Re: Who have you convinced to vote today?

[ManyMindsManyVoices]

"I might concede your last point, but even if I didn't, I wouldn't argue it."

"In the end, I keep saying, anarchy isn't practical in our world, doesn't matter to me. I watch people suffer in great numbers in this system, and just because the suffering isn't rioting and death, doesn't make it better. So often, I see people who would be better off in death, because emotionally, people are constantly wrecking them for who they are, what they believe, or just because they aren't quite normal."

"In my opinion, that's a million times worse than the destructive chaos of anarchy."

"I've heard all the arguments about this, none of them are convincing, because no one addresses the core problem. There isn't any way to address the core problem, which is the MASSIVE numbers of ignorant people that are allowed to live and harm the world just by their existence."

  You cannot simmultaneously maintain the position that   your position is reasonable, unintelligible (or at least incapable of   being reduced to words), and only open to those who have gained the same   insight as you! Occupying any two mutually excludes the third.
 
  You have now moved on from saying that government is corrupt to saying   that the majority is corrupt. Your position is therefore that every   other position is wrong, simply because you don't hold it.
 

"I always held the majority is corrupt... Also, both of your statements are fallacious. Saying the majority is corrupt and saying every other position is wrong are not the same thing. That's like saying, 'you agree that lions aren't tigers, so you must also believe tigers aren't cats', I made no such assertion. I would make no such sweeping accusation about anything."

"As for the first part, you've apparently decided your belief of what is reasonable is the only valid one, because that's the only way you can make a definitive statement regarding what can or cannot be reasonable. Therefore, your accusations about me, are more likely a reflection of your arguments."

[ManyMindsManyVoices]

"I should correct my statement, because I used the word 'reasonable' myself. That was a foolish use of the word, but honestly, I can't think of a way to put that statement that really conveys its meaning, so I just typed blindly. I have a habit of typing while my thoughts are still forming, and then using phrases I didn't quite mean."

"I usually make good on correcting them when pointed out, so in that case... I guess all I can say is, the majority creates the heroic ideals, and I stand vehemently opposed to the majority, because of its idiocy, so naturally, I would sound villainous."

[Noelle]

You talk a lot about ignorant people without actually pointing out who exactly and why you're qualified to judge them. If the world is better off without mankind, then why are you here? Why not promote suicide cults and why not just go out and do what you want right now? As far as I can tell, you play by all the societal rules while simultaneously decrying them.

Furthermore, you enjoy the benefits of the government and those so-called "ignorant people" while declining to mention them. The quality of life you enjoy, the technologies you're enjoying at this very moment, your clothing, your food -- Guess what? The things you do every day come at the cost of others, which, as far as I can see, makes you just as bad as the "ignorant people" you go on about by destroying others with your ignorance. The food you eat comes at the cost of destroying the environment, inhumane treatment of animals, immigrant labor --  the clothes you wear can come from sweat shops and forced, dirty, underpaid labor and can contribute to pumping more chemicals in the air as it is transported halfway across the world. The streets you live on paved over some creature's natural habitat. Why do you get to cast judgment on everyone else? Why do you get to be so enlightened and still commit the same sins you look down on?

The "core problem" here isn't being addressed because it's greatly flawed. It's not an established fact (unless you'd like educate us with actual, tangible proof of your claims), it is a construct of your opinion and philosophy and ultimately a loaded question. I can't tell you why so many ignorant people are allowed to live while inadvertently hurting others with their ignorance because I don't believe in a philosophy that makes me superior to the rest of the human race who differs in point of view and choice. If I phrase a question such that I say "Have you stopped being an idiot?", you can't exactly answer yes or no without implicating yourself to being an idiot. If you ask "Why are so many ignorant people allowed to live?", I can't tell you without implying that I actually believe in your view.

[Jude]

"In the end, I keep saying, anarchy isn't practical in our world, doesn't matter to me. I watch people suffer in great numbers in this system, and just because the suffering isn't rioting and death, doesn't make it better. So often, I see people who would be better off in death, because emotionally, people are constantly wrecking them for who they are, what they believe, or just because they aren't quite normal."

I find it disturbingly presumptuous that you believe people are better off dead who are in those circumstances.  What is your rationale?  I would think as long as you're alive and able to pursue happiness you're better off than being dead -- unless you couple these opinions of yours with an equally fundamental religious viewpoint, then I could see some twisted logic to them.

I can't imagine seeing non-existence as a viable alternative to life as a sane position -- that's a suicidal belief, not a concept held by a rational mind.

"In my opinion, that's a million times worse than the destructive chaos of anarchy."

