Propaganda

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

What exactly do you think the human race is capable of that [it] isn't already achieving, every single day? For Christ sake, we just went to mars.

---

"We" just went to mars?

"We" who?

Did you just go to mars?

The point that is (obviously) being made has much less to do with some 'supernatural' concept of 'being more than human(kind)' than it does with simply any specific person 'being more than they already are'.

Humor me for a moment: If you live in a system where the government keeps the public more 'warlike' through methods like desensitization to violence through mainstream media, then that government is effectively trying to stamp out the non-violent movement. It is creating a system where the population feels like the violence (often excessive) is necessary and natural, and not going anywhere anytime soon. It is a system where peaceful ideology and pacifism are looked at as inefficient/weak/abnormal/unrealistic/unnatural. I'm sure it's a sentiment that you are very familiar with. The 'what people can accomplish' - as it's (obviously) being used in this thread - is more speaking about what a large-scale paradigm shift toward peace could accomplish, if not impeded by said pro-violence system, and it is an outcome that not even you (in all your self-indulgence) could predict.

It is completely within reason to ponder the question of 'what different ends could a country like ours meet, if its people were directed in such opposite directions (those directions being: subtle glorification + desensitization of violence vs. a governmental/mainstream/subliminal advocacy of peaceful concepts and lifestyles), and I don't think you're doing yourself any favors by ridiculing the idea as if it were even unlikely, let alone stupid or 'hippie nonsense'.

And, yes, violence is taught; not in every instance, but in many. It can also be quelled in the same way that we can be 'taught' that a woman walking around with her tits hanging out is inappropriate; or that people of all colors should be have equal rights. Of course, it would probably never be a 'universal' paradigm; in that not everyone is going to follow it. This does not mean it is 'hippie nonsense'. I don't think there is anyone here implying that we (the entire population of our country) would suddenly "have no desire to destroy", but considering a monumental shift in the value system of the country-wide majority as being completely outside the realm of possibility is simply unrealistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

What horseshit, you people speak of control as if it's something that once relinquished will magically grant you super-human powers. What exactly do you think the human race is capable of that [it] isn't already achieving, every single day? For Christ sake, we just went to mars.

My 2 cents: It's usually the people who have no sense of balance, or an appreciation for order that spew hippie nonsense every time they open their mouth; a butthurt subconscious, for whatever reason.

Some of you seem to believe that violence is taught, and that we would suddenly have no desire to destroy if 'they' would just allow us to live up to our full potential. :?

---

Defensiveness is a mere shadow of fear, and you are representing what our society has become beautifully.

Gobbling up anything that gets slopped on your plate.
Not questioning these 'answers' you think you have from professionals they've trained you to trust.

These observations I am pointing out are not out of hostility. I am hoping to poke your comfort bubble so you can expand your awareness...to get you to think further than the surface of this 'matter of fact' society.

Why limit yourself?
If you imagined yourself without a job, money, a car, the bible, your hobbies, your friends and family, ect. Remove all things you identify yourself by.
And ask yourself, "who am I?"

I bet it would be a difficult question to answer. No?

Quote:

---

We" just went to mars?

"We" who?

Did you just go to mars?

---

Don't be coy.

Quote:

---

Humor me for a moment: If you live in a system where the government keeps the public more 'warlike' through methods like desensitization to violence through mainstream media, then that government is effectively trying to stamp out the non-violent movement. It is creating a system where the population feels like the violence (often excessive) is necessary and natural, and not going anywhere anytime soon. It is a system where peaceful ideology and pacifism are looked at as inefficient/weak/abnormal/unrealistic/unnatural. I'm sure it's a sentiment that you are very familiar with. The 'what people can accomplish' - as it's (obviously) being used in this thread - is more speaking about what a large-scale paradigm shift toward peace could accomplish, if not impeded by said pro-violence system, and it is an outcome that not even you (in all your self-indulgence) could predict.

---

As opposed to the aboriginal tribes that have all killed themselves off; government, nope. Human nature, yup.

Quote:

---

Defensiveness is a mere shadow of fear, and you are representing what our society has become beautifully.

---

Common sense seems to allude you.

Quote:

---

These observations I am pointing out are not out of hostility. I am hoping to poke your comfort bubble so you can expand your awareness...to get you to think further than the surface of this 'matter of fact' society.

---

You haven't searched through my posts, have you?

Quote:

---

Why limit yourself?
If you imagined yourself without a job, money, a car, the bible, your hobbies, your friends and family, ect. Remove all things you identify yourself by.
And ask yourself, "who am I?"

---

I'm 50, 000 years behind. You haven't thought this all the way through, kiddo.

Quote:

---

I bet it would be a difficult question to answer. No?

---

You're right, no.

What version of history do you read?

