-
Saved!It amazes me how homemaking and childbearing is looked down upon by feminists as being unequal of a man's career. It's fucking miles harder! I appreciate everything you good women do, believe me.
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … I think it's more of a case of not being what defines a woman's job. And, like, I'm sure it's not the case for every feminist, as I've met my share of psychotic feminists, we all have. But it's like, if a couple has a child it doesn't necessarily means the woman has to be the one to take care of the house and the baby. Men should be able to do so as well, of course this will always depend on the family. A woman doing it is no sign of weakness on her part and should certainly not be seen as such. But hey! We guys should be able to do the same! -
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … I think feminists focus too much on trying to deny the stereotypes, and I think that, in general, this is a wrong way to look at things. It's fine if you do and like things that are "stereotypical" of your gender, race, or whatever. It's just that you shouldn't be confined to it. If you want to be a manly woman that plays football and farts loudly in public, that's fine, but if another woman wants to stay at home and loves to try make-up on her free time, shit, let her be, that's her right as well. Be you, and don't judge other people for being them, regardless of how stereotypical or not it is.
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … Oh yeah, Claire is a manly woman that supports Everton and can outfart me, nevermind outdrink me. We're equal, always have been, always will. But we're a team first and foremost. She is better, by nature, at being a homemaker. I'm better, by nature at grafting, and we work as a team. Now, I know sometimes this isn't always the case, some women have great jobs and it works better for the man to be a stay home husband, and that's great if it works, sometimes I wish I could instead of working 56 hours a week. But being honest I'm not that type, I'm kinda strict and structured, it's my way or nothing and I won't change, I'm not all in on it, it isn't natural to me. Claire just adapted to motherhood brilliantly, it's natural to her. But back to equality I think we mostly have it now. Equal rights in society ect, it's all there now. All I want to say is listen to nature, being the best in your team at a certain job makes you valuable. -
Saved!NodleyEditing … Think of it this way: The woman does the important job of raising the children correctly whilst the man provides money and food for her to do it. It's the same thing worded differently but just as true.
-
Saved!DJ_JJSliderEditing … I just figured that the feminist fight for equal rights was just a way to escape from the kids. I mean, it kind of is, but...oh forget it. -
Saved!NodleyEditing … It just might be. It's the hardest job ever. Rewarding but hard, and I'm not built to do it 24 hours a day, I'm a natural provider. Like a male lion! I kill some shit so you can eat then I sleep all day whilst you raise the kids non stop.
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … But feminism can be completely proven bullshit when you ask the questions of raising the next generation of children. It's possibly the most important job there is! It's nature, you're better at it. You're the MVP! You can vote and take good jobs and all that shite, we don't care, but don't ignore nature or you suck as a woman.
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … Female lions are the ones that hunt. Male lions generally stay in the territory protecting it.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Egalitarianism >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Feminism -
Saved!NodleyEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Some feminists will tell you those are the same thing. When people argue over labels like these, each individual will come in with a different understanding of what those labels even mean. Personally I believe feminism means the adoption of femininity aka becoming a trap tyvm :) -
Saved!NodleyEditing … Egalitarianism combined with doing what you're best at is perfect. Somebody should make that a thing.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … "People who believe a person should act a certain way based on their genitals are morons" - Silent Gamer -
Saved!NodleyEditing … It's nothing to do with genitals it's about nature. It's about doing what you're best at in the team. No defender ever went up front in a cup final because they thought they could score goals better than a striker.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Exactly, regardless of whether they are a man or a woman.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … why care what's natural, and what even defines what's natural? if a woman decides she doesn't want to stay home to care for a family, is she defying nature? her brain naturally evolved to be capable of such decisions, and so it naturally came to wish for something other than staying home. a home unlike anything else we see in nature, at that.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Personally I couldn't live a life where I gotta stay home and care for kids, and put career aside. If a woman feels the same, I don't see how that's unnatural.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Men and women have certain strengths and weaknesses based on their physiology and hormones and are more likely to want to do certain things as a result, but it doesn't necessarily mean they WILL end up that way or that they should act a certain way/take on a certain role if they don't want to. But people also shouldn't be shamed for wanting to do what they are instinctively driven to do. I'd say feminists that yell at women for wanting to be mothers can suck my dick but they'd probably try and do me for sexual harassment.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … A feminist I know calls those folk "fake feminists." Cuz ya know, it's a really broad label that encompasses some totally opposed beliefs.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … We're in an age where life is so sedentary people can do basically anything they want and it's gr8
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I just hate the word feminist in general. Belief in gender equality is the norm now, we don't need a label for it.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … personally i dont identify as a feminist cuz i hate w*men
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I'd make a joke about keeping my woman locked in the kitchen but that implies a female would come within 50 feet of me without fleeing in terror
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … I once turned down a w*man by telling her I was gay. Not because I'm attracted to men, no, but because I could never be attracted to a w*man.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … husky slow down buddy
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … W*Man sounds like a mascot MC for an old anti-drug advert
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … "Exactly, regardless of whether they are a man or a woman" I agree. But 99.9 % of women are better at some things then men and men are likewise 99.9% better at other things. Nobody should be under pressure to be equal because we're not. A few people can, but most can't.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Well we are equal in terms of how much value we have as people, but yeah, each gender TENDS to have certain strengths and weaknesses because of all that gender dimorphic evolutionary goodness. It doesn't apply to everyone, but most people. How much testosterone/oestrogen a person's body naturally produces seems to play a pretty big part in it.