"I've heard all the arguments about this, none of them are convincing, because no one addresses the core problem. There isn't any way to address the core problem, which is the MASSIVE numbers of ignorant people that are allowed to live and harm the world just by their existence."

"I always held the majority is corrupt... Also, both of your statements are fallacious. Saying the majority is corrupt and saying every other position is wrong are not the same thing. That's like saying, 'you agree that lions aren't tigers, so you must also believe tigers aren't cats', I made no such assertion. I would make no such sweeping accusation about anything."

"As for the first part, you've apparently decided your belief of what is reasonable is the only valid one, because that's the only way you can make a definitive statement regarding what can or cannot be reasonable. Therefore, your accusations about me, are more likely a reflection of your arguments."

You seem convinced that things are so bad in the system that anarchy would be better -- I couldn't agree less.  The natural state of man, this anarchy that you refer to, is avoided at all costs by most for a reason:  it is needless and pointless suffering on a grand scale.  Without a governmental system there is no basis for cooperation other than some idealized view of human nature (a view that is total fantasy when you examine anthropological, psychological, and scientific evidence).

Government exists to limit actions which infringe on other people's ability to live their own life without damaging external influence.  Despite how corrupt our government can be at times, I see no reason to believe that government has failed this duty on such a grand level that anarchy would be preferred.  You mention a whole class of people who you claim have been mistreated by the system (homosexuals, the polyamorous, and others who aren't normal), yet the most egregious offenses you can list are nothing compared to the horror that people experience in less-civilized, more anarchic states.

We have it pretty good.  We rarely experience theft or assault, and can rely on other individuals to do their part to keep our society functioning.  It takes the effort of countless people coordinated into one gigantic union to produce the kind of cultural and technological sophistication we all enjoy.  Elliquiy is a product of our ordered lifestyle, as is the internet, art, literature, and every other positive achievement of humanity.  Advocating throwing all of that away because there are people in our society who don't approve of  certain abnormalities is ridiculous.  Very, very few injustices exist in our world compared to even 100 years ago, back when women couldn't vote and our society was infinitely more conservative.  Things are getting better, but they'll never be perfect.

The reason why I said you reminded me of a villain from a video game or anime is because a lot of what you say doesn't seem well thought-through or mature.  There's an awful lot of vague emotional weasel words or opinions that on the surface seem well-reasoned but have the depth of a piece of paper.  The whole "I don't care" attitude and supreme confidence is quite frankly juvenile.

The worst sufferings of our society are nothing compared to a daily struggle for survival and the pain of pre-civilized life -- not to mention the way humanity used to toil in absolute uncertainty for a relatively short amount of time.  Life is infinitely better now; there may still be a little bigotry left in our civilized minds, but at least it's no longer a fundamental tenet of existence.

[mystictiger]

"I always held the majority is corrupt... Also, both of your statements are fallacious. Saying the majority is corrupt and saying every other position is wrong are not the same thing. That's like saying, 'you agree that lions aren't tigers, so you must also believe tigers aren't cats', I made no such assertion. I would make no such sweeping accusation about anything."

You have said that you cannot express your justification in words.
You have said that you can only reach enlightenment through experience
You have said that the majority are corrupt.
You have said that ignorant people harm the world merely through existence.

The corrupt majority are presumably those that have not undergone this process of enlightenment.
You presumably do not regard yourself as being corrupt.
You are therefore advocating that those that do not agree with you are somehow not worthy of living simply by virtue of the fact that they disagree with you / have not been enlightened.

[ManyMindsManyVoices]

"Yes, I do consider myself corrupt, it is just part of being human. I only stand separate by being enlightened, and yes, I do believe I am enlightened. I won't explain why, I don't need to, I am happy to know what I know for myself."

You talk a lot about ignorant people without actually pointing out who exactly and why you're qualified to judge them. If the world is better off without mankind, then why are you here? Why not promote suicide cults and why not just go out and do what you want right now? As far as I can tell, you play by all the societal rules while simultaneously decrying them.

Furthermore, you enjoy the benefits of the government and those so-called "ignorant people" while declining to mention them. The quality of life you enjoy, the technologies you're enjoying at this very moment, your clothing, your food -- Guess what? The things you do every day come at the cost of others, which, as far as I can see, makes you just as bad as the "ignorant people" you go on about by destroying others with your ignorance. The food you eat comes at the cost of destroying the environment, inhumane treatment of animals, immigrant labor --  the clothes you wear can come from sweat shops and forced, dirty, underpaid labor and can contribute to pumping more chemicals in the air as it is transported halfway across the world. The streets you live on paved over some creature's natural habitat. Why do you get to cast judgment on everyone else? Why do you get to be so enlightened and still commit the same sins you look down on?

