the_rebel_alliance [.:..The SeeR ..:.] I've been referring it to as a much needed "Revolution" for some time now, but what I really ought to call it is The Rebel Alliance! But If I was to found such an organization, would I get any support? Would there be any courage among the masses? Would I myself act accordingly? I think so. If the department_of_homeland_security gains control_of_China, and the Red_Star_of_Russia re-instates the Cold_War, then we, as americans, are no_longer_free. Because we unwillingly are financiers (via our tax dollars) of the most formidable World Terrorists... AKA The US Government! If and when that time comes, I'll stand my ground and RESIST! WHO'S WITH ME?! 021130 ... the spork i am 021130 ... screwing for virginity i am 021201 ... [.:..The SeeR ..:.] All Right! We are three members strong! (Assuming that two or more of us are not just the same person using multiple names.) First of all, Do you think it's safe to talk here? What if they are listening... Well, I'm sure we won't be considered as a threat. I've never started a revolution before... either of you guys have any experience? Motivational Recruitment Speeches are my specialty. That and keen backwoods survival skills... and a bb gun! Ok... First order of business... Someone please find and post: The_Constitution_of_the_United_States_of_America We may need it. 021201 ... Dafremen I'm with you. If you want my help that is. I'm a strong back and a big mouth with the best of intentions and I'm unstoppable, just ask anyone that knows me. It'd be refreshing to be a part of something that someone else is organizing for a change. I get tired of being accused of wanting to lead a cult or something. I just want change and I want it as soon as possible. If you decide that you don't want my help, well...like I said, I'm on your side anyway. Peace, propz and on with the revolution. 021201 ... [.:..The SeeR ..:.] Welcome, Daffy... [I do have one question... isn't it paradoxical if you and the anti-daffy are on the same team? I hope your two personalities can work together nicely :) ] Ok, Daffy brings up a good point in TAKING_IT_TO_THE_STREETS that I want to touch upon... Before we experience an outer revolution we all need to undergo a serious inner_revolution! Like the Jedi, we must become congruently aligned with the Positive Life_Force of the Universe. (Be One with the will of God, to put it in Earthly terms.) I personally like the work of Ghandi, and believe we can achieve our agenda non-violently. As for what we determine our agenda to become remains to be seen. Is our agenda simply to Rebel against the evil empire? Perhaps... for now anyway. But we can widdle this down to a more specific purpose as we mature and develop our Alliance. Now... this is a Round Table... so please place your thoughts upon it also. 021202 ... screwing for virginity i personally agree that all successful revolutons must begin with an internal revolution. I am ashamed to admit however, that i am not well versed in ghandi. all i know is that he was an indiam who used non violent means to help break britans hold on india. please, if you have any good books or websites i would love to read up on particulars. and jsut to let yall know, ive been feeling that a huge change needs to take place, but i had no idea others felt the same. "let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or intended against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed." Jefferson 021203 ... Dafremen Seer, In answer to your question, the anti-daffy never really was. It was an experiment and a poorly thought out one at that. I got my answers but at a terrible cost to the very people that I would love desperately to help. I agree with your "non-violent" assessment one hundred percent. If I could sum the approach up in a phrase it would be "turning our backs on things the way that they are." I believe that by A) Leading by example and B) Educating by example we can achieve our goals. I also believe that it all starts by having the courage to meet strangers. Each of us must do this in his or her own way, as it feels comfortable. No one should be forced to contribute more than they feel comfortable contributing. Simply striking up a pleasant conversation is a start. It shows the fallacy behind at least one of the lies that we are being fed on a daily basis: That the world is filled to the brim with dangerous people. Secondly, it serves to put a little more positivity out there. Positive messages are as effective as negative ones. More so. It's why people turn to sit-coms and sports. Something to take the troubles off of their minds. I believe that is why the media portrays the world in a highly negative light, to turn our minds toward inconsequentials (pardon the blasphemy TV and sports fans) like sports, movies and TV and to turn our attention away from the political arena where our corrals and chains are being forged. The biggest crime at this point, however, is hardly that committed by the politicians, it is that committed by those who don't care enough to get involved and change things. To them I have this to say: Apathy is treason. 021203 ... The Spork we must be subversive in our everyday speech, we must steer conversations when and where we have the chance and throw the pressing issues on the table wherever we find a venue, be intelligent, be informed, boycott businesses that you know support the current political powerbase and urge your friends and families to do so as well take mass transit instead of driving if you can, if you can't, find out which companies use domestic oil or oil that is not imported from the middle-east and again, urge as many people as you can to stop and take notice and follow suit Write to your legislators, repeatedly and persistently of your opposition to the Bush administration and its willingness to sacrifice untold lives on both sides of the fence to cement its grasp on power, write in opposition to the lies and obfuscations that are the USDHS and the Act that enabled its creation. Even if they've both been passed and approved, if enough people make enough noise it might be possible through sustained coordinated protest to mitigate the damage if not completely undo it 021203 ... ??????? Good idea, guys. I think the "Star Wars" theme will really strike fear into the hearts of the shadow-government terrorists who control the Bush Administration. Honestly, though, your burgeoning revolution is the most impressive display of unfocused teenage rebellion that I've seen in a while--it's right up there with carving "anarchy" symbols into classroom desks. 021204 ... The Spork well, O nameless one, since you seem to think you know so much better than any of us what would YOU do? short of committing acts of politically-related violence, what options does a loose coalition of college and high-school students, blue and white-collar workers and other various denizens of this site really have what would you propose... or is my initial suspicion about you correct? -you are just being contrary for the sake of being a prick and you don't have anything real to contribute other than a lot of pissing on whatever little spark of dissent has been ignited So tell us, what would you do? 021204 ... ??????? What should you do? Fucking grow up. Realize that you're not going to start a nationwide revolution. But that doesn't mean you can't contribute to political change (or I guess you could say political revolution, if you have to make everything seem more exciting than it really is). There are plenty of already existant political groups you can join. They all hate our dependence on foreign oil and they all want Bush out of power. They want to change things, and so do you. So stop thinking you're the new Che Guevara, and just be realistic. 