Date: September 13, 2002 @ 3:12 AM
A DIALOGUE:


J: Well, what's so fascist about the RIAA? Do they believe in racial superiority?

L. FASCISM HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH RACIAL SUPERIORITY. (he shouted)

J: Do they promote xenophobic behaviour?

L. ABSOLUTELY.. THEY ARE AFRAID TO DEATH OF THE INTERNET, OPEN SOURCE and ALTERNATIVE SYSTEMS of all sorts. (He shouted, as his voice tapered off)...

J: Are they working on installing an old-style dictatorship? Haven't noticed any of that.

L. YES. THEY WANT TO DICTATE NOT ONLY INTERNET USUAGE RULES (he took a deep breath)....a la DRM, SDMI, and now repressive legislation mandating V-CHIPS in our TV's and music devices. Its 1984, only its 2002. AND THEY HAVE A "PIRACY CZAR" AND THEY ARE A MONOPOLY. This cannot be subject to debate. The new dictatorships are virtual monopolies, and many writers have noted that the new Global warfare possibilities are in the nature of "network wars".

J. And even if you believe they do - fascism is not the same as national socialism. The Nazis killed about six million people in concentration camps. Comparing a trade organisation like the RIAA with that is not just dumb, but a slap in the face of the survivors of the Holocaust.

L. READ WILLIAM SHIRER's ACCOUNT OF THE RISE OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM. You know they incarcerated and legislated their opponents as well as murdered them.

J. People, please think before you use such stupid analogies.


L. (exasperated) YOU SHOULD STOP AND THINK: HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT YOU ARE NOT LIVING IN A COUNTRY THAT HAS STARTED ON THE SLIPPERY SLOPE TO REPRESSION? WOULD YOU HAVE RECOGNIZED IT IN GERMANY in 1930? WOULD YOU HAVE RECOGNIZED McCARTHYISM in 1947? THE SEEDS WERE THERE for those that opened their eyes.

NOT SO FAR FETCHED. The words "Recording Industry Association of America" are now a Statutory collection agent and expressly named as such in the US copyright act, yet they mostly represent foreign companies. That doesn't bother you? Suppose the Copyright act named the Vivendi of France, Sony of Japan, BMG of Germany as the statutory agent to reinforce copyright law, and one night the FBI comes into your house with a warrant to arrest you under 17 USC 1201 for DRM violations, and the warrant is signed by a German, a Japanese and a Frenchman. OK with you? WELL ITS ALREADY HAPPENING. You never heard of Dimitri Skylarov? Ed Felton?


"How could you say Mussolini is bad - he made the trains run on Time!"


Final thought. Remember those old science fiction movies with BIG BROTHER on a TV set in your living room that you can't turn off or reprogram, and it watches you as you watch them?

Then go read the Hollings bill.


(he slumped in a pile on the floor)

Good job!
From www.dictionary.com :
often Fascism
A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
I agree.. fascism isn't about "racial" anything.. it's about control. Control by the government or it's agents (said agents being those entities that bought or contributed TO said government.. think about it). Read it again: "...stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship..." It's about making things go a certain way to the detriment of all other directions or forms. Arrest the troublemakers, sue,tax or find some other way to punish anyone you can't arrest, and make the rest of the societal body fall in (goose)step via governmental control of resources. Nuff said?

btw.. *smirk* first post!!!!!!!!

methinks someone enjoys their caplock.

And there is absolutely no truth to the rumor Hilary Rosen is working on a book called "My Struggle"

hhaahaahaha

!

I have often wondered what it would be like living in a society like the one depicted in 1984. Then I wake up in a cold sweat, safe in the knowledge that we are too strong to allow this nightmare to become real. They won't win, they know it now, they're just gonna grab what they can and jump ship.

Chillin, Go spend some time in Malaysia. I lived there for 2 1/2 years, and while there reread 1984. It scared the hell out of me and made me realize just on repressive it was. Even the news from CNN is delayed 30 minutes so they can edit. You only here and see what the government wants you to. I had a full band SW radio that I used to get news from the BBC. The full band SW radio was actually illegal to own in Malaysia. Want a TV? You have to pay an annual license fee. No license you can go to jail. Commercial Radios are next to impossible get and use, (FM wireless), It's illegal for the general population to own a topo map. (but interestingly enough, not a gps).
A simple comment such as "I think the Prime Minister could have done a better job on that" can get you arrested and jailed with no trial, no set term, under the ISA (Internal Security Act) A holdover from the last days of British Rule of Malaysia while fighting the communists. Newspapers have to license each year, print something unfavorable to the govt, and you are out of business at the next renewal, if not arrested, or made to retract the story and issue an apology.

J. And even if you believe they do - fascism is not the same as national socialism. The Nazis killed about six million people in concentration camps. Comparing a trade organisation like the RIAA with that is not just dumb, but a slap in the face of the survivors of the Holocaust.

L. READ WILLIAM SHIRER's ACCOUNT OF THE RISE OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM. You know they incarcerated and legislated their opponents as well as murdered them.

J: Uhhh, and I guess that's exactly what the RIAA does? Industrialized mass murdering?

Once again: Even if you believe that there are similarities between governments run by dictators and todays copyright regime - drawing the analogy to national socialism is just wrong and pathetic.

Just a raw estimate: About 80% of all countries of the world are not run by democratic governments. Does that mean they are al fascists, or even national socialists? Of course not!

You just shouldn't mix up these things. And now go and write some essays, that makes more sense

It can happen here. Its happening right now. There was no Microsoft and RIAA up our assess until recently. OPEN SOURCE NOW!!!!

Ohh, and Remye: Where exactly do you see the components of "belligerent nationalism and racism" in the RIAA policy?

The underlying social components that allowed national socialism to emerge in Germany when it did do not exist today in western democracies.
Germany was mostly a monoculture, unlike our multicultural make-ups, we are incapable of delveloping widespread, systematic racism like the Germans did against the jews.
Germany was a proud nation who had just lost a war that they started, the resulting humiliation combined with a bad economic situation made them ripe for an extreme, nationalistic mindset to take hold.
We are economically thriving and living relatively peacefully.
If the RIAA were that dedicated to suppressing the distribution of music outside of their influence, they would have closed the used record shops, and flea markets and taken away the music sections in public libraries years ago.
The comparison between the RIAA and fascism is such sky-high hyperbole I'm getting nosebleeds just reading it, especially considering how unsuccessful they have been in stopping file sharing anyway.
We all know that our capacity to acquire free music cannot be stopped by the RIAA, the worst they'll be able to do is inconvenience us from time to time.
I wish the Nazis and facsists had been as impotent in their day as the RIAA is today.
But if being paranoid fulfills you in some way than go for it.

Hmmm... I can see the Americans are going to see it different again.

Fascism is a nice good demonization that seems to work very well, though. If it weren't for the totalitarian overtones Americans associate with control over freedom of expression, we probably would still be living under a McCarthy-era sort of paranoia and oppression. I'm glad the PMRC stopped where they did, but we need to roll them back quite a ways.

By the way, I came across a nice quote, but couldn't figure out who said:
"Art + politics = fascism"

Anybody?

Oh, and peace? The United States has been funding and training 'nationalists' Iraqi generals, Death-squads and similar terrorist thugs ever since the end of WWII. We invite immigrants in to toil on our farms and sweatshop factories so we don't have to pay for medical benefits for them, then attempt to kick their children out of our schools and emergency rooms.