The "core problem" here isn't being addressed because it's greatly flawed. It's not an established fact (unless you'd like educate us with actual, tangible proof of your claims), it is a construct of your opinion and philosophy and ultimately a loaded question. I can't tell you why so many ignorant people are allowed to live while inadvertently hurting others with their ignorance because I don't believe in a philosophy that makes me superior to the rest of the human race who differs in point of view and choice. If I phrase a question such that I say "Have you stopped being an idiot?", you can't exactly answer yes or no without implicating yourself to being an idiot. If you ask "Why are so many ignorant people allowed to live?", I can't tell you without implying that I actually believe in your view.

"First of all, I do reap benefits, because I see the world as an irreparable mess. I don't care if I decline it more, because I am helping the one cause I have hope for, the slow decline of our species. In the end, why should I waste my time do anything more than being happy and comfortable before I die (that's rhetorical, while I'll listen to your reasons, I can almost guarantee I won't care afterward)?"

"As for tangible proof, there's no such thing. You cannot prove to me anything, because I can refute it, even if my refusal is completely outrageous and unbased, as long as you cannot prove my refusal to be completely, 100% untrue, then no actual proof can exist. So, I can say, the entire world is under the whims of a God who likes to fuck with people's heads. I can say, that God actually warps the known laws of physics when no one is looking, just because he can. You can't prove that isn't true, or a number of other outrageous philosophical statements, or even reasonable philosophical statements. So, all proof, far enough removed, is baseless. I live by what I (me, and only me), can perceive, so I can't make you perceive things with my brain, so no proof can be given."

  I find it disturbingly presumptuous that you believe people are better   off dead who are in those circumstances.  What is your rationale?  I   would think as long as you're alive and able to pursue happiness you're   better off than being dead -- unless you couple these opinions of yours   with an equally fundamental religious viewpoint, then I could see some   twisted logic to them.
 
  I can't imagine seeing non-existence as a viable alternative to life as a   sane position -- that's a suicidal belief, not a concept held by a   rational mind.

"That last statement, and many of your statements are as baseless as mine, and only hold true because most people perceive them that way. Yet you hold them like facts and swing them like a blade of righteousness as much as I do. The difference is, I know, at the end of the day, I might just be totally fucked and wrong, and there's not anything I can do about it because I can't honestly make an educated philosophical decision based on anything other than my perceptions."

"That's how I stand apart, I'm screwed and corrupt, and I accept it and try to better myself. Most people, don't even stop to consider that, don't even begin to consider other people. I've come to my conclusions about the best thing for mankind because I have spent so much time considering other people, I've come to realize they don't deserve my consideration because they refuse to even try to be open-minded."

"Believe what you want, come to my house and lynch me for your beliefs, but it doesn't change what I believe to be true, and it doesn't change that you don't KNOW anything. I'm sorry if it offends you or bothers you that I can see the close-minded ignorance of the masses, but it doesn't change what I see, and I will call what I see to the skies even if God himself kills me for it."

[mystictiger]

If you are corrupt, why are you not dead?

[ManyMindsManyVoices]

"I'll get there... I live by principles that I find acceptable, so I don't feel a need to die yet. I have hope for my life personally, for now, and when that fades, I'll decide what path to take to death."

[Noelle]

You have failed to answer any real criticism here except with hypocrisy, inaccuracy, and a real lack of substance. Telling people "you can respond, but I don't care" is incredibly inconsiderate, as well as a cheap and unimpressive brickwall tactic. You haven't addressed any inconsistencies anyone has pointed out to you in any logical detail except to go on further about your own philosophies that we're trying to talk about. Telling people they aren't addressing this or that and then turning around and saying you "can't prove anything" when someone challenges those questions is not an enjoyable or even intelligent way to debate. I am completely stepping out of this conversation now and do not wish to speak further with you on the subject. I wish you the best of luck in your ventures into anarchy and whatnot.

[mystictiger]

I truly pity you. It must be a bleak world that you live in to see your fellows as ignorant masses deserving only of scorn and death. I cannot debate this topic with you as you are unable to describe your position as you maintain that your position is only achievable through some subjective process of enlightenment only open to your being. I am unable to empathise with you as you maintain an utterly subjective view on the world with no space for the objective, or even the inter-subjective.