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … Feminism has become a dirty word, the very things they claim to be fighting for is laughable imo. I'd have time for those suffragettes back in the day but this bunch are just idiots.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Hear hear
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … Let's all vote equally, value each other equally, but do our own part. You wouldn't expect a woman to carry the shopping bags home whilst a man carried nothing right? Strengths and weaknesses, teamplay.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I would because my hands are already full carrying all this S W A G
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … I'm glad I don't have to worry about genders. With all the swapping going on, I imagine it'd be tough for a straight/gay person to know what you were getting into.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … I remember back in primary school when girls had their own social group but by 13 or so we all mingled. My friends are my friends, I don't change anything if they're male or female, we're are all equal in the social sense for sure. But would you expect your girl mate to back you up in a fight? Fuck no, I'd be horrified if they got put punched by a man, because we're not equal physically.
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … I sometimes feel like were all angry at 1% of the population that just happens to be very loud.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … A 1% who has much more influence than the rest of us because they're willing to play dirty and be cruel
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … do they? if I go and ask a feminist, I think they'd say anti-feminists have far more influence. from my pov it just looks like a lotta folk think it's them against the world.
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … Just be nice and do your job and the world is with you.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … That's a whole separate rabbit hole I ain't gonna go down today Crusty but I disagree with said feminist strongly
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … as a staunch individualist I believe we ought to choose our "jobs" but I get that you stand with personal decisions. Colgate that's okay too.
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … What about teamplay husky? Do you believe in that? Best person for the job does their part?
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Some people are just solo players
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … I don't know which label I am, but I believe consent is pretty much the most important thing. Aside from that, I believe you can do whatever the fuck you want. Tired of everyone telling people how they should act.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Being part of a team doesn't mean rolling over and taking the job someone else doesn't want. Sometimes if your desires don't match with the team's, you find a different team. I favor the individual over the collective, I'm a liberties guy over all else.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … not a fan of your totalitarian commie thing sorry nod
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … The way I see it is there are a lot of people who'd love to have the teamwork kind of dynamic you clearly value Nodley, but there are also certain people who are more introspective/"different" for a lack of better word and prefer a different way of life, and don't want to compromise the lifestyle that makes them happy in order to fit into a team, and would much rather be with someone like-minded who they can relate to rather than an 'other half' who makes up for their own weaknesses, and don't really care about any shortcomings they have as a result. Either is fine imo. Just as long as the more individualistic person doesn't act like a victim if their decisions don't work for them.
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … I do like the idea of communism tbh. It needs to be changed of course, it's too easy to exploit. We need to be voting people in and out. But the ideas are sound. To me anyway.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Could you elaborate on those effects
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … wOW thanks colby great now I look crazy
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I decided I really don't want to risk a communism debate but basically china/the soviet union/venezuela/etc
-
Saved!DJ_JJSliderEditing … Probably more like China. Minus all the absolute anti-Christian propaganda, maybe.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … but as an economic system, why would it have to end up that way? I mean, personally I don't think full communism or socialism is at all possible without restricting the human rights of everyone involved, but that doesn't mean a classless, truly equal communist society is actually impossible. personally I can't see it ever functioning well in a *large* society, but the thing about humans is that we tend to suck at doing, or even comprehending things we've never seen done before. Then once we've seen one guy run the mile in under four minutes, suddenly high schoolers are capable of doing it.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Communism requires the restricted rights of everyone involved though, because to achieve it you need to take peoples' private property by force so that it can become publicly owned, and there will always be entrepreneurs in any society who have ideas to make extra money, which would contradict the communist system, and the options are to either let it be and just end up with capitalism again or do what Russia, China, etc did and suppress these people by force, therefore becoming tyrannical. But if you disagree that's fine, I really really suck at debating and would rather just agree to disagree
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … Democracy doesn't work, it's a lie and ultimately decided by money so fuck it, at least communism has a chance. #brexit #betrayal
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … See you in the gulags Nodley
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Communism isn't a contradiction of democracy though Nodley, it's a contradiction of capitalism. You could technically have a democratic communist state, it would just be kinda weird and communism probably wouldn't last very long in it.