021204 ... [.:..The SeeR ..:.] So! you admit you're getting excited ???????! That's great news! I am excited too. What I just read not only impressed and motivated me, but it did one more EXTEMELY important thing... It gave me Hope. 7QuestionMarks is the first of COUNTLESS people who will attempt to stand in our way, be it for attention [ahem] or deliberate intervention, more obstacles will surely come. What are obstacles? Obstacles are those things you see if you take your eyes off the goal. We must remain focused on our success, not paying any attention to the naysayers. Be not ashamed, screwing for virginity, because I don't know all that much more than you know... I recommend the movie... very inspiring. Basically... Ghandi proved that non-violence is just as effective as violence when dealing with political power. He liberated his nation (India) from British Rule using only his Intelligence, Persistance, and Patience. (USA escaped Brittish Rule much more violently...) I am so THRILLED that you quoted Jefferson... not that I know all that much about Thomas Jefferson either... But I do know that The_Founding_Fathers of our nation were wise beyond words and they MUST be spinning in their graves at what has become of the US. Any information we can attain from Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin will help us. Dafremen... I agree with you. I don't feel comfortable talking with any ole' strangers though. If I meet people, and they are A) Honest. B) Trustworthy. C) Intelligent (Or, at least not clueless!) and D) Good Natured... as in they have a Good Heart and I percieve it... Then I would most certainly approach them about the revolution. But I also feel it is way too early to begin doing that. (Not that you were implying that we go and do that today). But I feel like we're still in a brainstorm here... throwing our thoughts and suggestions into the pile and seeing what we can come up with. Then we can make a plan... THE_PLAN! Then, when we are ready... enact_it! The difference between us, and those "Groups you can join" (for a small fee, no doubt) is that we are people who actually care... we are being intrinsically guided. We are not doing this for money. We are not doing this for fame. When the going gets tough... we may even lose our very LIVES! Yet, we have the courage to move forward... to evolve our society. We have enough knowledge and technology to feed the world and cure the sick, eliminate pollution and live in harmony with our environment... Yet Money, not harmony, is the supercedant in all dominant forms of power. It's time the greed and corruption be put to sleep. The BOYCOTT is a brilliant Idea! Using two tools: The boycott and the Internet, we could become very persuasive! The second most important decision We as Americans can make is _WHERE_TO_SPEND_OUR_AMERICAN_DOLLARS_ thus giving power to whomever we buy products from. ([btw, the first most important decision is our attitude every day! Make it GooD!]) Letter writing campaigns can be effective... but not as effective as an organized Boycott.com! 021204 ... ??????? I'm getting excited? Wha? That makes no sense, which is consistent with the rest of your rhetoric. I'm not "standing in your way". The only thing standing in your way is reality. 021204 ... dB And the view from the fence is very interesting today. On the one side you have the ideologist, on the otheryou have the fatalist. In the middle you can see more with one eye than you can if you're on either side and have both eyes. both comments are right, and both are correct if you apply the correct formula (rule 26, never confuse the right thing for the true thing). A rebellion of words would be a good thing, but not the right thing. Sitting on your arse is good, maybe have a wank if you haven't got anything better to do. This is not a war like others, comparing this to the india occupation is wrong. There a country was occupied by another force that had to be removed. In this case the US is occupied by itself (greedy tits). Before you argue, that is what it boils down to, greed and fear. So maybe something completely different yet also something very old... force of arms. if 59% of americans eligable to vote did not bother, this shows great lack of respect of the current governments and the opposition. If 59% of americans got off their arse, marched to washington and forcibly removed those in the big chairs and replaced them with people of their choosing... they would still not be happy. bottom line is that people are never happy. they only think they are happy when they think they have something worth fighting for, or they think they are right. but never consider if they are correct. it only matters to them that they are right. If every life on this planet was extinguised, then rekindled within one minute with the memory of death still present, then we may see some change. Only that experienced will change human nature. Any Ideas? 021205 ... stork daddy hmmm....well it seems to me one of humanities blessings is that we are all able to learn vicariously. the problem is pointing out the relevance of a historical death to a current situations. people tend to concentrate on the differences and think these modern times are exceptions even when there are discernable rules carrying over from one situation to the next and of course adjusting to the modern circumstances. this of course can be deadly. for instance, our stance on war hasn't really changed enough considering the difference in destructive capacities both in terms of sheer volume and target selection. however, i think if people were able to see the relevance of past deaths they could see more clearly the implications of current actions. although certainly the destruction we're currently capable of is unfathomable. however, a single death is a single death, and its description is always meaningful to those of us who value life (i'm assuming and hoping the majority not soley for the sake of my argument). hiroshima and nagasaaki were decimated, but refusing to be buried in a moment's flash were their stories. it is the job of artists and historians to make the public aware of atrocities so that in the future, they will be less apt to offhandedly call something inevitable. it is their job to make us imagine how things could've been different, and to apply the same imaginative and simulative thinking to our present options in depth before we take steps which, unlike the phantom steps of our mind, cannot be physically taken back anymore than cement can be molded after it has set other than by shattering. our minds are malleable, our minds can go through the rigours of various concepts without shattering. but there are certain concepts which, though possible in the mind, are impossible in our physical reality. winning a nuclear war is one. you cannot protect humanity by destroying it. i'm not comparing the war in iraq to nuclear war, but i hope you can see the more moderate implications my point has. i don't think it's very useful to pretend this issue has easy answers, but certainly even the most extreme written reponses to it are as good a place to start as any. they are us trying to get our minds around the issue, manipulate it, see what it means to us, and i don't see anything worth criticizing in that. in fact, i think criticism of the process of imagination is nihilism since imagination remains not only our primary survival instinct but also the greatest source of joy and beauty in our lives. in the course of life it often is left behind for what is real, but all progress has come from either an accidental or hard earned breach in what is and what could be in the world in the thoughts of the human mind. so even extreme thoughts as long as they are written are a start towards the moderate process of change that involves awareness before action. i grant that in life, decisions must often come quickly like in speed chess, only each one has its own often unknown timer. however, anytime a decision can be mulled over it should, and sitting back and bashing the process and demanding action instead of thought is a bit brash and seems to be our country's problem. anytime germany calls you warlike you should really reasses things. anyways...that's all! 021205 ... stork daddy and on another note, revolutions have always started somewhere. it's the whole idea of the paradox that oen vote doesn't matter. but if one doesn't how can many? my point is this, while widespread dissatisfaction is required for revolution, sometimes it is the voice of one that makes people aware of their dissatisfaction or the courage of one that gives other the courage to admit it. so to tell someone they can't start a revolution is a bit trite. you have statistical relevance since obviously not every defiant act even is noticed let alone agreed with or reinforced, but i think at certain points in many revolutions there were people who saw themselves as being reasonable when dismissing the perpretrators as ineffectual and unheard, or a terrible minority. there's certain members of french royalty who if they could do it over again wouldn't opt for nonchalance. 