In this regard, your standpoint is utterly incommensurate with any other perceived reality. You say I 'KNOW' nothing, and am probably incapable of ever knowing anything. You cannot explain the purpose of your outlook nor what you regard its truth criteria to be, nor the basis on how you make value judgments. There is no shared ontology, epistemology, or methodology. There can be no interaction, no dialectic, no resolution. You are therefore not comparing apples and oranges, you're comparing apples and the number 4.

So good luck with that and I hope it works out well for you. I'm with Noelle.

[Zakharra]

 You're kind of coming across as a nihlist that hasn't gotten the nerve to start killing people yet.

"Yes, I do consider myself corrupt, it is just part of being human. I only stand separate by being enlightened, and yes, I do believe I am enlightened. I won't explain why, I don't need to, I am happy to know what I know for myself."

That comes off as being hypocritical.  ' I do believe I am enlightened. I won't explain why, I don't need to,' , with the other posts you've done calaling most people ignorant and worthy only of death, is not helping your position.

[ManyMindsManyVoices]

"Does it seem like I'm trying to help my position? My debate with Vekseid remained civil because Vekseid was debating on respectable terms. I spend enough time getting into these long arguments, to waste my time trying to detail the ideals behind my arguments. Words would not convey the meaning well enough, and I don't have the time to waste even beginning to try, because it takes me hours to convey these thoughts in person to people I care about. Why spend any real time on people who I have no interest in trying to help, because they have decided they don't want my help?"

"As for the nerve to kill people, it's not so much that... If I thought killing any individual would make things better, I'd do it in a heartbeat. It's just that I alone don't have nearly the skill, armament, or power to put down all the people it would take to make a real change. So, let them put themselves down, it happens all the time. Between, war, drugs, drinking, obesity, pollution, and the number of other astronomically stupid things people do to themselves, I'd rather just let them die in their own time."

"I am glad most of you have decided to give up the argument, because it's not one worth having. Come to see me in Florida with an open mind and a few hours of free time, and if you don't prove yourself too stupid to talk to in the first 10-20 minutes, maybe you'll learn something."

[Zakharra]

[qiote]"As for the nerve to kill people, it's not so much that... If I thought killing any individual would make things better, I'd do it in a heartbeat. It's just that I alone don't have nearly the skill, armament, or power to put down all the people it would take to make a real change.[/quote] 

That right there makes me question your sanity a bit.  You're admitting that if you  did have the skill, arms or power to do it, you would do so.  Which is frightening.   I'm sorry, but you are really coming across as a nihilist.

Also, most of the people here have been polite and respectable. You're also avoiding the argument by saying this,

Words would not convey the meaning well enough, and I don't have the time to waste even beginning to try, because it takes me hours to convey these thoughts in person to people I care about. Why spend any real time on people who I have no interest in trying to help, because they have decided they don't want my help

If you cannot put something out in a forum like this in a coherent manner, then your skills or persuasion won't amount to much since this is the best way to reach a lot of people (youtube aside). Mainly because we're scattered all over the world and cannoty meet face to face.  I kind of doubt a lot of people would want to meet someone who would be willing to kill them if he thought they were too stupid or ignorant to live, if he could get away with it.

[ManyMindsManyVoices]

"The invitation was open-ended, and less than an expectation. Given how many people I've met that I haven't killed, you'd have to be a pretty loathsome individual, or in a really stupid situation, for me to suddenly pick some stranger to kill."

"As for questioning my sanity, no question, I'm a sociopath, bordering on psychopath, I never bother to question that. However, I find that most great insight comes from people with at the very least a mental deficiency. People who see the world clearly are often seen as insane, because a clear view of the world reveals a pretty dark sight."

"Otherwise, I'm not looking to convince anyone, if they learn something, and want to gain more, I'll speak with them further. Otherwise, I am TRYING to shut people out. Read my words, I think people are generally too fundamentally ignorant to actually accept what I have to say. I say it because I believe that's what needs to be done, but I'm not going to waste my time elaborating."

"Okay, I'm out, I'm just repeating myself at this point. If someone wants to gain something from my perspective, PM me, and maybe I'll give a damn to talk to you."

[Zakharra]

"The invitation was open-ended, and less than an expectation. Given how many people I've met that I haven't killed, you'd have to be a pretty loathsome individual, or in a really stupid situation, for me to suddenly pick some stranger to kill."

"As for questioning my sanity, no question, I'm a sociopath, bordering on psychopath, I never bother to question that. However, I find that most great insight comes from people with at the very least a mental deficiency. People who see the world clearly are often seen as insane, because a clear view of the world reveals a pretty dark sight."