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … I'll be a commisar ruling the gulags because I value teamwork and equality. You hippies who want to escape your responsibilities will soon be tortured to death.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Colgate, nothing needs to be taken by force if everyone involved agrees to it. This is why I can't see it happening in a large society. An entrepreneur can just as well exist with ideas only to benefit the rest of society, the aggrandizement of money could be largely a concept held by those surrounded by capitalism--as humans are bad at putting together original thoughts, and are wired by their environment. Russia and China also didn't just have communism, they HAD an elite class, and the poor working classes didn't live under any decent means. There's no reason communism would require that. Look, I'm a MASSIVE anti-commie and I disagree with you, does that mean anything in the "well, he's not promoting communism, so he could just be making sense" camp?
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … You can also have democracy and communism nodfriend, one's a system of government and the other's an economic ideology. The two can be compatible. In an ideal commie society, where everyone is equal, democracy would probably be a necessity.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … They wouldn't though. I know I don't want to give my shit up, it's mine. No chance in hell everyone involved would just give up what's theirs, so it would have to be taken. But seriously, I forget basically everything I ever learn as soon as I learn it, all I remember is the impression it left on me, I've heard extremely convincing reasons communism is a buttfuck of a bad idea and I don't remember what they are and that's why I suck at debating and aaahhhh pressure
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … Capitalism is bad. Every problem we have in society is because of money. Money should be distributed more evenly, but only when deserved.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Well Columbine, just because you can't live in a communist society doesn't mean communism is bad. To many commies, that just means you've gotta live in your capitalist world while they go live in their commieland. And you don't really have to give your shit up. No reasonable communist is gonna say "you can't have a TV, some other people don't!" or "GET THE FUCK OUT OF THAT HOUSE!" -- that interpretation of communism comes from a totally poisoned well.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … They are all shitty ideas, because free will is the enemy of all societies.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Capitalism has both good and bad sides, people are just convinced into thinking it's purely bad because people love to shine a light on all its flaws. It's not perfect, but it's the best system we've ever developed.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Look, if you ask me, it IS a bad idea--especially for people LIKE ME, because I don't believe it's possible without limiting the freedoms of others, and also because I'm an ambitious person who does want room for growth of my personal means.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I was just speaking hypothetically, if I owned a means of production I wouldn't want to give it up, and you can't expect everyone within a state being communismified to give theirs up, because they have no reason to. The only way they would have reason to was if they were being pressured to by a tyrannical government. The reason communism is bad is because it's destroyed every society it's been tried in and made its people miserable (and dead). You can turn it into something good maybe, sure, but then it wouldn't be communism, you'd have created something new.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Coolness, can't you see that's sort of how you're looking at communism? You could just be shining a lot on the bad sides, but like with US/UK's capitalism, it just needs tweaking--personally I think capitalist societies need to keep large corporations under check, as, though our capitalist *governments* may promise us freedoms (well, us americans), our corporations threaten that. Perhaps to keep our capitalism healthy, corporations should be limited from controlling my freedoms. Perhaps our healthy economy should also be used to boost everyone living under this capitalist government, let them thrive, and to thus energize that capitalist economy.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … okay right now we're all typing at the same time, and so each reply seems to be reaching to a comment five posts back
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Well no, because capitalism so far has worked. Very well. There are some people it's disadvantaged, and that sucks, but there are plenty more it's advantaged. Communism has led to nothing but suffering in every instance it's been tried. I'm kinda confused as to why you're saying communism is bad and then arguing against me saying communism is bad
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … CAN WE JUST AGREE TO DISAGREE I AM BAD AT ARGUING DSDFAGA
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Capitalism is great until the assholes get the money.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Colgate, just because someone makes a functioning communist society doesn't mean it's not communism. Just like there's good and bad capitalism, there may very well be good and bad communism. Just because the USSR and China suck doesn't mean nodley's communist cult compound does. Those people may have settled that island with the goal of creating their own communist utopia, and maybe they'll have truly created it. Converting a state to communism? Oh, I *highly* doubt that could go over well, and if it did, it would take generations. Enough time for no individual to ever have anything actually taken from them.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Communism is great until the freeloaders get involved.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … But while the assholes get the money so do the good people. And through taxation the poor earn money through the assholes' successes. It benefits everyone involved yo.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Just because one HAS worked doesn't mean the other DOESN'T work. I'm arguing against your reasons that communism is bad because I'm not okay agreeing with everyone who comes to the same end conclusion as me, I care about the method. I think Hillary Clinton's a piece of shit, and it's not because she runs a pedo cult.