Who's seen "Max" ?

Besides, everyone knows Microsoft and Apple are the real fascists.

Go Linux, GO!

Interesting that you brought up the PMRC.
Back in the eighties, the fashionable reason to despise the RIAA was because they capitulated to the PMRC on the issue of parental advisory labels.
The 'porn rock' controversy provided a nice distraction from the blank cassette tax they were pushing for.
I think the biggest issue for me in those days was that a person shouldn't be able to wield that much political influence just because they're married to a prominent politician.

You think it can't happen here? Here's two emails from today only. Be afraid. Its happening right now. YOU MAY BE NEXT. Its not ,imited to music you know. Pretty soon they will arrest you for ripping one of those tags off of a matress.
____________
Hello,

My name is Chris Tisch and I am a reporter for the St. Petersburg Times in
Clearwater, Fla. I am writing an article about an independent music store
in Clearwater that has been searched by law enforcement because they were
selling suspected bootlegs. About 1,100 CDs were seized; loss to the
business was about $10,000. The RIAA was involved in the investigation.
I'm seeking somebody to comment on this who thinks this type of action is
wrong. I would near to hear from you by 6:30 p.m. EST.
____________________

First of all, great site! I've been doing a lot of research into these
> bastards, and it's refreshing to see that I'm not alone. I'm actually
> working on a documentary about live video concert bootlegs (that the
> RIAA has historically inappropriately and incorrectly bundled with
> piracy. So much so that there are music fans who collect bootlegs
> whose homes have been raided by the FBI [at the RIAA's behest] and had
> their collection confiscated along with all of their electronics
> equipment. A bit draconian, no?) and would love to have the
> opportunity to discuss the RIAA's role in this issue. Would any of you
> be interested in a possible interview for this project?
>
> I look forward to hearing from you! You may also reply to _

That's pretty damn scary business about the store raids.

I'm not at all sympathetic to commercial bootleggers, but if they are going to crack my head open because I traded some crappy tape recording I made off the radio or a concert, we ARE on a slippery slope towards much worse.

$$ Admittedly not as cool
$$ $ as the poster that
$$ $$$ started all this.
$$ $$ $$
$$$ $$ BTW, why does so much
$$ $$$ cool artwork have to be
$$ $$ $$ propaganda? OH, DUH!
$$$ $$ the whole point of it is
$ $$ to make an idea appear
$$ 'fashionable.'

PMRC? Hm. I still don't listen to 2-Live-Crew, (FYI, it's entirely too comically-oriented to be considered 'porn') but I was pretty pissed-off back then too.

But to continue my thought (got interrupted, have to do some work too, ya know) It is a bit of hyperbole to compare the RIAA with the Shining Path, or Noriega, or the Contras, or the Khmer Rouge, or the Third Reich.

However, the record labels fit in the overall pattern of fascism because they encourage and profit from the ignorance of consumers and musicians, the stongarm means they use to defend their shady devil's-contract-revenue-streams infringe on our freedom of expression. They push whatever can be cheaply supplied into the distribution system and negate the free-market's ability to select popular music. They similarly extend their control into broadcast media. Ultimately, they limit the diversity of musicans and available music.

Personally, because of their rabid lust for money, I'd compare record labels to the mafia. But I wonder what kind of country they'd run? (probaly fascist)

Corporate music sucks, forever.

Rats, I made a swastika out of dollar signs. But the posting killed all the white space.

Sorry.

Its illegal to rip the tag off the mattress? Uh oh....

I still HAVE the tag on my mattress, how's that for paranoia?

What's the rationale for Malaysia not allowing people to own topographic maps? (am I understanding that point?) That sounds absolutely retarded.

I guess nothing evokes fear and obedience (or enraged resistance) like a bunch of irrational laws that are enforced to the letter.

Is this just old news?

http://www.sf.indymedia.org/uploads/bushpdx.ram
also (for media-challenged computers)
http://truthout.com/docs_02/08.25A.wrp.portland.htm#

I cut my tags off.

So a business was caught selling bootlegs, which is illegal.
The cops got a warrant, searched the place, confiscated the bootlegs and for all we know, the record store is still in business.
Did the record store owner get his ass kicked? Did he dissapear in the night never to be heard from again? Was his store burned down or vandalized or even closed for a few days? Was he even charged?
Forgive me for not seeing this example as you described it to be indicative of some fascist conspiracy.
The guy broke the law, he got caught, what is so threatening about that?
That's like saying its wrong to arrest a drug dealer and confiscate his stash.
It sounds like plain ol' 'rule of law' to me, but maybe I'm a fascist in your eyes for thinking that laws should be enforced.

You're strange. ("Whats so bad about burning books? No one gets hurt....).

The RIAA does extend a common american corporate attitude through: "We are capitalist. We rule the world! The markets always right because we control the market! Capitalism is everything and you wil join us!". Americas biggest export is own attitudes.

From the 1970's until 1989, the RIAA was run by Jay Berman. In 1989 his assistant, Hilary Rosen, a former lobbyist in charge of gay rights causes, became president of the RIAA and Berman became preisdent of the IFPI, an international version of the RIAA, headquartered in Europe. This is a world problem, not just U.S. In the year 2000, Rosen was paid more than 1 million dollars. Rumor has it she is tone deaf.

Why should you be concerned? Because they are trying to globalize intellectual property ownership, in order to lock up intellectual capital.
In ten years there will be no new music or art, since everything under the sun will be copyrighted for a century or more, and you won;t be able to improvise a 12 bar blues without getting sued. Its already happening.
Yet the US constitution says that the purpose of copyright is to promote the progress of arts of sciences by securing for authors the fruits of
their labor for a limited time.

The constitution put copyright before the bill of rights not to elevate it, but to limit it. It is in the section mostly concerned with limiting federal power. However, if you read the RIAA web site at RIAA.org, they actually say that the framers thought copyright was more important than the first amendment. No kidding. Check it out yourself. Read the RIAA blurb, and then read Article i section i, clause 8 of the constitution. Read the whole Article I to get the context of what is concerned about.
As a lawyer practising for over 25 years, as a father of children, as a musician, and as a litigator who has seen internal documents from the record companies ( I just took delivery of 125 boxes of documents produced by Universal Music, the biggest single record company, after they were found in contempt by a federal court for hiding them), I give you this message.

BE AFRAID OF THESE PEOPLE, BECAUSE THEY WILL STOP AT NOTHING. They are not US citizens and are not concerned with the US constitution , the first or fourth amendments. And they are spinmeisters.

More paranoia. "In ten years there will be no new music or art"??? I don't follow you're reasoning. If this daydream of yours ocurred, and it became impossible to reproduce existing copyrighted music, than wouldn't that ENCOURAGE musicians to write their own stuff?
No government or corporate entity has the will and the resources to send 'copyright infringement police' to every sleazy bar and living room jam session looking for copyright violators. Unfortunately, mediocre hacks will be jamming on 'Mustang Sally' for decades to come.
Record companies are motivated by profit.
I'll say it again, record companies are motivated by their desire to make money off of musicians. Any action taken by them that effectively curtailed the creation of new music would not be in their financial interest. Spending more money on copyright enforcement than they earn in royalties wouldn't make any sense either.
But I guess we'll find out who is right on this issue in ten years when all the art and music stops and we're being led around in chains by RIAA minions and have barcodes tatooed on our foreheads.
If that day comes, leflaw, I'll owe you an apology. Until then, maybe you need to get away from your 125 boxes of documents and take your family on a nice vacation before the RIAA makes that illegal too.