021205 ... [.:..The SeeR ..:.] RIGHT ON!! I have SO MUCH to say right now... grr I have to go to work. To be continued... Ok... but I will say... real quickly... dB, with all due respect, I don't think standpoint is neutral, or on the fence... You are saying "Nay"... And to say that the instant global death-rebirth scenario (which was creative and interesting...) is the ONLY thing that will change human nature is a bit close minded. There are manythings that motivate the masses. As the Spork so effectively illustrated. And when the time is right, (not the people or the power, the Time!) the spirit of Revolution will spread quickly and vastly... causing fast and permanent change. I believe... the Time is now. (Oh crap...I'm gonna be late for work!) 021205 ... ??????? I agree with dB that everyone wants to be right. Everyone wants to convince the audience, whether he's talking to a crowd of would-be revolutionaries, an opinionated cast of message-board characters, or just himself. I agree with Stork that imagination and expression are important, but as a matter of statistical reality, no one here will revolutionize anything. In a way, aspiring to the impossible is a self-serving cop-out. When someone sets out to Change the World, he feels righteous, important, and proactive, and may convince others of the same, but he bears no responsibility for actually achieving any practical goal because expectations are naturally low. He gets to feel good about himself without the burden of accountability. Suppose an idealist decides that the waters of the Atlantic Ocean are the sole source of All Human Suffering. Inferring that humanity will be glorified and uplifted once the last drop is drained, his course of action becomes crystal clear: Drink the Ocean. So the idealist walks to the nearest beach, sticks a straw into the foamy surf, and starts sucking. He invites others to follow, and praises their virtue between gulps of salt water. Those who choose not to join him are “lazy”, “passive”, and “complacent”. Realistically, though, no matter how many other idealists the ocean-drinker recruits, he will never swallow the sea. So is trying to drink the Ocean somehow better than doing nothing? In effect, there is no difference, but the do-nothing’s position is more respectable in the sense that he is aware of his inefficacy, whereas the busy idealist is not. Idealism itself is okay, though. Sometimes the desire to transcend human nature can be expressed beautifully and used resourcefully. However, once idealism nominates officials and forms a platform, it becomes too self-serving to be trusted as altruism. 021205 ... The Spork Interesting fact you leave out, you second-rate heckler, you dime-store provocateur, is that none of us ever proclaimed ourselves the next Che Guevara, that was a product of your own assumptions. i happen to be a contributor and supporter to a number of those organizations you speak of, but even a lot of us who are, are somewhat disillusioned over the lack of effect on the part of a lot of these organizations. none of us proclaimed ourselves to be of any special importance. my original point, which must have gone sailing quite quickly over that pointy little head of yours O, Question Marks, was just in remarking that the actions of the current administration were turning one of the star wars films into a rather eerily correct allegory. but of course, people like you just need something to pick at. you can talk all you like but you'll never act. I'm out here in my little corner of the world sticking my fingers and what ever other appendages in as much as i can to be that bit of sand, that pebble in the gears, to be as much of a monkeywrench as i can so while you sit there on your high-horse, a lot of us are working in our won little ways to pull the nails out of its shoes. 021205 ... stork daddy okay...but the fact is, in human matters, us being as short sighted as we are, the impossible is often not distinguishable from the possible. moonwalks anyone? look obviously it took us a long time to get into the sky. but there had to be someone who said fuck kind of wanting to fly, fuck talking about it, let's try to fly. and if you don't believe one person can change the world, well then how does it change? your anecdote about the ocean wasn't very apt since the word world in this case was meant to mean the course of human affairs. if you mean to tell me a human can't change another human i think we have some major disagreements. besides, tell me something, what's wrong with a person feeling good about themselves? and how do you know they don't feel any accountability? they're doing more than the naysayer is. they obviously feel a responsibility. is the naysayer actually responsibly setting them straight about the impossibility of their task, or is the naysayer just justifiying their own lack of action? this is just like the psychological phenomenon when a person gets hurt in a crowd and is less likely to be helped than if they're hurt around few people since the people feel like someone else will bear the responsibility. when you naysay, you're trying to change the world one person at a time, and so are they with their message of idealism. i agree that most revolutions happen in steps, but they are necessary steps. you seem to think that a significant change comes overnight unseen like santa claus. and i'm saying there are mom and dad working hard behind the scenes. if the person who beleives that the atlantic ocean is the source of all suffering feels like he's doing something about it, well he's at least reduced his own sense of suffering. but that's besides the point, you're right that for something to be "good" it requires the approval of lots of people. however, does this mean that the status qou is necessarily good for all of the people who aren't complaining, or is that they've been just as deluded that their actions won't matter. it's just like, let's take the theoretical joke that if everyone in china were to jump they could destroy the world. now of course if one person jumps nothing will happen. so the government says, hey, not everyone's going to jump, so why waste your time, what can you do? but that you is a necessary part of the process. there is nothing impossible about an idea changing society. it's happened before. the burden of proof is on you to disprove that a single person's nuance can't change the world. i'm not even arguing for the truth behind these particular idealisms because they've been said before and there are plenty out there with these opinions. my argument is against your dismissal of them as part of a larger subcategory of beliefs worth sharing that you've deemed as entirely futile. it isn't entirely futile. if public sentiment was firmly against the war, we wouldn't go. we're ambivalent, perhaps because like you, most of us have opted for the easy way out of skipping to the sporting green or taking in the latest bad movie and convincing ourselves that someone else will pick up the bill. for you to compare our going to war with the inevitable presence of the atlantic ocean is pretty fuckin ridiculous buddy. ideas are a strange thing, and every mutation they go through from every individual could hold drastic consequences for the rest of humanity. i'm not saying it always does, and you're right, statistically what you're saying is far more likely than what i'm saying, but you use words like impossibility and futility and i'm saying history just doesn't show that's true. in fact, the very opposite is true. it shows that it was those individuals who didn't falter in the face of incredible indifference and instead went forward that were heard and that affected change. and of course i'm not saying people get opinions for nowhere, the imagination is a strange thing, it makes connections between the unpredictable personal life and whatever is being thought of. so having very unique personal lives, despite our commonalities within cultures etc, we all have insights to offer to the pool. yours was one, theirs was another. i guess you can guess which i find more useful. i prefer criticisms to be directed at the methods for bringing about change and progress not to be against the possibility of change itself. 