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … We need a combination of it all. But no people on either side are willing to compromise because it'll cost them their own good life. Me, I don't care. I'm a hard worker and under any system I'll do ok. I do think the wealthy have too much power though and that has to change, and it will the way things are going. Back in the day rich people could do whatever but now with the internet they're called out to the world within seconds. But the downside to modern society is that they are getting called out by entitled pricks who don't want to work but want money. At least some of the rich earned it.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … actually our taxation results in many millionnaires paying less in taxes than their own secretaries, despite earning more by multiple figures. the amount of corporations paying 0% in income tax has actually doubled under Trump so far, and those companies are still receiving massive tax refunds. we're paying our rich, not taxing them. the taxes on the poor have also gone up under Trump--for the rich, they've gone down.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Nah, Cool Gent, because the assholes don't pay taxes, and blow up poor people.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Well sure, if a group of like-minded people moved away with the intention of creating a new state with communist ideas, sure, maybe that would work. I think we were just talking past each other for a bit there. But then what happens when an entrepreneur of this state decides to start an enterprise? He starts making money from labour, paying his workers, etc. Now you have income inequality, and a class has been created of people within this enterprise earning more than those living simply off the state. What happens then?
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Holy shit a lot of replies were just posted
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I'm just going to bury my head in the sand and yell at myself that I'm right over and over
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Yeah in the US it's insanely difficult for anyone born under poor circumstances to change their place in society--and it's nearly impossible for anyone born rich to ever lose their place. The US isn't one society, it's many, separated by a vast class disparity. The government has a safety net to rescue most elites, no matter the crimes they commit, and the masses are to be leeched off by those paying to have the law written in their favor.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Y'all agreeing with each other and don't see it.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I KNOW AAAHHHH
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Coolboy, the thing is, that scenario doesn't have to happen. If in that society, entrepreneurs haven't been taught to think of money as highly as we do, then his entrepreneurship might actually go towards the betterment of society more than the elevation of his own status.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Agreeing on the end point isn't all that matters. Someone can tell me "I'm an atheist because God's been proven to not exist," and I'm gonna heavily disagree with that buddy.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I don't think they'd have to be taught that, money has inherent value, anyone can see that. If you have money, you can use that money to acquire things, and knowing that money will be coveted. As soon as anything has value people want it. It's just human nature.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Also, clinical psychopathy is and will always be a thing. There will always be people with a drive to further their own ends at the expense of everyone else.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … There's also a value in the betterment of society--a value that all communists would seem to favor over money. If to covet money was human nature, why would we have communists?
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … So what does matter to you Husky?
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Psychopathy also has many treatments, and 99% of all psychopaths fit into society without sticking out. Fulfillment for psychopaths doesn't normally come through elevation in the business world, it usually comes from just getting good recognition.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Mr. Gamer, I care about getting to the truth of the matter. If the reasons someone came to the conclusion as me look faulty, then I wanna find out who's at fault, and for millennia that has been the purpose of debate o/ (oh, backslash is broken...) - I want to see reality in a way that conforms to reality, so I want to find out what's actually right.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Every one of those communists has an element of greed in them, it's just that in those people their desire to do what they think would better society wins out. But not all people are like that. Some people ignore societal values and form their own, sceptics question the morals they've been taught, some people simply have life experiences that teach them that they can only survive by getting ahead, and again, clinical psychopaths cannot be taught to cooperate with other people, because they just don't have that instinct within them. You will never have any society where everyone within it agrees on how things should be done. The initial people forming this society would, but their children may not, their grandchildren may not. If you could simply teach people to share the same values we wouldn't have any criminals.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Psychopathy doesn't have treatments. Socopathy does because that's conditioned, but if you're born without the ability to feel compassion or empathy for other people that's not something you can have implanted into you.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Recognition is a narcissistic desire, not a psychopathic one. A genuine psychopath doesn't care what others think about them because they don't feel any connection with people. It'd be like wanting recognition from a random NPC in a game.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Good man. Debate away then.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … But psychopaths DO cooperate with people--one of the most common jobs for psychopaths is surgery! Surgeons don't work alone! The cartoony depiction of psychopaths as purely impulsive and unfeeling is inaccurate. A lack of empathy doesn't mean one can't manage people through an intellectual process.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … And our environment shapes how we think. We can't really imagine how the second, third, fourth generation is going to think under a willfully communist society, because we haven't seen it.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … They CAN, but that doesn't mean they will. Yes, stable psychopaths exist, but a psychopath is many many many times more likely than the average person to say fuck everyone else and go on their own path.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Colgate, psychopathy and sociopathy often have loose definitions, and based on who you ask their definitions will often be swapped or even recognized as completely indistinct, but I've never heard them described in the way you're describing.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … No we can't predict it, but that's because not everyone thinks the same way. There will always always always always be radical thinkers, and a single radical thinker in a communist society is a threat, because communism requires conformity to be successful.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Almost ALL psychopaths are stable! Literally almost all! What you're talking about sounds like something out of a serial killer drama!