Correct me, then.
edit: Okay, I think I meant indigenous.

Whatever you meant, you're still wrong. Hunter Gatherers had war, sure, to prove to their neighbors they weren't push-overs. But they didn't conquer, they never wiped each other out. That was an invention of the totalitarian agriculturalists. Claiming they "killed themselves off" is asinine and makes me think you're fucking retarded.

Quote:

---

That was an invention of the totalitarian agriculturalists.

---

Quote:

---

is asinine and makes me think you're fucking retarded.

---

:facepalm:

You're only making yourself look dumber. Just walk away.

I am, how?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

As opposed to the aboriginal tribes that have all killed themselves off; government, nope. Human nature, yup.

---

Right...because the prominent, widespread, cultural/behavioral patterns of indigenous groups are completely analogous to the prominent, widespread, cultural/behavioral patterns of modern, 'civilized' man. We all know that behavior (even those of large populations) cannot be consciously and purposefully influenced. We are all slaves to our primitive, animal impulses, and indoctrination and propaganda have absolutely no bearing on the perceptual development of a society. I don't understand how I could have overlooked such an absolute truth. You must have been a sociology major?

/sarcasm

I understand the point that you are trying to make, but you are doing it with such a narrow scope that you (like I said) are really not doing yourself any favors. Did you know it was once widespread, 'human nature' in our society to openly enslave/whip/rape and kill people of color? So that just means it's human nature, in general. Yeah? I suppose the fact that slavery has been pretty much stamped out, here, can just be chalked up to 'human nature' as well, right? It had nothing to do with decades of civil rights movements, demonstrations, education and eventual acceptance, right? It was just 'human nature' that caused our country's paradigm shift toward integration, right? Hell, if that's how loose your definition of 'human nature' is, then any ideology allegedly pushed upon the people by its government is simply a reflection of 'human nature' as well, which would still make your argument invalid.

Again, nobody is saying that government is the 'end-all, be-all' of the level of violence within its country. We are saying that the kind of government that we are alleging can (and often does) have a very huge role to play in the perceptions of its people, and those perceptions include an aversion to - or acceptance of - violence.

Not sure how much clearer I can make it than that.

Okay.

O's right, with his middle paragraph, your argument is completely untenable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

What horseshit, you people speak of control as if it's something that once relinquished will magically grant you super-human powers. What exactly do you think the human race is capable of that [it] isn't already achieving, every single day? For Christ sake, we just went to mars.

My 2 cents: It's usually the people who have no sense of balance, or an appreciation for order that spew hippie nonsense every time they open their mouth; a butthurt subconscious, for whatever reason.

Some of you seem to believe that violence is taught, and that we would suddenly have no desire to destroy if 'they' would just allow us to live up to our full potential. :?

---

I can name many things the human race is capable of that it isn't already achieving for every single day. So we went to Mars? Science is the only part of human nature that you can show an accomplishment for that's clear in our world..

But what we are capable of doing, but haven't achieved is far more important.

Poverty exists all over the world; people are starving, people are lacking in education, slavery still exists.

Some peoples potential continues to overshadow the rest of ours.

Balance is my specialty. Our scientific accomplishments do not make our moral failings any less true.

Hippie Derp.

Quote:

---

Balance is my specialty. Our scientific accomplishments do not make our moral failings any less true.

---

there are billions of people with a billion different perspectives, so morality doesn't exist.

balance doesn't work, either. the only balance a person can hope to achieve is one in which the playing field is level, but what's the first move that same person makes as soon as this happens?

Quote:

---

Some peoples potential continues to overshadow the rest of ours.

---

who?

Are you the richest and most powerful person on earth, greenhavoc?

of course not, but what does that have to do with me living up to my full potential?

Quote:

---

there are billions of people with a billion different perspectives, so morality doesn't exist.

---

That's just not true. Proper behavior exists whether you want to deny it or not. Murdering innocent people is wrong no matter how you slice it.

Quote:

---

balance doesn't work, either. the only balance a person can hope to achieve is one in which the playing field is level, but what's the first move that same person makes as soon as this happens?

---

Balance is the key to life. Good luck finding it. I'm not talking about money when I'm talking about balance.

Quote:

---

who?

---

The ruling class.

Quote:

---

of course not, but what does that have to do with me living up to my full potential?

---

More than you'll ever know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeathCell

That's just not true.

---

You sure about that?

Quote:

---

Proper behavior exists whether you want to deny it or not. Murdering innocent people is wrong no matter how you slice it.

---

All subjective, there's no reason to assume your own prejudices for/against (whatever) is anymore righteous than the wicked, just because you're in the majority. On the universal>? scale of morality, if god does exist, no person on this planet is guilty of being 'unbalanced', because no person can escape the ignorance/contradiction of their own existence unless they take themselves out of the equation.