"Otherwise, I'm not looking to convince anyone, if they learn something, and want to gain more, I'll speak with them further. Otherwise, I am TRYING to shut people out. Read my words, I think people are generally too fundamentally ignorant to actually accept what I have to say. I say it because I believe that's what needs to be done, but I'm not going to waste my time elaborating."

"Okay, I'm out, I'm just repeating myself at this point. If someone wants to gain something from my perspective, PM me, and maybe I'll give a damn to talk to you."

I am going off of what you did say,

If I thought killing any individual would make things better, I'd do it in a heartbeat. It's just that I alone don't have nearly the skill, armament, or power to put down all the people it would take to make a real change.

Which is, to be honest, damned frightening. If you did have the power, you said yourself you would do ity because YOU think they are too stupid/ignorant(your definition)to live.

  And you follow up by this;

However, I find that most great insight comes from people with at the very least a mental deficiency. People who see the world clearly are often seen as insane, because a clear view of the world reveals a pretty dark sight."

Again you are saying that people who are considered insane to be able to see the world clearly. What's to say that others see the world clearly and just disagree with you. A LOT of people are likely like that. Yet you've written them off as stupid or ignorant and on your 'To be killed' list.

I think people are generally too fundamentally ignorant to actually accept what I have to say. I say it because I believe that's what needs to be done, but I'm not going to waste my time elaborating."

To be honest, that is one of the stupidest things I think you've said.  A lot of people do accept things, but they are willing to work within the system to try and change it. Not smash it to pieces. Most people, I think, would disagree with your view. You seem to be automatically dismissing people who do disagree as stupid and ignorant.

If you feel that way about people, why did you start this thread in the first place?

[Will]

Well, to be fair, he didn't start the thread.  It was split off of the thread of the same name in On-Topic.  Still, that's even more inexplicable, really.  It's a rather angry, malicious response to something very benign.  With no apparent desire to explain or back up the content therein.  Why post it, if that's the case?

[AtlasEros]

I'm a bit late on this thread but I voted.  It took about 10 minutes of time total.  There were also 3 issues on my ballot, since there were issues on ballots across the country, this leads me to find the reason of not voting because you didn't want to vote for either of the people that ran for a position to be less than valid.  I've heard lots of excuses for not voting, I've always looked at them as laziness.  Even if you don't want to vote for a person, you can write in votes & there may be issues you could vote on, on that ballot.  Even though 1 vote is a tiny thing, it does give you a tiny bit of power over the direction of your country or state. 

[ManyMindsManyVoices]

"I'm in a foul mood, particularly concerning politics, so I'm going to just start and see where this rant goes, like all the others. Let me start by saying, I really don't care how people view me, or what people think about my practices, thing is, I've dealt with enough arguments and debates to understand that people rarely consider an entire argument, they usually just follow up on the last thing said, and if something is left unsaid, it clearly means nothing. Which is why I generally end my arguments prematurely, with a statement that it's simply to complex to waste my time arguing about."

"To clarify on the point that my argument is too difficult to put into words, I should say, I could probably do it, but I would have to write a couple thousand words, and still, it would be a poor representation. The fact of the matter is, I have tried to explain it to the open-minded and been shut down because people have had stupidity drilled into them day after day after day after day. It just isn't worth arguing over, when I know close-minded people will remain close-minded. I make my point, because I refuse not to, because I am the lesser man if I make no attempt to enlighten others."

"If you are so blind as to not see all the stupidity and evil in humans around you, then that is pathetic. If you can't see where something is wrong if even one human being suffers while another lives in luxury, then don't begin to judge me. A million men have stood in the face of death rather than be tortured and forced to live under someone's shoe, and the truth is, death is the better option. Why am I enlightened? That's simple, because I refuse to turn a blind eye on the world. You might see a homeless man and turn away, or even offer him change... However, you cannot begin to explain to him why he has to live the way he does, while you do not. I have given up on this world, because I cannot stand alone against the waves of ignorant masses."

"As for you, Atlas, you apparently missed the idea of Anarchy. Voting on ISSUES is still supporting a worthless and failing system. I'm still voting against thousands of stupid people. So it isn't laziness, it isn't even a statement, I just don't care. In the end, if it's that important, I'll make it happen. If I can't, I'll die trying, and everyone who has to drown in the sea of stupidity, should have stepped up and done something about it, not with a piece of paper and an opinion, but with will and blood. I hate to watch people suffer, but with the world in the state that it's in, I simply let it go because people simply allow the suffering, or suffer because they are ignorant."

"I can't relieve my misanthropy any more here, because, in the end, I can't really speak my mind here. Even if I could, I would be screaming at the deaf."

[Will]

Rants go in the Bad & Ugly.