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … As I understand it a psychopath is a person born without empathy for other people, and a sociopath is a person whose morality has been twisted by life experiences. Then a narcissistic sociopath is a person who puts themselves so highly above others that anything they do is justified.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … That contradicts everything I've ever heard about psychopath Husky, where've you heard that?
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … But yea, I agree with the original post. Have a like, nodley
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Maybe a radical thinker would be enough to destroy a communist society, maybe it's impossible for one to last long without being a police state. But we can't really know that. Hell, it could easily be solved by allowing anyone who disagrees to move to a nearby state. Those who prefer their serene communism could remain in the land they've collectively claimed.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … HUSKY MY BRAIN IS SMALL STOP MAKING ME THINK
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … But why would they want to move to a nearby state? In a communist state there would be no competition. They'd be the only business in the entire state. If they moved they'd have other entrepreneurs to contend with.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Colgate, the most commonly accepted definitions I've read--having read a lot about it as well--are that both psychopaths and sociopaths lack empathy, but that psychopaths better fit into society, and sociopaths struggle to fit in social (hence the "socio"). Psychopaths I see generally described as charming, the sort of people who, despite their lack of empathy, can understand others through an intellectual process. Sociopaths lack the charm. Both of them are generally characterized as impulsive, but these conditions are measured on a scale, and I'm talking literally over 99% of psychopaths at least will function well in society. Most psychopaths probably won't even learn they've got a disordor.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I feel I should clarify by the way I'm saying all this as a penniless NEET
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … They wouldn't be the only private business in the state if there were no method for one to obtain a private business. It also wouldn't work if everyone who decided to be part of that communist state didn't support private business.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Aside from the definitions themselves that seems to fit in with how I understand them to actually behave, but I don't see how that contradicts the idea that they'd be more likely to be willing to get ahead at the expense of others
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … it's okay I don't disrespect your NEET lifestyle because I accept that the lifestyle of some isn't the lifestyle for everyone and that we all need different things to feel fulfilled
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Best solution I can come up with is just waiting till we are all one big shared consciousness and then having a vote on every single decision and purging the losers. Eventually we would be left with two thoughts. They would either come up with a new solution for survival's sake, or one would kill the other and be the only thought in the universe. Then they'd probably terminate themselves or create new thoughts out of loneliness.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … (I have worked by the way I am just very bad at job hunting one I've been booted from a job help)
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … The idea of being a shared consciousness utterly terrifies me. That whole philosophy that we'll become that someday makes no sense to me because there are too many people who value their individuality. I know I'd never agree to that.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … With most psychopaths, based on the definitions I'm most familiar with, there's no need for the "expense of others" as their fulfillment isn't normally monetary. Having folk look up to them in their ordinary workplace is enough. Seeing growth within their job also tends to be important. Even under communism, jobs would need to have managers, someone who knows the ins-and-outs of the job well enough to make sure the trainees are on the right track. That's recognition. Sociopaths though lmao they're basically retarded (by some definitions)
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … and also if they really do want more room for growth, the ideal commie society ought to allow folk in/out if their ideology so requires them to move. If the majority of society won't abide by private business, due to their own philosophy, then seeking that growth in the communist society is pointless. In a communist society where most people don't want to be communist, well, that's a whole 'nother deal.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … As I understand it though psychopaths have no reason to want to be looked up to by others. I get that you've read up on it a lot and I'm not doubting that you know what you're talking about but I find psychology fascinating so I've looked into it a lot too and I don't understand why a psychopath would need recognition from others. Why would they care? Without empathy, other people are meat bags that look like you. Why would they want esteem from meat bags?