021205 ... stork daddy the main point though is that if something's been attempted and it's failed then you can go ahead and say it's impossible (although there's always a chance you're still wrong). but discourse like this is an attempt at seeing what is possible. unchecked idealism is petting a tiger, but there is nothing of the sort going on here. it'd be nice if going into all ventures we already knew what was possible and what wasn't, but the fact remains we only know after the fact very often so trying remains our best line of action. of course one must consider all consequences, which is what discourse like the sporks etc. does. Even when we know what we can do, that doesn't mean we know what we should do. The fact is though, a single person can change the world. It's very unlikely, but should they attempt to anyways? i think so, because if no one did, where would we be? in the case of the ocean it doesn't matter how many pick up the cause, it will never be completed. in the case of touching many human being's minds that isn't the case. find me something more contagious than human thought, there simply isn't. 021205 ... Dafremen What I thought was so funny was the idea that reality was standing in our way. Let me repeat this for the reading impaired, I am now DOING this..really, I'm engaged in this right now.. and the feeling that change is coming is more widespread than you might think. There are many of us who have felt this coming for years. Reality is standing in YOUR way because in reality you don't believe that such a thing is possible. Like I said in another blather, you've been programmed for pessimism. Let me repeat one other thing, again for the reading impaired...I am UNSTOPPABLE. So is this revolution. It's only a matter of time. Again, those who choose apathy and naysaying over helping to create change have sold out their grandchildren and mine. Positive_being will win this revolution. 021205 ... stork daddy okay...now you're creeping me out. 021205 ... dB Do you know what it is to sit on the fence in this issue? You see both sides are correct. Not doing anything is unacceptable. At the same time however, how can you do something if there is no definite direction? It's very well to say "make the workd a better place" and "be nice to people for a change", but these are actions already being taken by many and it's merely a way of making YOUR life better and those you contact. For the most part OTHER people are not like you in this. It'd be nice if they were, but they ain't. What is needed is for the few to have a leader, a direction and THEN spread the word to the masses. I believe last time this happened that hippy got nailed to a tree. But if that's what it takes then it's worth it... but it's not worth it in 500 years time when the process has to happen all over again. Those on the fence are waiting for someone to tell them with CERTAINTY what must be done and the best way to do it. Then, we follow. But ONLY while the cause is bigger than the person. What tends to happen in these situations is that the person becomes more important than the cause. The followers do it for the person more than the cause, then everything collapses. I know this is taking the issue off on a little tangent, but there you go. 021205 ... stork daddy yeah yeah...well you're all creeping me out. oh and enjoy your splinters. sitting on the fence...an argument? but why not, everything in moderation be it war or masturbation. hmmmmm...or... 021205 ... dB stork daddy, you can do much better than that. 021205 ... [.:..The SeeR ..:.] I'm Sorry... Are we here to discuss The_Revolution... Or are we here to exchange revolutional ethics, logic and what I would never dare to call theories? If we could dispense with the tea_party distractions for a moment and refocus on the current task then perhaps you'll get a glimpse of exactly what is or is not realistic and possible within the capable hands of motivated men. The Simple Truth of the matter is that revolutions have happened before. Revolutions will happen again. It wasn't the smartest or the strongest or the wealthiest that began them... It was those who BELIEVED in their Revolution strongly enough that claimed victory. The Bottom line isn't about Happiness, Righteousness, Justice or Ignorance [as in ???????'s case]. The Bottom Line here is that WE_PERCIEVE that a revolution is : Likely, Necessary, Possible, and ultimately relevant. You mentioned Fear, someone, dB I think, Yes we are afraid... Afraid to allow another generation to be raised in the fashion of Greed, and subject to the influences of marketing while being made into corporate slaves while the lies are repeatedely forced down our throats! I fear that like nothing else! I am afraid to allow our culture to be raped and our lives to be puppeteered by cowards hiding behind shrouds of darkenss. I am afraid to watch as six-pack joe plays hand over hand conveniently into the media's stacked deck. I am TERRIFIED by the patriotism being wasted on lies that were sold for the price of blood and oil. The Tears Shed Around The World For A Sly Manuever Giving One Man More Power Than Any One Should Ever Enjoy!!! The Dense Cloud Of Confusion Pulled So Snugly Over Your Eyes Making It More Comfortable For You To NOT SEE WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON! The_Bottom_Line Is this: We Percieve the need for a major change. We Feel the Urge to DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. We Have common bonds, called cooperation and communication. We Know that what we are doing is Right. We BELIEVE that this... will... happen... Anything else you have to say to the contrary is simply Irrelevant. 021205 ... The entire world speaking in unison Amen! 021205 ... [.:..The SeeR ..:.] "The essential principles of our Government... form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty and safety." --Thomas Jefferson 1st Inaugural Address, 1801. 021205 ... dB seer, I think I've seen you before somewhere. However.... If you were the right person, and doing it for the right reason i'd certainly follow you into the chasm. I'd follow you into the fire and death... IF YOU WERE THE RIGHT PERSON. Now show me. 021205 ... BLAH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH BLAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 021205 ... stork daddy haha...why should i do much better than that? your argument is that it doesn't really matter if i do or don't buddy. besides...i like to stay at the level of whatever i'm competing with, it keeps everyone's spirits up. and i'm guessing it's a competition if you're challenging me or something with your comments. 