Incidentally, the comparison between a bootlegger getting busted and book burnings is so stupid I'm starting to wonder what law school you graduated from.
Bootlegging should remain illegal. Unless you want us to be like most of Asia where there are no limits to bootlegging and a consumer never knows what he's getting.
Consider the Bavarian beer purity law, which has been around since 1516.
The Germans, proud of their reputation for making good beer, became alarmed at the rising trend of using adjuncts in the brewery process. Lazy brewers were throwing anything they could think of in their wort to maximize their profits and quiken the process, thereby compromising the hard earned German beer making tradition and even creating a health hazard.
When the Bavarian beer purity law was passed, anyone caught brewing substandard beer was shut down and/or fined.
As a result, the Germans are still known for brewing good beer.
I suppose you think that the German government was supressing the brewer's freedom of expression.
Part of a government's job is quality control, whether it's music, food, booze,industry, alternative medicine etc... standards need to be established and enforced, unless you want to live in total anarchy.
Are you an anarchist lawyer? There's a paradox for you.

Date: September 14, 2002 @ 4:50 PM
1. You want government quality control for music? You can't be serious.

2. Define "Bootlegging". You can't. It's like "terrorist". It depends on whose ox is being gored. 17 USC 501 says that the artist has an equitable interest in the copyright he assigned. If he streams his own music from his own website after assigning to a record company who lets it go out of print for 25 years, is that bootlegging? If an artist has to make a living selling mp3 cd's of his work because he can't get an accounting from a record company, is that bootlegging? If I stream a live concert tape that was recorded in 1969 before there was federal copyright protection for sound recordings, is that bootlegging? You clearly haven't thought about these things. Why don't you worry more about price fixing than bootlegging? Thats against the law too, you know. And I already told you that 17 USC 101 defines a "copy" and a "phonorecord" as having to be material object. How can you bootleg a sound file if a copy has to be a material object under the copyright act?

3. Boston College 1978. I took Copyright and Constitutional law. You ought to study up and stop substituting press releases for treatises.

4. You didn't even mention the denazification of tim's art work that we did as a result of your teutonic diatribe. We must be careful about the Nazi analogy in the future. Some people get weirdly defensive, like jews do when someone criticizes Israel. Tim's art work was a characture of mid thirties nazi heroic poster art. Not very effective without a twisted cross somewhere in the picture. And you totally missed the analogy to Goebbel's propaganda machine (Nurenberg, Riefenstahl, etc.) Where you at, man?
5. Castro was a lawyer, too. You don't have to swear to be a democrat or a republican to get a law degree you know. As a matter of fact, I'm a libertarian.

"quality control" applies to tangible goods.
If I wanted good german beer, and I had the ability to take german beer and make perfectly good copies of it for free, then that's what I would be doing.
You like it: you buy it. Don't like it: don't buy it.


BUT THEN AGAIN, no serious person gives a FLYING FUCK about German beer.


But beer brewing rocess is more complicated and expensive than that.
I am sure that when/if we get StarTrek-style replicators, many MANY manufacturers will have a problem with it.
Imagine, if I could just get one Porsche, "scan" it, and make 1000 copies of it for under $100 in electric costs.

The RIAA are Nazis.
They should eventually be treated as such.

1. I want someone out there responsible for quality control for retail music, either the government does it or the industry regulates itself(RIAA), which would you choose?
2. Bootlegging is the practice of making a recording of an artists music without the artists knowledge or consent and offering it for sale without giving the artist a share of the proceeds.
If an artist signed away the rights to his music I sympathise but, as you lawyers know, a contract is a contract.
Zappa sued his former record companies for rights to his music and won.
Prince took Warner's forty million dollar contract and then spent ten years snivelling about how unfair it was.
It's funny that we never hear about artists who are prevented from making very stupid creative and business decisions by their record companies.
3. You're the third person in this forum I've clashed with who make statements that seem to defy the most common of sense and then when challenged, offer their educational credentials as a defence. I'm starting do be proud of the fact that I never went to University.
4. I noticed the de-nazification of the poster but I didn't think I had anything to do with it, I just assumed the artist came to his senses.
It's not that I thought the poster wasn't clever, it's just that I can't go a day without hearing someone compared to Hitler, and it is getting tiresome.
5.Being a libertarian is fine but one must recognize the inherent need for regulation in this day and age. Would you buy medicine for your kids from a guy in an alley? Why not?
Bootlegged music might not carry the same health risks as a coat-hangar abortion, but on a fundamental level, they have one thing in common. There is no one to make the abortionist/bootlegger accountable for their lack of quality control, no one to keep them honest.
A lot of libertarian/anarchist types I talk to have this naive notion that we are essentially good, honest people and its only greedy corporations and repressive governments that cause people to rip each other off.
I think that attitude indicates a grave misunderstanding of human nature, which you don't need a university degree to encompass.
In fact, it seems to me that the more time people spend in American universities, the more out of touch with reality they get.
Howja like them apples?

...There is "QUALITY CONTROL" in Western music?!!

prfffthahahaHAHAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAHA
BUAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
hahaha
ha.

Quality control?! ROFL!!! D

In Eminem's song ken kaniff in the marshall mathers lp album, 2 guys suck ken kaniff's dick and the guys say eminem instead of ken and ken gets angry.

In Fat Joe's "What's Luv" song, he says about how he wants to screw more than 1 girl at once, and the girl is saying "it's about us, it's about just me".

In the song "One Step Closer" by Linkin Park, for about 30 seconds, in a loop you hear "SHUTUP!! SHUTUP WHEN IM TALKIN TO YOU" over and over again.

In Britney Spears' "i'm a slave 4u" Britney Spears sounds like shes gettin screwed in the background, like a dog in heat for the entire song. Also, using file sharing, it's out in the open what "other things" that ho does for money. On Oprah "I'm a virgin" my ass!

In the song "Square Dance" by Eminem you hear "so wont you please jump off my dick, lay off, and stay off?".

In the song "Drips" by Eminem, you hear "all.. of these diseases, streaming from Obie's penis" and "all these bitches on my dick"

Now can someone here tell me who the fuck said that THIS is quality??

Nobeu Uematsu, or however you spell his name, creator of the FFIX soundtrack, made quality. Songs that touched the heart, made you sad, raised the spirit, and in some cases were just cheery. Natalie brown's "Let the candle burn" on dmusic was quality.

The stuff the RIAA produces is pure shit. Spica, we are laughing with you.

Spica, old friend, I liked it better when you were ignoring me.
That being said, you're right about the fact that replicators would totally transform how we practice economics, if you invent one, let me know and I'll phone Bavaria and tell them they don't need that pesky law anymore.
If you don't like German beer,(I was drinking one at the time, hence the analogy), let's pick another one...
Lets say either of us went out and bought a new monitor.
We took it home, plugged it in, and after an hour or so, it overheated, caught fire, exploded and blinded you and your kid, who was sitting on your knee at the time, with red-hot glass shards.
Who here wouldn't call their lawyer? Or the company itself, demanding compensation for the injury suffered due to the crappy quality control of the company?
In an unregulated environment, the company would be free to say," buyer beware, go fuck yourself".
Fortunately, there are regulatory agencies in place to ensure that they can't get away with that here. As a result, we all can go out and buy a new monitor, reasonably confident that its not going to blow up in our face.
The same goes for cars, medicine, food, you name it.
Some people astound me how they can go from villifying corporations, and hence, sounding socialist, to villifying government regulation of industries, which sounds laissez-faire, I think you just need someone to hate and you're looking for easy targets.