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I'm also trying to weasel out of the commie debate in case you haven't NoticED
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Through an intellectual process, one can see that meatbags is a bit of a simplification. There can be a measured value in being looked up to by others. Part of why a desirable job like a surgeon's is so common amongst psychopaths. Something else usually favored by psychopaths and sociopaths is control, and again, I don't mean to extreme degrees, I mean enough where a decently noteworthy managerial position would suit. A psychopath doesn't need to be CEO to feel fulfilled if their position earns them respect, and allows them a measure of control.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … we don't have to look at it as a debate, it can just be a discussion of "hold up, can we find out what's most true here?"
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I guess that's true, but what I'm thinking here is that control isn't the only thing that's beneficial. Control only gets you so far. There's a lot more that can be desirable to a person, and money can get you all kinds of things that make your life more comfortable and enjoyable. So when you don't have to worry about what effect your actions have on other people, you have all kinds of advantages at your disposable that you can use to climb the -economic- ladder and earn more money, and more, and even more, and use tactics that no-one else would dream of, while using your psychopathic charm and intellect to keep others on your side. Isn't that sound?
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … And that's a fair way of looking at it but it's still definitively a debate and I am very bad at debates ;p
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … In an ideal communist society, most people would have the means to get themselves a fair amount of luxuries. I don't think most psychopaths have unlimited ambition either--remember, this is a population which almost entirely functions so normally in society that they aren't even observed as out of place. They also don't have unlimited charm (nor do they necessarily have greater intellect--they're humans without empathy, and they have certain drives, but certain intellectual games are often harder for psychopaths due to their general impulsiveness--based on the definitions I'm familiar with). A psychopath doesn't need to be the very top dog. They generally just need enough respect to feel fulfilled.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … I wouldn't agree to it either Cool Guy, but no-one said consent was a necessity. It will be forced like everything else. Free will and society are opposites. Well, not entirely. There is always that chance that everyone will agree on everything, all the time, forever and ever and ever. So either we stomp out free will (the current method) or we push for it's proliferation (dangerous). I'd prefer the latter.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … eh, good debate's mostly a back-and-forth of ideas, in the search of ideas that best fit reality, which are then replaced by other ideas after further debate. Then there's the debate I'm listening to, which is about the flat earth, and that is very much a debate for the sake of entertainment lmao
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … I want to unsubscribe from this thread now
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … ahahahaHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … I need to study a bit sociopathy to more accurately write Carny in my book
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Oh no when I said psychopathic intellect I meant the skills they tend to be better at than average, like the observing people and understanding how they work and whatnot. But the problem I see there is that a life of luxury is relative. If everyone has a fair amount of luxury, then no-one lives in luxury, that's the average. There'll be more out there that can make your life even more comfortable, and I can't envision there not being any people who want to reach out for that, psychopathic or no. We just can't assume that everyone living within this structure will play by its rules. There will always always be radicals and there will always always be people who for one reason or another desire more than they have. Even the most primal societies on earth have ambitious people. As long as there's a hierarchy there will be people who want to climb to the top of it. As long as there's more to be had there will be people who want more. As long as there's something to want there will be people who pursue it.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Wait you're writing a book Crash?
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … My overall point: communism could be hypothetically possible if such a society was formed only by people who agreed on their form of communism, and collectively decided to own the land they settled upon. Or hell, maybe they could spice it up with some private land, who knows, we'd have to ask these hypothetical commies. Then, members of new generations would be raised under this communist society where everyone had already agreed to go with communism, and so they'd see a non-forceful society, and so they'd be raised with the impression that communism works. Those that think otherwise, or find themself repressed, ought to be free to go--if this is a commie paradise, at least. And not "free to go" in a "WELL GET THE FUCK OUT" way, but in the "well, everyone else here has decided to collectively own everything, so it's not really possible for me to privately own my own business. I'd better bring this idea to the outside." Would it work out? We'd really have to watch and see. Hypothetically, such a functioning society seems to me like something that could exist. Personally, I don't think it would encompass a very large amount of land, but they may not even want that. And I'm sure by the time I post this there will be more to respond to...
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … Kinda. So far I got 3 chapters only (and in Portuguese) but yeah. About three sisters after their family breaks down when their older sister finally succumbs to disease and dies
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … What I mean is, the ideal communist society HAS ROOM for these radicals to exist--but if they want to pursue such radical ideas, and the overall society won't support them (and so, their radical ideas can't go anywhere), then the IDEAL communist society would allow them the freedom to come and go as they please.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … carny always seemed straight-up schizo to me
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Having listened to your point I agree that those first people who formed that society would live within a functional communist society, I just don't think it would last. There's no guarantee the next generations would share their values, and two problems arise: One, they may not WANT to move elsewhere, because the place they live is the only one they know; and two, staying there and trying out their ideas where they already live may be more beneficial to them. I get that we can't be certain of that, but that's just my point, nothing is certain, the future is chaos, but then -so are people-, and that's the factor I think will cause this communist society to collapse.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … Even if everyone in this communist society has to be a total buddhist and not value personal belongings in the fucking slightest, it's a hypothetical scenario that doesn't have to be bad just because it doesn't match with our ideals, and it doesn't have to enact force to keep from becoming capitalist, so long as the overall society doesn't support radical change.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Oh damn that's pretty cool Crash, I like tragic stories like that. So Carny's one of the sisters?