021205 ... stork daddy my advocation was merely for the necessity of discourse as a prelude to actual change, not blind idealism in any direction and not unaction. riding the fence is unaction. it is different than being moderate. but of course being in the middle is the easiest way, just look at all of our politics. they know that is where the majority of voters lie and that little changes will win a voter from one side to another. but this game theory is what keeps politicians from making bold and grand statements. i'd rather have a ralph nader come in and stir things up, raise awareness and lose than play a game he can't win. so i happen to believe riding the fence isn't really a good thing. if you want to change the definition to weighing both sides that's fine. there are some ideas where the middle ground is essentially ineffectual. anyways...i don't want to make this another 3.4MB blathe. if you want to discuss politics...call me up. 021205 ... Billy Idol with a rebel yell...... 021205 ... dB Spork, you are the victor. no i'm not kidding. The way to test someones belief is to question it harshly and see what they do. you have stuck to your guns, as they say. and you are right. some of your wording in the beginning was a little mushy and indirect but now you are getting it. one of the key issues in chaning the way people think is to be direct. take the Yorkshire attitude; "I'm a yorkshire man me. I say what I like and I like what I damn well say". It sounds bad, but not that bad. If people for once said what they mean rather than being manipulative little penisis the world would be better off. In short, the rebellion is a good idea, but rebellion is the wrong word for it. we've had too many rebellions. most of those are remembered with awe or dismissed as a bad joke or something evil. Time for something a bit different, yes? Tell me what we should have, and kx21 will tell you how wonder you are. 021206 ... [.:..The SeeR ..:.] Well, dB I don't want you to follow "ME". I want you to set up your weathervein to precisely detect the approaching winds_of_change. I want for you to erect your sails to grab hold of this change, and let it take you to where you know you should be going. I will tell you where, when, what, why and how to revolutionize this planet, but please be patient. You want me to disclose step 10 when you haven't even completed step 1 yet. First, we must brainstorm... which is near completion. Even though we've allowed ourselves to get distracted, we have come up with some powerful thought patterns, strengthening our dendritical channels and warming up our minds. Next, we must gather_information...Lots and lots of information about history, current events and emerging technologies. After all, knowledge_is_power! All the while, and in between each step, we must revolutionize our own selves first. How can we change the world if we fail to change_ourselves? Thirdly, we must institute a movement of passion and instill a sense of urgency within the hearts of the masses. Pry open their eyes to clearly show them the truth they love to ignore. Then we must engage our Plan_of_Action. A series of events, and I am being intentionally vague here, that triggers a sequence of chain reactions designed to shake the powers of the earth and realign them according to Reasonable and Honorable principles. This will cause an unavoidable attack upon all of those who participate in the_revolution. We Must Not Retaliate! We Must Maintain Non-Violence! Lives will be lost. People will die. The current regime will not simply step down and abandon their greedy agenda. There will be a war! The government will even ATTACK ITSELF to make it look like we are attacking! Using all facets of media to force lies to the undecided or cowardly bystanders. We will maintain truth. We will uphold integrity. We will patiently prevail. Once the dust clears and the tears dry, we can then, finally, rebuild_the_future! Supertowers, Flying_cars, Vacations_in_orbit, free_education, Prison_Labor, No_more_oil_production, Hydrogen_economy, hydrogen_future, space_colonies, biotechnology, genetic_therapy, exile_criminals_to_the_ocean_floor, Geothermal_energy, cerebral_fitness instead of critical (negative) thinking, erasing_corruption onepoliticianatatime... 021206 ... ????? "I will tell you where, when, what, why and how to revolutionize this planet." "We must institute a movement of passion and instill a sense of urgency within the hearts of the masses." Yeah, I guess you guys didn't say you were the next Che Guevara--you implied that you were the next Jesus Christ, with a crazy megalomaniacal twist. Come on, Stork Daddy, how can you read the above goals and say the ocean-drinking analogy is ridiculous? Yes, change is possible, but it's slow, and it's a statistical reality that no matter how hard one tries, one's contribution will be small. The "Rebel Alliance" doesn't want to contribute in realistic ways. Sea levels rise and fall over time, and I suppose that with enough people and straws the process could be sped up, but in a way that is close to meaningless in practical effect. But these people don't want to make a small contribution, they want to swallow the sea. 021206 ... stork daddy okay first of all, i was never arguing for their personal goals, i was arguing that change was possible, and i was arguing that the changing the current political scene was possible. so your ocean drinking analogy is pretty bad. changing a human mind isn't the same task as removing water. secondly, "no matter what, their contribution is going to be small" is a totally misled statement. a person's contribution to the current shared perspective of a culture can be immense. the tasks itself might take more than one person. but that's why changing a mind isn't like drinking the sea. your example involves something which simply cannot be done by one person, which requires the repeated physical work of many. of course there always could be technological improvments as you admitted. however, a mind is already equipped to spread information rapidly. when it comes to the down and dirty work of a revolution you're right that a person's contribution might be small. but in the world of information, unlike sips of the sea, not all information is equal, and therefore, not everyone makes the same futile contribution. when it comes to ideas, there are values a single person's statement has which many can recognize and act on. therefore, with a single incindiary idea a person can change the sea sipping techniques of many. so to say a single person can't change the world is just wrong. change is like a big game of telephone, but each set of personal circumstances changes common knowledge in such unforseen ways. maybe on average in insignificant ways, but to dismiss the proven fact that it often can be stark and meaningful is blind pessimism which is no worse than unchecked idealism. if idealism is petting a tiger, unchecked pessimism is running away from a kitten. marx, luther, martin luther king jr. these were people whose ideas changed the world. sure they merely perceived a pattern that was developing and shared it with many, but i'd hardly say that's mere. no one else did it. and perhaps these people see a pattern. if not, well then nothing will happen, their revolution will fizzle like anything without real energy to release, or anything that has less of a base than is needed to provide the friction to stop society's inertia. but what is your purpose? you think you're saving their energy for other tasks? their energy has to go somewhere. i agree that stupid things like "don't buy anything today" don't work. that's an absence of a plan, it's not a replacement, since by not rerouting our country's metabolism all they insured is that tomorrow they'll have to buy twice as much. but what are these tasks you suggest they give their lives to? if they're not happy living in a way conducive with the way our society runs, they'll run into enough problems. i just want to know what you think you're accomplishing by mocking them? like haha you stupid people believing in things. your caustic disagreement with their beliefs is an implicit admission of your own position. so you must think things are dandy as they are? if you don't agree with them, what is your suggestion? it's easy to say something doesn't work. we all have pretty much mastered the criteria for that. but if you don't know why and you can't fix it, you aren't really adding anything. we can all see it's broke. so when someone steps forward with a suggestion, hear them out, think of the consequences of trying it. if it's not worth it then don't, if it seems okay go for it, and if it doesn't work, it'll soon be apparent. but hear people out. sure rejecting ideas gives you status, because people think, wow he shit on their ideas, he must really have some good ones, but you know as well as i do