Now whether you believe in god or not, you still need to take into consideration the billions of people who do; clearly morality does not exist.

Quote:

---

Balance is the key to life. Good luck finding it. I'm not talking about money when I'm talking about balance.

---

What does money have to do with balance, more importantly why would you even mention it? I don't think you've truly grasped the irony of constructive criticism.

Quote:

---

The ruling class...More than you'll ever know.

---

Lol, can you be a little more specific than that?

Quote:

---

All subjective, there's no reason to assume your own prejudices for/against (whatever) is anymore righteous than the wicked, just because you're in the majority. On the universal>? scale of morality, if god does exist, no person on this planet is guilty of being 'unbalanced', because no person can escape the ignorance/contradiction of their own existence unless they take themselves out of the equation.

---

Nothing subjective about killing 5 year olds. Sorry. Don't care about god. Theirs no contradiction to existence; what kind of metaphysical nonsense are you speaking about?

Quote:

---

Now whether you believe in god or not, you still need to take into consideration the billions of people who do; clearly morality does not exist.

---

Clearly morality does exist. Just because people believe in Gods doesn't mean that killing a 5 year old is morally acceptable. I don't have to take into consideration anyone's personal religious views to understand that killing innocent people is not proper behavior.

Quote:

---

What does money have to do with balance, more importantly why would you even mention it? I don't think you've truly grasped the irony of constructive criticism.

---

I don't think you've truly grasped the art of a constructive debate; and more or less throw shit at a wall and hope something sticks.

Quote:

---

balance doesn't work, either. the only balance a person can hope to achieve is one in which the playing field is level, but what's the first move that same person makes as soon as this happens?

---

This isn't a sentence or a statement with a coherent thought to be found. It makes little to no sense and is left to complete interpretation.

Quote:

---

Lol, can you be a little more specific than that?

---

Us and Them. Those with and those without.

Those who control our economies and governments and those who just live in them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeathCell

Nothing subjective about killing 5 year olds. Sorry. Don't care about god. Theirs no contradiction to existence; what kind of metaphysical nonsense are you speaking about?

---

I wonder if a 5 year old's life has ever hung in the balance at a hospital; a decision on whether or not to take him off life support? ...but green, that's not killing a 5 year old. Lol, really? I don't know how to put the metaphysical nonsense into words, sorry.

Quote:

---

Clearly morality does exist. Just because people believe in Gods doesn't mean that killing a 5 year old is morally acceptable. I don't have to take into consideration anyone's personal religious views to understand that killing innocent people is not proper behavior.

---

You don't, and neither do I. That doesn't mean another person won't, though. In biblical time men took underage wives, but now? See what I'm driving at here, just because you think something is right of wrong doesn't mean shit to the person beside you. How is this hard to understand?

Quote:

---

I don't think you've truly grasped the art of a constructive debate; and more or less throw shit at a wall and hope something sticks.

---

I don't think you fully appreciate that expression enough to use it so loosely.

Quote:

---

This isn't a sentence or a statement with a coherent thought to be found. It makes little to no sense and is left to complete interpretation.

---

I'll simplify it for you, then: When you play a game, do you want to tie?

Quote:

---

Us and Them. Those with and those without.
Those who control our economies and governments and those who just live in them.

---

That's not an answer, you're just stating the obvious. I asked you how these people keep me from living up to my full potential. How?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

I wonder if a 5 year old's life has ever hung in the balance at a hospital; a decision on whether or not to take him off life support? ...but green, that's not killing a 5 year old. Lol, really? I don't know how to put the metaphysical nonsense into words, sorry.

---

People like you are annoying.

If you can't tell the difference between taking a child off life support; because he's only suffering.. and strapping a bomb to a childs back? I feel sorry for you. I know you're one of those guys who just loves to argue whether you have a reason to or not.

Quote:

---

You don't, and neither do I. That doesn't mean another person won't, though. In biblical time men took underage wives, but now? See what I'm driving at here, just because you think something is right of wrong doesn't mean shit to the person beside you. How is this hard to understand?

---

I don't have to take into account fools opinions. Go for the Descartes method break down all your moral beliefs instead; how do you defend killing an innocent 5 year old? You can't. We don't need to bring up underage wives arguments; when theirs far simpler moral equations to contemplate.

Just because some idiot beside you thinks it's ok to murder people; doesn't change the moral fabric of humanity.

Quote:

---

I don't think you fully appreciate that expression enough to use it so loosely.

---

Throwing some more shit?

Quote:

---

I'll simplify it for you, then: When you play a game, do you want to tie?

---

I don't care.

Quote:

---

That's not an answer, you're just stating the obvious. I asked you how these people keep me from living up to my full potential. How?

---

LOL? If I'm stating the obvious; why do I need to explain it to you?