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … Shes gonna hear versions of her dead siblings in her head to stay "together" but shes also doesnt feel true empathy which is the main point of her storyline since her friend tried to understand and relate with her but cant
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … What I'm saying is that if they try out their ideas at home, and society is communist, then those ideas can't really expect to go anywhere. They can't start a business in a privately owned building, as privately owning a building may be impossible. Most people raised in a religion grow with the mindset that that religion is the best way to understand reality--those that grow in a functioning society grow with the mindset that that society is the best way to live through life. Those living under functioning communism are more likely to prefer communism, and those who don't aren't likely to face any support, nor even the possibility to pursue their ambitions. Not through force, but by lack of infrastructure or means for those ambitions to even start being realized. A communist society may not have any of the resources needed for one to start, say, a private business.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Damn man that's awesome, I hope you're able to finish it, I'd love to read it someday
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … I've joined you in the "also tired of this" gulag now
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Awesome let's stop I'm tired
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I totally get what you're saying and see where you're coming from, I just wish I was better at articulating my points
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … Thanks. I hope I finish too. The main story is about Carny's older sister, Aurora, as she kinda ruins her friendship due to her atitude.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … it's okay I get that, and it's part of why I spend so much time talking about my beliefs. It's something that has to be practiced. Look at something as simple as movie discussion--I HATE the feeling of loving or not liking a movie, but not really understanding WHY. But the more you talk about movies, and the more you sit and comprehend what specifically you liked or disliked, the more practiced you get at understanding your own thoughts and expressing them to others. Unfortunately, I don't think most movie critics are doing this...
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I'm kind of jealous actually, I love to brainstorm games and I have all these pet projects where I plan the worlds and stories and characters and get all excited for them but I'd never be able to actually make them, but books are so much easier if you're a decent writer, and there you are making progress on completing your book. That's great man.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … colgae pls pursue your dreams and achieve artistic fulfillment
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … See I can't relate to that at all, I don't need to know why I enjoy things, all I care about is how they make me feel, as long as I can understand that feeling I'm happy. Maybe that's why some people enjoy discussing the pros and cons of things they like and I just feel fury when I see people shitting on things I like and want to buttfuck people who share my love for them.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Thank Husk
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … imagine being able to look back someday, and seeing a memory of somebody that most people only imagine being in their future
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I feel like these are very profound words but I don't know what they mean
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … Im really slow with my progress tho. I'm pretty happy to have finished a short horror story, inspired on PT. I need to pass it to my computer tho
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … We'll make a Favslist page for it and we'll all push to keep it on the trending every day so that when Favslist becomes world famous when it's alive again your story will be FAMOUS and you'll make MILLIONS
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … colby, what would make you happiest in life. big dreams. the things you fantasize about doing. the things you'd like to aspire to be.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Oh wow that's a deep question, uhhh
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I dunno, I don't really have any ambitions tbh. I guess the only possible one I want to talk about would be auteuring a game, that'd be awesome. I've accepted it probably won't happen though so it's not something I'll cry over if it's not something I experience.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … if you don't feel comfortable stating them, that's okay--but every moment you aren't chasing them is a moment you're putting off the happiness you want most. you don't want to get to that mid-life crisis and think "fuck, did I ever even try?" - it doesn't matter HOW BIG the aspiration, you gotta reach for it, or you'll never grasp it. doesn't matter how much competition there is. doesn't matter what percentage of folk succeed. how much do you want it? those others don't matter. this is your dream.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … well that's okay too i guess
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I guess I just don't really have that drive to go for big dreams and whatnot. I generally have very low motivation, but I'm moreorless content just keeping on keeping on. As long as I keep getting new Persona games I'll be a happy chappy.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … I consider games an art form and I think many artists would like you to feel fulfilled through their work as well
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … gOD the rain smells SO GOOD i LIVE FOR THIS SMELL
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I agree that it's an artform, or at least it can be if the creator wants it to be. It allows for pretty much any kind of expression other artforms do.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … but tbh I'd argue that most games as a service titles aren't ever intended to be a work of art, but an addictive loop intent on leeching off your wallet
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Mate imagine standing in it
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Eh, same goes for movies and music and they're still essentially an artform
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … related, I find this song profoundly saddening https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1Pb-cRbspA . god, imagine being like debbie. this song's a warning.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Oh no the music links are back
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … This is topical
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … lmao we should invite filly
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Fucking hell what is this. I stopped reading when you started arguing about the definition of psychopaths since that's entirely irrelevant to the conversation. You all did just confirm to me that I'm the most most lefty person here, though, so okay, that's not super surprising though. I'll post a long reply to all this later if I feel like it, though right now I'm going to watch youtube videos. -
Saved!Husky WingEditing … it's not irrelevant to the conversation WE were having
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … and pls if you like buttigieg you ain't very lefty pls pls
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … i'm typing this from vr ooooooOOOOoooOOOOoo
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … my life is lagging
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … ready player guy
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Buttigeig is okay. He's far from my favorite but he does interest me somewhat and I'd be willing to hear more. He's definitely the best out of the 40s and younger candidates, which by itself does matter to me since I'm tired of boomer rule. I have no intention of voting for him in a primary.