that this is a fallacy. and when arguing with prepositions about the future which have yet to be proven or disproven, it goes beyond simple logic to statistics (as you mentioned) and the realm of fuzzy logic. all i'm really saying though is so what if you think their ideas are ineffectual and overblown, give them a chance or leave them alone. who do you think you're saving from them? were you the type to go up and make fun of the kids playing advanced dungeons and dragons as if they didn't know they weren't popular? my main point is that in the realm of the mind information is stored much more densely and at a much more reasonable cost than other in other physical places. as such, though there are more connections in the human mind by far than there are atoms in the oceans, they are much more muteable. a single person's idea can spread if given the proper forum. and storing and spreading that information costs much less physically than moving the oceans. so maybe your contribution will be small, but that doesn't mean everyone else's will okay? granted, there are a lot of ideas out there, but if one beautiful glimmering macrostate of words contains the recipe for microstates of thoughts which involve action and involve further thought and brings about positive things, then that idea will spread. 021206 ... stork daddy oh and while we live in a statistical reality, there is no such thing as a statistical reality in the way you used it. there is only statistical probability. if it was reality, we wouldn't need statistics. dig? 021206 ... stork daddy and look, i'm not making fun of you, your position is the most intuitive response. and the comparison to the anarchy signs being carved into desks was clever as far as expounding on their pretentious whimpering bangs. but i think the only thing worse than constructive criticism is destructive criticism. 021206 ... stork daddy like mine for instance. its just pure crap 021206 ... ????????? With all due respect (and trust me, I wouldn’t type that to many people who post here), I really think some of the distinctions you made are a bit hair-splitting. For instance, your problem with "statistical reality". What I mean is that the probability of an event is so high that the chances of it not occurring are negligible. It’s It's not to be taken completely literally or as a technical term; it's just a way of saying that something is very unlikely. Revolutionizing the world is very unlikely, whether or not you like the way I say it. Also, I still disagree with your assessment of my analogy, and I can definitely split some hairs of my own in my defense. You say my analogy’s inappropriate in part because everyone takes the same sips from the ocean. Well, that's just not true. Different people can drink varying amounts of water. Some people have more endurance, superior stomach capacity, greater resolve, a wider strawthe point is that they could imbibe more saltwater, and thus their contributions to the overall goal will be greater. So in that respect, you're wrong. And I don’t mean that the goal of achieving social change is a matter of simply lowering the level of a single thing, as you sort of implied. I’m only saying that it’s a very difficult goal. More fundamentally, though, you reject my analogy on the basis that it would be impossible to drain the ocean, and yet some reformers have arguably done just that. However, I never said that the analogy applied to reform in general. In my first post, I said, “no one here will revolutionize anything.” By “here” I meant “here on this page”, not “here on this Earth”. Yes, change is possible, just not through overblown teenage rhetoric about capturing the hearts of the masses. So if I have to be supertechnical in my analogy to avoid having it dismissed as inept, here’s the clarified version: Drinking the ocean is the goal, namely social revolution; the drinkers are the revolutionaries; the straw is the method of achieving this goal. This analogy applies specifically to the “Rebel Alliance” people, and not to reformers in general. But I get why you disagree with my position. You think it’s pessimistic, which it might be. I don’t think of pessimism as inherently bad, so I could see where we might clash. Maybe you just dislike criticism in general. You ask me about my goals in criticizing, and I probably don’t have any. My writing on this page is just a reaction to what I perceive as stupid horseshit that will never help anyone. All that the idealistic rhetoric on this page will ever do is justify the self-congratulations of the deluded, who haven’t yet realized that they’re not the answer to all of the world’s problems. Personally, I think the world is as okay as it’s ever been, and ever will be. No bullshit revolutionary idealism will ever create utopia. This is pessimistic, in a way, but is it untrue? This brings up a point about the nature of radical reform in general, and my skepticism and mistrust of radicals in particular. It seems to me that radicals are necessarily reckless in their assumptions about what will make a better society. Radicals may truly believe in their hearts that the adoption of their policies will result in positive social change, but they can never know for certain the consequences of those policies until they are enacted. Marx’ ideas, for example, had very mixed results. Only from hindsight can we attempt to assess whether or not a radical’s ideas are good for us or not, regardless of their feasibility. There’s a supreme arrogance in most radicalism, then, because radicals make incredible assumptions about other people’s lives. I would suggest that radical reform is largely rooted in hubris, a quality that demands criticism. Also, people are selfish--maybe not all of them, or at least not all the time--so it’s foolish to deny that a radical might be motivated by personal gain rather than altruism. I think we need to be vigilant about people who tell us what is or isn’t in our best interest. Let’s not deny that radicalism can be very self-serving in more ways than one. Think about this: People who espouse realities that will never come to fruition don’t have the burden of testing their ideas, and thus they can believe forever that they “did something” with their lives, that they valiantly fought the system while everyone else “sat on their asses”. Now, as you said before, there’s nothing intrinsically wrong with feeling good about yourself. I agree. I’m just trying to cast doubt on the true motivation of would-be radicals. Do they really want to help people, or are they just in it for the power they expect to gain? If not motivated by political power, are they just haphazardly spewing hyperbolic idealism to feel important? Still, I wouldn’t make fun of would-be reformers who I truly believed were sincere and seemed to have a handle on reality. If someone wants to make a positive change, I’m all for it. Tell me where I’m wrong, here, Stork, but something tells me that true innovators are not spouting megalomaniacal rhetoric about “revolutionizing this planet” on Blather. Maybe I’m completely wrong. Maybe “The Seer” is the next Marx. But I seriously doubt it. And something tells me that you feel the same way. Which brings me to the question: Why would you defend something that you know is “pretentious” and “whimpering”? If you really believe this, then you already sympathize with my motivation in criticizing. For the most part, I thought your response was unduly dismissive and condescending, but either way, I appreciate and respect your point of view. 021207 ... dB amongst all the long windedness a short, readable reaply might be welcome. Things fall apart. When they do, that is when you make the changes. Plan all you want to, but inevitably, nothing goes as planned. The chips fall where they will. When nobody is looking arrange them how you will. I really respect both views in this argument, but it must be made clear: Revolutions are planned, but the plan never comes to be. Take whatever opportunity comes up, however small and work on that. Planning profits man nothing. 