Neo, shut up, by quality control, I was referring to the quality by which the music was recorded, not the artistic quality of the songs, I want that left up to the artist.
Most bootlegs sound like shit, they are LOW QUALITY recordings, sometimes, the music is good but not when heard through a cheap microphone in the back row of a hockey arena, which is where many bootlegs are born.
Where's Petula? He should be backing me up on this one at least.

I hear you shoshidge, there is quality control there, and we should have it in music. I can go home knowing my monitor won't burn me with shards of glass(that's why I like my laptop lcd so much =D ) and I should be able to pay 15$ for a cd, come home, and know that I will get more than 1 song on it good, if any.

Maybe you're listening to too much top 40 pop music. There is lots of good shit out there, that's one of the beauties of file sharing, you can explore more obscure music easily.
Figure out what styles of music you like and join a group. Jazz, Psychedelic, techno, punk, bollywood soundtracks, avant-garde...
There is so much good music out there I don't think I'll ever hear it all in my lifetime. There is no reason to focus on Brittany and eminem, if enough of us ignore them, they will go away.

dmusic has great stuff. RIAA has bad stuff because they try and grab the absolute most money out of the artists, ususally with the RIAA the same few artists.

And by audio quality, mp3 at 320k is almost or is the wav in spectral analysis graphs. ogg is always superior by a superb amount in these graphs of the frequency. So if I make an ogg file at about 200k, I can have a file that sounds perfect. ogg can sound EXACTLY like a wav at the proper bitrate, I had the graphs to prove it 'fore I did my debug and reformat(found norton's tool AFTER klez had made me do all that). mp3 cannot be the same as a wav, but ogg can. And be easily distributed below the 50 mb wav average.

I HAVE heard those annoying ones that were made through rusted cables or a microphone. The funniest one was the linkin park in the end where the guy actrually sung along to it!

There is good music. I am saying that the RIAA isn't good music, not all music.

Seems like some morons here not only lack dual cognition, but also don't bother to read what other people write.

So I shall repeat myself:

QUALITY CONTROL APPLIES TO TANGIBLE GOODS.
i see no problem with that, it helps mankind.

BOOTLEG MOVIES AND MUSIC ARE OFFERED FOR FREE.
Don't like the quality? Pay more, get it in better quality.

Another thing:
Today's DivX movies have better quality than DVD movies of same binary size.
Same thing with mp3's and music CD's.
Well, suck on THAT.


P.S.: I am just about to impose yet another ignoring-period on some particularly under-developed and annoying lifeforms here.

I don't mind bootlegs that are freely shared, it's when they're being sold that problems arise.
Also, bootlegs are often sold under the auspices of being the genuine article, just like gucci wallets in Hong Kong or Rolexes in Mexico, I consider that a form of thievery and I don't shed a tear for the assholes who profit from the sale of such goods when they get busted.

I have not heard from anyone that quality control of compact disc production was a burning issue of our time. Who gives a shit.

I say that monopolization is a serious threat to liberty, and your response is how dare someone infringe a copyright owned by the very same monopoly?

You apparently have a chip on your shoulder about your lack of education. I didn't trumpet my credentialls - you asked where I went to school, and I told you.

Finally, if the same thing happened to me three times in a short span (like getting into fights with diffrent people over their education) I would venture to say it might be more your problem then theirs.

You don't need a college degree to be educated. But you do need to get an education to be educated.

Well, you don't need a liberal arts degree to be articulate and have a practical approach to things either. (as opposed to talking out of your ass to support whatever ideology fulfills your...?) I work with machinists, mechanics and medical professionals and techs whose opinion I trust in matters beyond work. It certainly helps in their line of work to recognize facts for what they are, and not make assumptions in unfamiliar situations.

And actually, my opinions were formed from experiences I've had in the ten+ years since I've been out of school. So if it makes you feel better, you can forget anything I said about my educational background. (I don't think I ever did.) And I know full well that if I walked into to an investment bank or cigarette company board room or tarot card reader I would be completely abhorrent to their 'common sense.'

If you want some back-up, shoshidge, I can clarify for people here that your government does a slightly better job at regulating manufacturers/protecting consumers than ours does. We've let private insurers & big consumer products companies run rampant with regard to consumer rights in the interests of their profitability. I've seen increasing amounts of 'buyer beware, let them go fuck themselves' attitudes among managerial types here in the last ten years. Really came to a head in the deregulation of the accounting industry didn't it?

Also I don't see how assuming that every individual has limitless greed and dishonesty serves any purpose but to justify your own selfishness and lack of vision. If you ever decide to act with integrity and compassion then you will have changed the nature of reality without uttering a single piece of annoying bullshit. (Which is all I ever do here, sorry everybody)

Go buy a homeless person something to eat, or read to a kid at an orphanage, or maybe you just need to go watch 'A Christmas Carol' again. I'm sorry you are so embittered with society that you feel the need to join the zero-sum/ zero-trust game with the same users who are probably screwing you over now.

It would be really nice if profit-mongering corporations were out of the picture and products were made by designers, engineers, and craftsmen who took pride in their work. I really really don't need any of the stuff that lines the shelves of Wal-Mart.

I don't shed a tear for people who think genuine brand Gucci bags, Rolex watches, and Mercedes Benzes aren't worthless consumerist crap either.

Why should artists care about making 'business decisions' ? Their job is to make good art, not help fatten up some MBA who owns 5000 CDs he never listens to. If someone wants to give Prince $40 million they're the ones making a bad business decision - there's no reason for any amount of music from one person to cost that much money. Prince made some good albums twenty years ago, but he's become quite the degenerate asshole hasn't he? (of course, maybe he quietly donates all that Warner money to a homeless shelter in Minneapolis, in which case, he's pretty cool ;> )

I do hope more artists get a clue and realize they don't need to sign usurous contracts with the big label mafia. Each time I go to a record store, I see more new record labels. (I suppose some of them are camoflage for the big guys) Don't trust that A&R guy everybody! He either sucks, or he doesn't know what he's talking about.

http://www.negativland.com/albini.html

shoshidge, in spite of what you say about yourself, you sound to me like any good ol' corn-fed frat boy I've met. I didn't even know they had those in Canada.

Quality control in CD production ISN'T a burning issue here because we have regulatory standards.
This is feeling like deja vu here, it looks like we're in for another long thread.
Leflaw posted an email about a record store getting searched for bootlegs. It mentioned that some CD's were confiscated, which suggested they had goo reason to search the place, but had no mention of the store owner being charged.
This was presented as evidence towards impending doom for all at the hands of the RIAA, I still don't know what the big deal was about.
That led to a suggestion by leflaw that I supported book burnings.
Then,leflaw asserted that copyright enforcement somehow would lead to the end of new art and music, I argued the opposite was true.
I'm not trying to stir up opinion against me for the fun of it here, I just think some of you get carried away when demonizing those who are on the opposing side, for that I get insulted.
I guess I am treading where I'm not wanted, this is obviously a forum for disgruntled paranoiacs and there irrational conspiracy theories, and not fascist frat boys like myself.

