Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Paleo And Politics

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Rojo View Post
    Common sense would have you eating a low-fat diet. Your "common sense" is internalizing the values of your rulers. That's ok, lots of people are fooled. But to pretend your "damning-the-man" is ludicrous.
    "The shrill gloats and exultatios of A [the welfare parasite], who has got something for nothing, drown out the repining of B [the taxpayer] who has lost something that he earned. B, in fact, becomes officially disreputable, and the more he complains the more he is denounced and detested. He is moved, it appears, by a kind of selfishness which is incompatible with true democracy. He actually believes that his property is his own, to remain in his keeping until he chooses to part with it. He is told at once that his information on the point is innaccurate, and his morals more than dubious. In an idal democracy, he learns, property is at the disposal, not of its owners, but of politicians, and the chief business of politicians is to collar it by fair means or foul, and redistribute it to those whose votes have put them in office."

    --H.L Mencken, Baltimore Sun, May 12, 1940, in A Second Mencken Chrestomathy (1995), pp. 48-49.
    Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
    Starting Weight: 294 pounds
    Current Weight: 235 pounds
    Goal Weight: 195 pounds

    Comment


    • Originally posted by sakura_girl View Post
      That is true. I'm not saying things are necessarily directly connected. I believe that the system balances out, and there is never any one way we can measure that. For example, if I buy a car from a Toyota dealer - that dealership will gain immediate profit and last longer as a business. Versus I buy a car from a Toyota dealer and that has an effect on the Toy industry in Europe.
      Many systems have linkages even though they are not explicitly linked. Is that what you are thinking of? For example, if the people who buy from Toyota dealers also buy European toys that's a pretty direct link even though those two industries have no explicit linkage. If Toyota dealers and the European toy industry use the same (or exchangeable) currency, that's a less direct but still relevant link. It's hard to completely uncouple systems that are tied together by something in common like that. That's why ideas like "rising tide", "trickle down", et cetera end up being so popular and so contentious.

      Originally posted by sakura_girl View Post
      Fair enough on creativity; I can't really make a response to that because we'd just be arguing over subjective definitions XD


      Originally posted by sakura_girl View Post
      About watts and stripes - how do you know they don't exchange? Maybe the fact that it was painted meant that it was more expensive, therefore affecting the cost for which you bought the machine to begin with, making it less efficient. I think it's more complicated than that. That is why I can only look at things at a system; because it already contains all the connected things in a vacuum, and then you can sort of hypothesize on the system rather than the details of the system that are prone to be incorrect based on nonsensical values.
      Stripes can be an indicator, but indicators are not the same as what is indicated.

      Race cars go fast.
      In order to go fast, race cars are expensive.
      In order to pay for expensive cars, race car owners seek out sponsorships from businesses.
      In order to provide a quid-pro-quo for sponsorship, race car owners put sponsor logos (advertisements) on their vehicles.
      Therefore, fast cars are indicated by business logos painted on the outside.

      Does that mean that putting an STP sticker on your Toyota will make it go faster?

      Yes, that is why I never answer anything in this thread when I am brain-dead from work xD
      We are opposites then.


      Originally posted by Rojo View Post
      Common sense would have you eating a low-fat diet. Your "common sense" is internalizing the values of your rulers. That's ok, lots of people are fooled. But to pretend your "damning-the-man" is ludicrous.
      To be picky...

      Conventional Wisdom would have you eating a low-fat diet.

      Common Sense says that since our bodies extract everything we need to live from our food, and we have only one "eat" signal, eating excess calories (as indicated by gaining unhealthy body fat) is an indication that some need (a trace nutrient, for example) isn't being satisfied by the food being eaten and our body is responding by signaling us to eat more.

      Convenience is what you were thinking of. It's convenient if you internalize the values would-be rulers want you to hold, because doing so makes you easier to direct. Even there you had a critical flaw: would-be rulers don't want you to internalize their values, they want you to internalize values that are beneficial to the would-be rulers. Would-be rulers hold entirely different values than they would ever want you to hold.

      Three very different ideas. I guess it's understandable that you mixed them up since they all start with the letter 'C'.
      Last edited by Him; 01-31-2013, 12:37 PM.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Rojo View Post
        Garden-variety authoritarian.
        So, you think that since I believe the government has a duty and legitimate role to protect the lives and property of its civilians from those that mean to do them harm, I'm authoritarian? My god, you are officially the dumbest, most idiotic person I've ever talked to.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Rojo View Post
          Common sense would have you eating a low-fat diet. Your "common sense" is internalizing the values of your rulers. That's ok, lots of people are fooled. But to pretend your "damning-the-man" is ludicrous.
          You really don't have very many functioning brain-cells, do you?

          Just because I'm not sitting in my own filth and raping under-age girls in a park while posting to Facebook on my apple product I'm not against "the man"? Fuck off. I guarantee you I've done more to distance myself from the system wherever legally, fiscally, and logistically possible, and do more every year, than any of those losers living in Zuccotti Park begging for the government to step in and cradle them and be their nannies.