021207 ... [.:..The SeeR ..:.] Stork Daddy, you're a genius. And you, nameless coward, the amount of question marks in your name is directly proportional to your confusion... it's increasing. So far you've demonstrated nothing noteworthy except for your total low emotional maturity and total lack of understanding for logical analogies. It's fallacies of logic that you have mistaken for accurate mindful connections. Why do you refuse to state your purpose here? Can't you understand that people can see more than you can? Don't you realize that you are not the smartest person alive? If you think your judgements against me or my ideas carry any weight then you are only typifying your egocentric ramblings. If you would only think things through to completion before opening your mouth you could save yourself much embarassment. Your analogy is rejected because it is inaccurate, and rather silly. But it's ok. There are people like you in every city and every nation. People like you have some vendetta against change. You fear it. People like you laughed at the Wright Brothers. People like you publicly mocked the idea of sailing across the "edge of the world". "They'll never do it!", you said back then. But people like you never hesitate to raise their glass at the victory celebration. "I knew they could do it all along.", you whispered to the lady next to you. Your purpose is to distract us. And, wow... what a noble cause you're fighting for. But something tells me you have trouble sleeping at night. Much regret on your mind? Anyways... you have wasted enough time. I don't know why I allowed myself to get entangled with your little squabble, but since your remarks are irrelevant, and analagous to those of typical change fearers, they will be disregarded and ignored. If you had the guts to be bold or the courage to state your name, then at least I would know who I should lose all respect for. I am sorry you lack vision and passion. It's not MY fault though, so don't attack me. Please try to get some help so that your egomania doesn't always conflict with your low self-esteem. Mmmmkay? 021207 ... ????? Seer, I have no respect for you because you really don't have anything to say--you're trying to bluff intelligence, and at least in my mind, you're failing miserably. You have no credibility to judge the logical rigor of my writing because as far as I can tell, you're a moron. In fact, you're by far the biggest moron posting on this page. I don't want to waste too much effort here, but the fact that you seriously want to name a social movement after something from "Star Wars" is evidence enough of your stupidity. Your stilted attempt at elevated language is more evidence. The fact that you manage to misconstrue or otherwise miss important points in others' writing is even more evidence. That's enough evidence to convict, I'd say. 021207 ... ??????? Yeah, I agree dB, that's part of what I was saying in my post. It's Like Marx. His ideas went one way on paper and another way in practice. And so there's something that I don't trust about people who really think they know what's best for entire nations, when in the past, things haven't quite worked out the way revolutionaries had thought they would. 021207 ... Pythagorus OMG! This is ridiculous! It started off as something exciting and became progressively worse. "?????????" you are the moron here, not the seer. I just read this entire page and let me tell you something. Several people asked you to come up with something intelligent to say and you failed multiple times. Who is a bigger fool? The one boy standing in a room with men calling them little? Or the men who stop their work to try to argue with the little boy? Seer and everyone else should have just ignored the coward guy and carried on with what would have been some great reading material for me! But no! I mean it's not like the rest of us are illiterate or stupid. We can tell just by reading this that "???????" is the moron, So seer, spork, stork, etc, why even defend yourselves against this child? Now please, carry on! Oh... the star_wars analogy (see it was an analogy that's why you failed to comprehend) is based off the department_of_homeland_security page. NOW SEE: the_rebel_alliance_2 021207 ... ?????? Pythagoras: If I'm wrong, where's the proof? Unfortunately, I can't be wrong just because you say so. You can't simply will an assertion into being true. And saying that something's so obvious that it needs no proof is a cheap cop-out. Also, I've expressed ideas relating to the topic (noteably, you haven't). You say that I've "failed to come up with anything intelligent", or some similar nonsense. Basically, Pythagoras, what you're saying is that in order to participate in this discussion, I have to agree with its original posters. I disagree. Your assessment that I "didn't understand" the Star Wars analogy is silly. I explained why I thought it was stupid, and if you actually read my posts, you'd understand that. Or maybe you wouldn't. I don't know. Now, I'm not going to call you stupid because I haven't read enough of your writing to justify that assertion, but what you've done on this page is pretty sloppy. Maybe you don't really care enough about this topic to think your arguments through. I don't know. Of course, you're not obligated to be logically rigorous or whatever (though the lack of any supposting evidence makes one wonder why you chose that name). 021207 ... stork daddy look, i never claimed that radicals had altruistic intentions. i think what's beautiful is that humans are inherantly designed so that they can't really help themselves too much without helping others in some way. because people tend to get ahead only when they provide something to the rest of us. of course there have been ingenious loopholes found, but for the most part we need each other. and that's exactly my point, with human affairs you can't always tell the results in advance like you can with the task of drinking the sea. you didn't really address my point about the human mind being different from most other forms of physical organization but it doesn't matter. i don't mean to nickpick, but if people always believed the world was as it should be, and there was no such thing as someone who thought that perhaps things could change for the better, many, many injustices may have never come to an end. many still haven't, and so i see your point about pessimism and idealism, action and inaction balancing out. the fact is, we have to turn a blind eye to certain luxuries to ensure certain necessities. i never said i wasn't pragmatic. i don't believe that when i send money to starving children in chad or calcutta that all my money gets there, or that it's going to change the statistics noticeably by tomorrow. but i do think it's going to change whomever received the food from it's mind about something even if only briefly, and that might be all it takes to ennact a chain reaction. small chances? perhaps. but what have i lost. not much and there's always the off chance that i've set in motion something far larger than myself. my point is that with human ideas, it's much easier than mopping up the oceans or dusting the desert. all it takes is one common node and the information can be its own revolution devoid of the revolutionary. this is of course perhaps the most idealistic thing i've said, but it also isn't the least logical (no comments please). sorry if i came off as condescending. i thought that was your bag. 021207 ... ????? I agree with you, Stork Daddy. Pretty much completely. I can be idealistic at times, too. Naturally, though, when I perceive a particular instance of idealism to be stupid, misguided, or conceived from pretense rather than altruism, or rooted in sublimated angst rather than a true understanding of issues, I react with pessimism. Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my criticism, but I was referring specifically to the idealism expressed on this page, by these people. In a way, I think I'm more fundamentally optimistic than the idealists on this page, because unlike them I don't think that humanity is spiraling uncontrollably toward disaster. Are there some things that could change? Sure. Dependence on foreign oil is one thing that is mentioned by "The Rebel Alliance", and it's obviously a valid concern. However, I don't think the delirium about oil company conspiracies is particularly helpful or accurate. Oil companies do make campaign contributions, and like any company, they want to stay in business. Their deep pockets make them suspiciously powerful, and we should probably pressure and scrutinize politicians who accept oil money. But let's be realistic--oil companies don't force anyone to drive cars, and if Exxon stopped all political donations and issued press releases telling people that dependence on foreign oil was morally wrong, I doubt many people would abandon their SUVs for electric cars. For the most part, I think we'd all like to have a cleaner environment and a transportation system not dependent on unrenewable resources. I think the sentiment exists, and is growing... slowly. Electric cars are increasingly more common, better made and cheaper. (Though this is somewhat offset by the popularity of SUVs). Ultimately, I think we're headed toward a better, less oil dependent future, with or without protesters chanting conspiracy theory nonsense. To me, the "Rebel Alliance" people seem paranoid. I'm sure they'd say I was complacent, but that's usually what people say when they want to drum up supporters for their cause. To me, it's like, "Equate disagreement or uncertainty with the movement to passivity and watch the weak-minded and easily guilt-tripped fall in line". I think this page's idealists force dissimilar issues into a non-intuitive, arfificial mess posing as a revolutionary social movement. Dafremen's goal to be nicer to other people really has little to do with the Bush administration, for example. Now, this may blow some "Rebel Alliance" minds, but here's an idea that I really believe in: These issues could be better dealt with SEPARATELY. Believe it or not, Rebel Alliance, most people in this country are relatively satisfied with their lives. You'd call them complacent, passive zombies, but how the fuck would you know? Why are you making it a moral issue of some kind? That can only be justified as a pragmatic, ends-justify-the-means strategy to bully people into accepting your rhetoric. Zombies or not, the American people have the right to pass on a REVOLUTION, especially one with no clear policy led by "a loose coalition" of kids with their heads up their asses. This post went on for way too long, but I wanted to include enough ideas to avoid being summarily dismissed by mysterious Seer supporters. To the idiots: feel free to ignore me as you keep promising you will, but Stork Daddy, I'm interested to hear what you think. 021207 ... ??????? And on an unrelated note, a special message to "Pythagoras": after reading some of your other posts, I’ve realized that I was far too kind to you. Your diction is consistently sloppy and your thoughts are confused. You have a rambling, disjointed style that suspiciously recalls “The Seer” and you have a curious history of defending “The Truth” (42_14, THE_ANSWER, GOD_S_GIFT). In close connection with those two Blatherers, you virulently espouse fundamentalist Christian beliefs (REASONS_TO_LIVE, I_WORSHIP_NO_GOD, INFAMY, WICCA). In WICCA, you reveal a deliriously misguided misunderstanding of “witchcraft” comparable to the religious propaganda published by Jack Chick. Similar to “The Seer”, much of your non-religious writing pertains to government/corporate conspiracy theories, and includes rhetoric like “oil puppets” (I_AM_SCARED). What you said about analogies is also interesting, as you made one of your own, equating human beings to caterpillars who transform into butterflies after they die and fly up to heaven—a rather unimaginative metaphor that you attempt to portray as insightful and thought-provoking (PARALLEL_CATERPILLAR_ANALOGY). In conclusion, Pythagoras, you are an idiot. Your opinion of my writing (or anything else, for that matter) is completely useless. And please, ignore me so I don’t have to run my eyes over your half-witted prose. Also, it'll give that brain you share with The Seer a much needed rest. 021207 ... ??????? Also, the reason I never said anything intelligent in the first place was just to see how stupid I could make myself look. (I think I've done a nice job of that. Don't you?) I felt totally jealous that I didn't think of this page so I had to ruin if for all of you. Heh, I didn't even realize that about myself because I'm not really self-aware. I focus on what others do but no regard toward my own irresponsible behavior. I guess I feel such hostility all of the time because I am such a weak person. It's completely obvious when I say things like " I can be idealistic...too. ...when I perceive a particular instance of idealism to be stupid... I react with pessimism." and then "... I'm more fundamentally optimistic than the idealists..." that I contradict myself unknowingly, making myself look rather foolish and ultimately retarded. I just did this to trick you though! HA!. You idiots are so below my ability that I wonder why I even bother wasting time talking to you. Don't you know that my writing and intelligence are far greater than anyone else's here. I don't need to justify my intelligence by answering your direct, simple questions, so don't even bother asking. I am a coward, so what? If I had balls enough to post my regularly lused name on blather, I'd then also have the balls to be out living my life instead of sitting home alone and dirty in front of my computer on a late saturday night. The fact is, my dissoluted friends don't really like me because I am such an arrogant prick. If I didn't confess to somebody, besides my battered spouse, that I honestly am disgusted by my angst filled rhetoric and uncreative, old, not-really-thought-out-to-far ideas, I was going to explode! I am a sad and pathetic waste, I think I'll go to bed now, alone and dirty. 021208 ... ??????? BTW, I am also suicidal snowman. hehehe. I know it's a genius name. I am so brilliant! Seee you can't call me a coward anymore now! 021208 ... Dafremen I find it hard to believe that you and suicidal snowman are the same person. Very hard. 021208 ... Dafremen see also: THE_REBEL_ALLIANCE_2 021208 ... stork daddy hmmm. i don't know. it's one of those sad things with the people not buying cars or driving cars. all it takes is for one person to drive a car and it becomes necessary for others to just to compete. it isn't really as simple as just telling people to boycott cars. that's not really a plausible option. because there's going to be someone who will say i'm not starving for two weeks...i'd rather keep going at a pace that can't be maintained and have dinner on the table tonight. it's like the tragedy of the commons where a self-interested individual does what he or she thinks others will do if he or she doesn't and ironically does what isn't best for society and therefore, eventually, him or herself. game theory. ahh. oh well...i have fewer tears to cry this morning. you're right that not everything is bad. i just made myself a delicious bacon and egg sandwhich. my taste buds find it easy to forget that those chickens and pigs were all cooped up and jammed with hormones or whatever everyone tells me to be vigilent for. 021208 ... casual observer Is it just me, or are the last two "question mark" blaths obviosly done by someone else? 021208 ... ??????? Yeah, that wasn't me, but now everyone will think you're me trying to surruptitiously acquit myself. This impersonation game is tricky. 021208 ... ??????? By the way, what happened to "Pythagoras"? Are you The Seer? 021208 ... ??????? In my opinion, the only thing that "The Seer" has a clear view of is his colon. 021208 ... ??????? And was "The Seer" also "The Truth", or is that someone else? They both seem to be way into Jesus, but I'm not sure. 021208 ... Apathetic It seems the revolution is dead or has gone underground. 040410 ... minnesota_chris if the rebel alliance is still up for an insurrection, would they give me a call? It's 651-295-0092, thanks. 040605 what's it to you? who go blather from