By the way, have you guys been getting all of these annoying ads?

signs of the apocalypse:

1. All the small record stores in my area closed... can now only get cd from megalomarts or chains.

2. All the local movie rental places in my area shut down... now only possibly to rent from giant chain...

3. All trees on property simulaneously dying...

Ads . . . . where ?

P.S. - Again with the bitching at each other hmm way to go on constructively using your enrgies to actually achieve something other than just venting your spleen.

P.P.S. - There's absolutely no point of bitching at me as I don't bite and hemce won't retort to any insults. or derogatory comments !

Hail MP3 !

Plus Hail the 'American' Freedom Of Speech

. . . and again damn with those typo's . . . either too much or too little caffeine here in the UK @ 7:42am . . . d'oh !

do away with Corp America and let the freedom ring.

True story. In my law school corporations class, on the very first day, Professor Donovan (I can't believe I even remeber his name - I hated the course) cited the first rule of capitalism
-
1. Take an investors money
2. Use that money to make more money
3. keep both.

(circa 1975)

Add to that Descarte's 17th century description of corporations, ("groups of like minded individuals") and you can see why the world is fucked up 300 years or even 30 years later.

A lawyer I know was the one who conceived and executed the 5 Billion dollar Holocaust reparations case from the swiss banks, corporations and government. He figured they didn't have the BALLS to assert the statute of limitations. He was right. No balls.

Maybe I should talk to him about the RIAA. Maybe I already have.

sho:

What ads are you getting? We stopped the banner ads last week, you might have noticed.

I'm getting a bunch of crap ranging from 'rolling stone' to 'choose the best picture of Brittany Spears' tits, and a request to change my homepage to lightwebsearch,com, and wild sex club
They appear after about two minutes on here, and they bug the shit out of me.

In response to Rhino, we used to have one small independant movie theatre in town, now we have three or four, the indie record stores that are able to compete with the big ones are well managed and appeal to niche markets, they do pretty good too.
Small, independant business can amd does compete with big chains, they just have to figure out what they can provide that the big ones can't and focus on that.
One video store in town started specializing in hard to find, bizarre, cult movies and with a bit of well placed advertising, they are actually expanding, who knows, maybe they'll be the next Blockbuster.
I've always lamented the 'Walmartification' of small communities, but I also know that the people in those communities that allow it to happen. They're the ones who want lower prices, better hours, better selection, which the Ma and Pa store can't provide.

The ads are on the gnutella news site but not the dmusic site so I think i'll just not go to the gnutella news site, which I was only doing out of habit anyway.

Gnutellanews.com or gnutella.com ?? We host them, you know, but we do not control the ad content . Givce me some more detail, and I will look into it. What is being advertised mostly? Is it pop up explorer windows? (what browser, BTW?)

Its gnutellanews, yes its pop up explorer windows and I use explorer. It only happens on that site as far as I can tell.

juicy thread ya'll..

k..about fascism (or national socialism if you must)

aren't people simply making comparisons..jeez to compare does not denote ONE IS THE VERY THING we're comparing it to. People make comparisons all the time. Those who suggest it is hyper-extensive here put a lid on it.

DID ONE PERSON SAY THE RIAA MASSECRED JEWS

Holy crap thumbtack..why are you always tellin someone to "go and do something" and there you are again pipin on about reading 1984. How many times you read that book anyhow! I think you secretly wish that socio-economic fictional nightmare would come true. At least that way you'd merit some clout fostering such paranoidal attitudes of america (not that there isn't cause for alarm). Tell me, what terribly restrictive government stands the test of time..NONE thank you. The people ALWAYS have the ultimate say so, AT THE VERY WORST THE PUBLIC WILL LAY DOWN IN THE STREET AND DIE AS A PROTEST. What then does the government do..nothing..they're left to die. Eh, people take shit til they reach there limit.

Now Sausage, scuz me Shoshidge..

"If the RIAA were that dedicated to suppressing the distribution of music outside of their influence, they would have closed the used record shops, and flea markets and taken away the music sections in public libraries years ago."

Then you say "I wish the Nazis and facsists had been as impotent in their day as the RIAA is today."

First you ascribe ultimate power to the RIAA suggesting they could remove 45 records from libraries. Then in the next breath you make them as impotent as a mouse.

Here comes more of your bullshit...

Shoshidge: "The comparison between the RIAA and fascism is such sky-high hyperbole I'm getting nosebleeds just reading it, especially considering how unsuccessful they have been in stopping file sharing anyway."

Please don't force me to site examples of the many similarities. You dipshits have to learn that likenesses aren't exagerrations...THEY'RE FUCKING LIKNESSES. And your use of 'Hyperbole' Shoshidge IS IN ITSELF A FUCKIN HYPERBOLE!

anyhoo, the RIAA fit the very definition of fascism: in fact you cannot argue the fact.

here, read it and weep

Fascism: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control.

Guess what: the riaa wears that definition out.

even saying there are NO similarities between governmental fascists of the past is ABSURD TO THE POINT OF A FUCKIN NOSEBLEED.

50 years ago, communities were closely-knitted together. There was no net access, no chat rooms, people hardly knew other people from across the world.

Today we have friends in all the corners of the globe. Most if not all of us are here for a love of art and music. The RIAA is killing music. In my eyes, they're no different to Hitler's Third Reich, just more advanced technologically, anyway.

and I wonder whether they understand technology either

Spwee, my point was they didn't and COULDN'T remove music from libraries, I'm sure they would have liked to though.
I dissagree with the belief that file sharing is some god given, self evident civil right, and therefore, supressing file sharing is akin to the sort of civil rights oppressions that fascist regimes are notorious for.
I like file sharing, its fun, free and convenient, but it is not a vital part of my life.
Living under an oppressive fascist regime meant living in a state of constant fear. Those regimes enforced strict rules of political and behavioural conformity with the threat of violence.
To suggest that the record industry or even the American government is willing or capable of such extreme action is irrational and paranoid.

And Spwee, if I tried hard enough, I could find similarities between my grandma and fascism. A bottle of shoe polish has similarities to fascism, that doesn't justify the comparison in a persuasive arguement.
Besides, once I call you a Nazi, where can I go from there? Asshole, moron, cocksucker, retard... none of those have the same stopping power and implications as Nazi. Why don't you save the big guns for when their needed instead of shooting gophers with them.
And in the grand scheme of things, the RIAA are gophers. Their ultimate goal is to stop you from engaging in an activity that wasn't even possible ten years ago, most of the world still gets along fine without it.
They don't want to stop the creation and consumption of music, that wouldn't be in their interest, they don't want world domination, they just want to conserve the status quo that their industry has profited from (on the backs of musicians).
That might make them jerks but to call them Nazis and fascists is just tacky, and that sort of extreme overstatement makes it difficult for more moderate types to listen to your more sober arguements.
And those points go for anyone who throws the word fascist around at anybody, oil companies, religions, feminists, environmentalists, anti-abortionists..any controversial group.

jank: I think I got misunderstood. Probable, tho not intentional. My point was that fascism is NOT what's going on here. My point was that fascism is an extreme way of thinkin about what's going on. I don't think (or see) anything about the components of "belligerent nationalism and racism" in the RIAA policy (what I've read anyway, tho I'll admit I've not read much of said policy as it's actually pretty boring stuff). Never have. RIAA has nothing to do with racism that I know of. Didn't mean to give that impression of my position. The line you refer to was just part of the complete definition. My rant was meant to sound paranoid and unjustified. I think that part carried well *smirk*.
Shoshidge, I agree. The hitler analogies are getting a bit tiresome, but whatcha gonna do (said with an "I give up shrug"). Hitler is the ONLY "dictator" type person that many people living today can relate to because of the timing and familiarity. Again, I agree with you, and I'm sure that we (they) could make comparisons to Caligula, Julius Caesar, or any other vast number of tyrants and dictators if the knowledge was there. Not saying it's right, this is just the line of reasoning I use to get thru all the boring same old "hitler" analogies. Hope I got that out right *smirk*.