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … So we're all agreed that raising kids and homemaking is just as important as being the breadwinner, right?
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … But going 107 posts back up to where I went to bed and we were discussing communism/Capitalism etc. We should combine them all, take the best parts of each and make rules so it can't be abused. Like what the BBC has done, they've published their stars earnings. Anybody going into public office paid for by the taxpayers should have to make their finances available to view by anybody.
-
Saved!LizardTaroEditing … penis -
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … PI
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … LA
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … I actually wanna know how this conversation makes Zap think he's furthest left here, cuz that seems like impossible information to derive from a conversation about communism (unless you prescribe to a one-dimensional political spectrum, I guess)
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Dude, I'm an internationalist intersectional dem soc who wants to nationalize the energy sector and rapidly change to only renewables and nuclear by 2030 (maybe a bit later), establish a robust UBI, forgive all student-debt, make free college, establish robust single-payer with vision and dental included, create a reparation fund for black and indigenous people, and raise taxes sky high on high-earners and corporations while closing a ton of military bases and expanding our diplomatic corps to a ridiculous degree and becoming a broker in every single humanitarian and human rights crisis in the world. Oh, and open the borders while we're at it. Husky, the closest to another leftist I've seen here is you but even you keep on throwing out all these "communism can't work" statements.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Deleted by himself
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … That's aside from all the futurist stuff I want.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … All of you (and Sanders, for that matter) are discussing the best way to live the current paradigm as you see it. I see the current paradigm as fundamentally flawed and archaic and envision a new one. I'm not bragging or anything when I'm saying I feel like the most left-leaning person here. It just seems evident based on the 60+ or however many comments I read. Granted not everyone has been involved.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Also I misspoke when I said Buittigeig was the best of the 40s and under crowd. I actually think Yang is. I was tired, I guess. Buttigeig is second best out of that group I guess.
-
Saved!MrZAPEditing … Oh, and @Nodley There's nothing wrong with homemaking so long as you acknowledge that it's not inherent to the gender, that either gender can do it, and that either gender (or both, as is generally the case) can be earners. As far I know you do believe all of those things, so cool. No one in the circles I travel in thinks that homemaking is worth less than being an earner either.
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I believe all people are equal except for people who eat loud food at the cinema, fuck those guys amirite
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … Nobody is equal, but we all have our values. No two people are exactly the same.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … Importance is subjective = No-one is truly important = We are all equally unimportant = We are all equal.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … but zap, those beliefs you've brought up don't have anything to do with what you could've concluded from this discussion. Everything you've suggested there is pretty moderate.
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … and I spent this whole conversation arguing for how communism, a system I wouldn't wanna live in, could work, wtf are you talking about. and what would that have to do with how far left I am? tbh I don't think you're very far left--I think you're just very much a democrat.
-
Saved!LizardTaroEditing … I've concluded something very important from this discussion.
-
Saved!LizardTaroEditing … Ur mom gay lol
-
Saved!Husky WingEditing … im fuckin crying right now omg
-
Saved!NodleyEditing … Some people are more important than others but we've had that discussion before.
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … I know, and I disagreed
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … I agree, Tommy Wiseau is far more important than anybody else
-
Saved!Silent GamerEditing … YOU'RE TEARING ME APART, COOL GUY!
-
Saved!HelendlocEditing … Keep your stupid comments in your pocket!
-
Saved!MasterCrashEditing … Yall fuckboise
-
Deleted!