          Comment


          • The more you name-call, the more you lose.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Rojo View Post
              The more you name-call, the more you lose.
              To whom is that addressed?
              Starting Date: Dec 18, 2010
              Starting Weight: 294 pounds
              Current Weight: 235 pounds
              Goal Weight: 195 pounds

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Rojo View Post
                The more you name-call, the more you lose.
                I don't have to win with the likes of you. I've posted facts, you've posted lies and ignored my facts. I really couldn't give a shit if you think I'm "losing".

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Primal Moose View Post
                  ...Just because I'm not sitting in my own filth and raping under-age girls in a park while posting to Facebook on my apple product I'm not against "the man"?...
                  Is there only one The Man? I thought it was more nuanced than that.

                  "In the Southern U.S. states, the phrase came to be applied to any man or any group in a position of authority, or to authority in the abstract. ..."

                  The Man is whoever is in a position of authority over you. If you are a renter, your landlord is The Man. If you own a house, the county tax assessor is The Man. If you have student debt, banks holding that student debt are The Man, and so on.

                  I suspect that the Occupy people and the Tea Party people are EQUALLY against The Man. It's just that the Occupy people are mostly low income/high debt people, therefore their The Man is whoever owns their debt. On the other hand the Tea Party people are more likely to be low debt/higher income people, therefore their The Man is whoever is collecting taxes. The fact that The Mans are different doesn't mean that either group is less passionate or dedicated to their cause. Nor that either group is right about who's The Man.

                  Comment


                  • I wasn't the one who used the term "the man". Rojo did, that is why I was quoting him.

                    And for the record, I never claimed to be, or claim membership of, either one of those groups. I believe they both completely missed the mark.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Primal Moose View Post
                      I wasn't the one who used the term "the man". Rojo did, that is why I was quoting him.
                      And I was responding to someone who said libertarians are "damn-the-man".

                      Comment


                      • If everyone has their own The Man, then groups with completely different goals can work in direct opposition while equally engaged in fighting The Man. That seems to render Rojo's point (X isn't fighting The Man, Y is!) moot and/or outright wrong. The claim that Occupy is fighting The Man doesn't reduce the fact that Libertarians are fighting The Man, and wouldn't even if Occupy and Libertarians were in complete opposition (which would be a gross oversimplification).
                        Last edited by Him; 01-31-2013, 01:58 PM.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Rojo View Post
                          Common sense would have you eating a low-fat diet. Your "common sense" is internalizing the values of your rulers. That's ok, lots of people are fooled. But to pretend your "damning-the-man" is ludicrous.
                          Common sense about human evolutionary diets is what lead me to the premise of why we should possibly eat a primal/paleo style diet. Your definition of "commons sense" is different from most anyone else. Common sense (not popular political opinion) is how one science theory replaces another.
                          Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Scott F View Post
                            Common sense about human evolutionary diets is what lead me to the premise of why we should possibly eat a primal/paleo style diet. Your definition of "commons sense" is different from most anyone else. Common sense (not popular political opinion) is how one science theory replaces another.
                            Common:
                            1. belonging equally to, or shared alike by, two or more or all in question: common property; common interests.
                            2. pertaining or belonging equally to an entire community, nation, or culture; public: a common language or history; a common water-supply system.
                            3. joint; united: a common defense.
                            4. widespread; general; ordinary: common knowledge.
                            5. of frequent occurrence; usual; familiar: a common event; a common mistake.


                            I would say that encapsulates the low-fat paradigm most people struggle under.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Him View Post
                              If everyone has their own The Man, then groups with completely different goals can work in direct opposition while equally engaged in fighting The Man. That seems to render Rojo's point (X isn't fighting The Man, Y is!) moot and/or outright wrong.
                              Except the black block was literally fighting the Man. Do I have to type that again?

                              And FTR, I don't commend black block tactics (which isn't really Occupy, but an adjunct). I just feel I should point out the above.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Scott F View Post
                                The quest for efficiency and problem solving is what caused previous societies to eventually collapse

                                Joseph Tainter - The Colapse of Complex Societies

                                https://www.google.com/search?q=coll...iw=320&bih=416

                                There's 7 videos
                                Thank you very much, Scott. That was an excellent presentation. It combines history, peak energy, and economics. I'd recommend everyone listen to it.

                                It also presents the first rational explanation for the change in the culture of business that I have heard. That the increasing complexity of production requires an increasing control and complexity of control of the behavoir of humans. And it is that 'increasing control' is one of the factors, and a necessary factor, that is involved in bigger Gov't, bigger businesses, bigger organizations in everything.

                                Which Libertarians greatly dislike.
                                Last edited by Cryptocode; 01-31-2013, 05:00 PM.
                                "When the search for truth is confused with political advocacy, the pursuit of knowledge is reduced to the quest for power." - Alston Chase

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X