"and I wonder whether they understand technology either" nice point from chillinbuzz

Shoshidge, i'm going to show you how you're a total dipshit. No offense. I understand the emotion one has toward the conspiracy-theorists, but alot of your opposition here are pretty level-headed. Some people just get sick of all the griping i think.

Shoshidge: "Spwee, my point was they didn't and COULDN'T remove music from libraries, I'm sure they would have liked to though."

Earlier you say: "If the RIAA were that dedicated to suppressing the distribution of music outside of their influence, they would have closed the used record shops, and flea markets and taken away the music sections in public libraries years ago."

Let's see how those two sentences come together:

"The riaa would have liked to close down the used record shops," that you're sure of. "They simply weren't dedicated enough, but they would have."

Number one: "if they WOULD HAVE" closed down sections of libraries THAT PRETTY MUCH MAKES THEM FASCIST AS HELL!!!!!

YOU SAID IT ASSHOLE NOT ME!

No wait, they COULDN'T because they were powerless against us. No wait, they COULD have done so but they weren't dedicated enough. Yeah that's the ticket. No wait that means with the right dedication they could do anything they want, like be fascist. No wait not fascist, just shut down music sections in libraries.

Either way you're saying they can do virtually anything they want. They are POWERFUL enough to actually close the record shops you say and music sections in the libraries. That's what you're saying.

You my friend are a backpeddler.

You see. You oppose even yourself. "The riaa could close down the used record shops if they wanted to with the right dedication. But they aren't that dedicated so they can't."

Either way the riaa COULD do what they want with the right dedication. If you say they absolutely positively cannot..then you're backpeddling.

Still YOU YOURSELF MAKE THEM FASCISTS BY SAYING THEY 'WOULD' SHUT DOWN PARTS OF LIBRARIES.

THAT'S FUCKING FASCIST ASSHOLE.

YOU SAID IT NOT ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

They may remove music from libraries, but what good will it do? I will get it from a friend than. Music is information though. Entertainment stands on information, just like windows 95 does on dos. Entertainment, lyrics are given, music from sheet music is given, and that is information.

Now i agree some, very few, go overboard. Thumbtack stresses a little overconcern for some of the more extreme possibilities. Nonetheless guys like him keep us on our toes, and he does site very good and REAL examples of OPPRESSIVE forms of technological control.

In my opinion YOU OVEREQUATE THE WORD FASCISM with Nazism or GOVERNMENTAL FASCISM.

Shoshidge, fascism MEANS fascism. It does not necessarily TIE IN THE GERMANS or whoever else you want to tie in. The word applies to THOSE WHO FIT THE DEFINITION.

NO MORE NO LESS.

What would you rather call the riaa.

a little OVERZEALOUS

shit! give me a break! now my nose IS bleedin!

GUYS LIKE YOU NEED HARSH WORDS

YOUR LOGIC IS LAZY

YOU LACK THE INTUITIVENESS TO SPOT YOUR OWN LOGICAL IMPUNITIES

The question is not whether ONE CAN STRETCH THE DEFINITION OF FASCISM to include SHOE POLISH.

The question is does the term FASCIST (nevermind its political implications) fit the overall behavior of the riaa.

Unquestionably IT DOES!! Without a single doubt!

Suing others for writing an article about file-sharing technology is fascist in a country that saviors its right to free-speech.

Computer spying isn't the least bit fascist???
Deleting others personal files without a warrant wouldn't be construed as fascist in this country (assuming those bills are passed)? The list goes on and you know it.

In light of all their dictatorial, scuse me, unfair, scuse me, thoughtless, scuse me, unwelcomed, scuse me, wonderful practices...give me ONE DEFINTION THAT BETTER DESCRIBES THEIR UNSAVORY BEHAVIOR. I DARE YOU TO GIVE ME A BETTER ADJECTIVE. IF YOU DO NOT; YOU ADMIT YOU ARE WRONG.

IF YOU DO I BET IT MAKES MY FUCKIN NOSEBLEED.

whew! now the most FASCIST thing about the RIAA

NOW THAT WERE POSITIVE they are FASCIST.

is the FACT that THEY THINK THEY CAN HOLD BACK TECHNOLOGY OR THE FREE DISTRIBUTION OF INFORMATION. Whether it be music files, software, or my GRANDMA'S BORROWED PHOTOS OF FASCIST SHOE-POLISH , the riaa actually has the FASCIST GULL to think mere laws or mere meddling can prevent millions of web surfers from sharing personal media in a era that keeps improving upon and selling such sharing capabilities.

Alright alright..it isn't necessarily fascist to WANT to prevent the sharing of your product..but for an unmindful disorganization, i mean organization, such as the riaa to attempt to IS DOWNRIGHT FASCIST. The are attempting to pull off a GODLIKE REORDERING of things.

Shoshidge..no one is suggesting file-sharing is some naturally ordained right of ours. Simply put..people gravitate to convenience. If there's a cherry tree nearby, i don't go to spain to get my cherries. That's all i and others are saying. And topple that with an economy that lives and breathes selling the capabilities that allow for file-sharing, well..you get the picture DON'T YOU.

It is fascist gumption to try and stamp out file-sharing. The alternative is to USE file-sharing to market your product.

Now i have uttered continually that such oppressive tactics WILL BE STAMPED OUT IN TIME, at least in a country like ours with significant checks and balances. So in that way, i agree with you, its ridiculous to worry over ALOT OF THIS. Nevertheless the word FASCIST comes into play, success or no.

I associate fascism with nationalism and public policy that is justified in an irrational way. This happens to include Apple Computer, dictators, feudal societies, religions, self-serving leaders who corrupted socialism, and racist/xenophobic/ warhawk politicians. They might maintain their position by political oppression and murdering the opposition, or by usurping the free market with monopolistic powers and threatening financial ruin of their opposition. What is common to them is self-serving appeal to things like 'common sense' or 'tradition' and 'heritage' or 'history' or inappropriate use of a mathematical model without an objective assessment of the facts. They also tend to adhere to mechanisms that maintain their own power in defiance of new technologies (that allow protected public dialogue) that make them obsolete or undesirable. That is why allowing one to exist will make it easier for the other to happen. I guess it's time to upgrade my stance, then.


No I don't fear for my own life or liberty - that is only because I had the fortune to be born within the borders of the United States. What do you call it when the largest military power in the world stands idly by when hundreds of thousands of people rip each other apart with their bare hands? Or when 16-year-old thugs with stolen assault rifles are allowed free reign? What about when the strongest military power arbitrarily decides step into a conflict or betray alliances with known dictators to maintain the price of oil? Or when they are in disagreement with the more sensible nations (like Canada) about who gets to throw rocks and who gets to use air strikes?

The US government has been and is quite supportive of frightening oppressive regimes - and by extension, is part of an extremely oppressive world 'government.' That's not a conspiracy theory, it doesn't need to be as complicated as a 13-year old can imagine. If you live in a town that houses a US military base, you know that the US military, like all military organizations, just happens to attract disenfranchised psychopaths who believe (and thus perpetuate the notion) that brutality and force is a necessary component of civilization. Just because we happen to live in a temperate zone in terms of violence doesn't exclude us from culpability with what our government decides to intrude upon or ignore.


The professional managers who run, for example, big record labels, work under an analogous system. Here, they believe that limitless selfishness and greed are the only factors that govern the our lives - and by virtue of their size and control they guarantee that that's exactly what happens in their industry. Under this B-school way of thinking, they have strong incentive to commodify and lock up resources (inventory) to sell at the highest price they can. Large commercial entities will develop competitive (identical) products as cheaply and in as formulaic a manner as possible. If a back-catalog is large enough, and distribution is sufficiently restricted, a large company can make a ton of money from that alone - and hence be able to let go of a lot of A&R staff, deny lots and lots of new bands recording contracts, and dictate to broadcasters what they can and cannot play.

If file-sharing went away tommorrow, all talk among major entertainment companies to make digital music available over the web will disappear as well.

Professional managers have no reason to care about the state of music or culture or even long term profitability of the company they currently leech off of. As soon as the market value of Capitol drops below a recoverable level, these locusts will leave for some other consumer goods marketing concern. (for more looting) New MBA's step in for restructuring, some more honest employees get shaken out, and the cycle begins again.

Meanwhile, music on the radio becomes more and more homogenous across a country of 250 million people, bands with integrity (and who have a life) publish their music independently or not at all, and the websites we make that describe the sort of music we DO like get shut down.

File-sharing is free expression, culture is priceless. By putting files in my shared folder and putting downloads on my webpage, I am communicating to whoever is interested (and only to whoever is interested) what I like. Don't tell me I have no right to ignore your asinine valuation of 'good' big-label music or 'bad' non-label music, Mr. Ed McMahon. How much I like one song vs. another has little to do with its technical merits or the cost of anything that went into its creation or anything that has to do with you.

"And in the grand scheme of things, the RIAA are gophers. Their ultimate goal is to stop you from engaging in an activity that wasn't even possible ten years ago, most of the world still gets along fine without it."

huh? are you actually proving my point AGAIN!

hey, let's bring out mr. paraphrase!


the riaa is a gopher YOU SAY

their ultimate goal is to stop you from engaging in an activity that wasn't even possible ten years ago...

SOMETHING, you say, THE WORLD STILL GETS ALONG WITHOUT

Let me see here; the riaa ACTUALLY CARES ENOUGH to TRY AND STOP ME from DOING SOMETHING the WORLD STILL GETS ALONG WITHOUT..something that's SO NEW..THAT ONE CANNOT ARGUABLY SUGGEST IT IS EITHER RIGHT OR WRONG.

If we don't need it Shoshidge (if we can so get along with it-filesharing)...WHAT'S ALL THE FUCKIN FUSS ABOUT. Why is the riaa SO STINKIN UP AT ARMS? WHY in the hell have they bought out entire companies, been on a sue-spree, sideswipped the competition, and endeavored to pass biased (fascist) laws favoring only them.

Are you suggesting (good-god, for gracious-sakes man) that the RIAA are FASCIST enough TO ACTUALLY PUT ME IN JAIL, INTERRUPT THE ECONOMY, REWRITE THE CONSITUTION, HALT TECHNOLOGY, AND TRAP-DOOR WORTHWHILE SINGERS, SONGWRITERS, PRODUCERS, AND INTERNET VISIONARIES in some deluded half-assed hopeless cause AS YOU PUT IT, a gopher-cause AS YOU HAVE COINED NOW.

something WE CAN ALL FUCKIN LIVE WITHOUT ANYWAY!

IF THAT AIN'T FASCIST FASCIST FASCIST..to cause SUCH FUCKIN MAYHEM over FUCKIN NOTHIN!!!!!!!

as YOU put it

Then MY NAME AIN'T DIPSHIT BABY!

"Living under an oppressive fascist regime meant living in a state of constant fear."

many file-sharers now live in constant fear in lue of all the riaa threats

"Those regimes enforced strict rules of political and behavioural conformity with the threat of violence"

jailtime isn't violent?

forcing people to not file-share isn't behavioural conformity?

lopsiding an entire industry around ONE organization isn't strict? isn't regime like?
isn't fascist like?

is underserving of alarm to those wish to creat a freer funner, better music industry, a vision the ENTIRE public (as well as ENTIRE industries) keep CALLING FOR, goddamn SHOUTING FOR.

Are they that deaf?

Or are they just that FASCIST?

For an unfascist organization that sure BRING ABOUT THE WORD ALOT.

I am one of 100s of millions. http://www.gnutella.com/forums/dev/614/ all the ideas are here, so noone will be caught. I will always share.

You know Shoshidge..one more thing..i read post after post of sober arguments here..

the only one who wouldn't let fascist go

WAS YOU!

Status Quo???

The nazis' status quo, since you can't let it go, was to annihilate jews by the hundreds.

The riaa ain't in to jew-killing, that's for sure. If that's your point i agree. But if you suggest their status quo (in need of maintainin as you put it) is a humble one you got shit for brains. It isn't humble, it isn't more than humble, it isn't medium, it isn't a brickhouse of a status quo, it is a fuckin fascist one. One that needs no introduction of Nazis, jews, national socialism, Stalin, Hitler, my grandma, shoepolish, or that guy in the bathroom that hands you a mint and a towel on your way out.

You talk about moderate types listenin to the argument of filesharing. There's nothin moderate about you. Your whole scheme is to equate fascism with Nazis. You can't argue without it. If you cannot force us to exaggerate, or keep up false appearances, you got two things: jack and shit, and shit left town. You know what you are..Moderately Inept At Thinking--The new title for my book, a rare
treatment into the phenomenon called Shoshidge.

Watch our subject's joyful harping on words of 'fascism'. Uninstall Nazism and the illusionist-arguer falls bereft of logic.

Your drunk on fascism i think. All i hear are sober arguments on behalf of filesharing. Well, some overworrying, some doomsday phrophecying from time to time. But primarily sane level-headed undebatable arguments. Which is prolly why you go for weak points, cuz you got nothin else.

Finally i know what you OBJECT TO ABOUT ALL THE CONSPIRACY-THEORISTS

THEY'RE TOO FUCKING ACCURATE

DAMN I'M GOOD AT EXPELLING SHIT

Shit is right.
My definition of fascism is different than yours, which is where the problem seems to arise.
The RIAA's desire to eliminate all opportunities by the general public to obtain copyrighted music through unauthorized(by them), means does not alone make them fascist, the determining factor is whether or not they actually have the power to do it.
We've all daydreamed of what we would do to improve the world if we were proclaimed undisputed ruler of all mankind.
I was in the supermarket the other day and I was wondering how wonderful it would be if trashy tabloids were banned, seeing that they seem to serve no journalistic purpose and only exist off of the basest voyeuristic tendencies of bored housewives.
That desire alone didn't make me fascist, however if was elected supreme ruler tomorrow and banned all of the tabloids, I would be accused by some of fascism, supressing free speech and the press, etc.
The RIAA opposed FM radio, cassette tapes, cd burners and now this. If you want a better term to describe them here it is, reactionary.
The continually fail to predict and incorporate technological advances, rather, they try to prevent the advances from establishing themselves, which is stupid and futile.
The definition of 'fascist' seems to have transformed into,"a fascist is anyone who attempts to prevent me from doing what I want to do no matter what that happens to be."
What about the guy pouring used motor oil in the river, or distributors of white supremacist propaganda or kiddie porn? Most people would want those guys thrown in jail, is that fascist or democratic, and if the majority of our population decides that file sharing as it is practiced today is wrong and should be illegal, will you settle with that? Or is that fascism too?

Sorry bout all the name-calling..i just feel guys like you disseminate the truth too much..not that you don't have a point.

> i just feel guys like you disseminate the truth too much

... huh?

Don't sweat the name calling, I've been called worse. It would be nice to try and figure out a good description for organizations like the RIAA, who, when offered the choice of creative, visionary positive action as opposed to heavy handed, dictatorial indimidative action, choose the latter. 'Fascism' is too inflammatory, but other more general insults like 'asshole' are too vague, any thoughts?

Hey Spwee! Sorry - dictatorial intimidative action is worse than mere fascism, it's intimidative action. Fascism is annoying from a scientific, rational standpoint, but it has it's uses.

If the majority of the population agrees that file-sharing is wrong on the basis of mis-information dished out by a self-serving oligopoly, or if it is wrong with respect to the interests of rampant consumerism and profiteering, or some other basis that is harmful to democracy and prevents further dialogue on the subject, yes, it is fascism. Fascism is reactionary when it allows those in control to increase their power. Fascism is conservative when it keeps the crooks on top, well, on top. Fascism is progressive when it convinces people that the world can be made better. Some ideologies, like Nazism or religions, have no rational basis or allow for discussion, only fascist rantings.

To want to be 'undisputed' ruler of the world would be as unethical as telling someone to 'shut up' in this forum. I never imagined that. So you can probably tell that I've seen and heard your position argued with less opacity than you spew, shoshidge. I point out where the United States government acts like or condones extremely violent, totalitarian oppressors, (Ruwanda, Liberia, Nicaragua, El Salvador) and how corporations can be damaging to public interest on a frightening scale (tobacco, oil, venture capitalists, mainstream media, urban sprawl) - and you give me supermarket tabloids and a person too lazy to store used motor oil for disposal?

There is nothing inherent in corporate governance that allows containment (or contentment) of greed and exploitation. There is no reason for them to recognize technological advances that allow us greater freedoms. In fact if an economical method of cleaning motor oil from a river were invented, Dupont or Dow would buy the start-up, bury the patent for seven years, and then maybe they will pretend they invented it and bill the taxpayers $40 billion for its use. 'That's how we make money in this world' I was told. Again, I was there, I've seen this thinking at work at a large manufacturer - it made me suprised (after the fact) how candid and knowlegable a business school professor could be.

In the US, corporate entities (charters) were granted the rights of a human being (ie, irrevokability) not too long ago. That was a controversial matter when it was generally recognized (Abraham Lincoln) that their activities could be harmful to the general populace. Since then, we were somehow convinced that we were the greedy bad-guys and they were going to provide us with wonderful products out of the good of their hears that would allow us not to think or worry and spend our evenings at home with a case of beer and our TV. (BTW Have you been visited by the Ghost of Christmas Past yet?) Meanwhile, they have amassed resources beyond our imagination, and spend hundreds (sometimes thousands) of times what you or I earn in a year just for political lobbying and campaign contributions.

How much justice do you think YOU can buy? I think people who steal $40 million should be thrown in jail indefinitely. (Come on, how many ailing grandparents and children does Ken Lay have?) Have you seen the stock market? That's your dad's pension fund going down the toilet, you know. If you pay attention, and actually read a mainstream newspaper once in a while, you'll see that corporations are already the undisputed leaders of the world. And they don't care. Not just 'it's OK, as long as I get my $500K paycheck'-I-don't-care, but they abso-fucking-lutely don't care about anything or anyone.

http://www.digitalspeech.org/boucher.shtml

Petula, I didn't address your statements regarding American foreign policy because, I don't really dissagree with you on those points, also, any attempts to persuade each other regarding our respective political/ideological differences haven't been very fruitful.
Left leaning people and Right leaning people will never truly see eye to eye, they operate on totally opposing axioms, bu I think a society works best when those two forces keep each other in check.
If I feel like a good political debate, I'd much rather do it face to face.
I think you have an image in your mind that represents a typical privilaged, ignorant, North American conservative stereotype. Because you don't know me, its easy to overlay that stereotype upon me, I think when you're telling me off, it's like you're striking a blow against capitalist pigs everywhere.
Which is funny because I don't consider myself a conservative by nature, although i've been slowly sliding that way over the years,( it brings to mind the famous quote by Churchill).
If people generally become more conservative as they age does that mean they get dumber with experience?
Most of the issues you have brought up remain undisputed by me, we know what the problems are, the disagreement lies in our understanding of the causes and of the potential solutions.
You don't like my choice of analogies? Fine, but why the condescention and insults? You should be trying to understand the point, not nit-pick the way it was delivered.
My point with the tabloids was to demonstrate that any one of us, despite the best intentions, could be accused of fascism if we were given the power to make our political wishlists come true.
Do you really disagree with that? Doesn't it reflect one of the main leftist axioms,(power corrupts)?
If I had the time and desire to want to convince you, a total stranger, of the validity of my opinion on any of these issues, I would be more thorough, but participating in this forum is too time consuming as it is.
Although I'm opinionated, I am not a revloutionary, in fact, my tendency towards moderation seems to be what gets people so riled up around here. A moderate in a room full of extremists becomes an extremist in the eyes of the extremists he's sharing the room with. And I'm pro-file sharing.
Other people who have written posts that seem more in tune with the RIAA's point of view have been taunted, ridiculed, and accused of being in the RIAA's employ. That is what initially started pushing my buttons, it struck me as insufferably unfair and immature.
I love some of the thoughtful debate going on here, I just wish we'd all be adults(myself included) and keep it nice.

You think I'm condescending - try watching CNN. I agree with your stance on censorship - I figured that much was obvious b/c I haven't told you to shut up or eat shit and die, and b/c I invite criticism on an open forum. However, if you are going to tell me you refuse to take time to frame your argument in a more convincing manner, you really should leave the debate to people who will. (or care) I really can't say I've learned anything from you.


Socio-economic realities in the US are beyond comprehension for citizens of the rest of the civilized world. Maybe this is why you say some of the things you do.

1998, two independent incidents: Two rural good ole boys dragged a random black person from the back of their pickup truck until his torso ripped apart - In one of our wonderful cities, a family of four got shot dead in their car simply because they got off the wrong freeway exit. When you kick desperately poor people around too much, they feel the need to defend their communities in strange ways.

You know - Riot, Herbie Hancock, 1968 - too many Americans still live in the third-world.

I've have met Japanese, Canadians and Europeans (and residents of Orange County, CA) who are quite shocked to learn how some people in our country live. They seemed genuine and compassionate (but insufferably naive) On the other hand Native Americans, Asians/Indians, South Americans, Africans, Eastern Europeans, Russians and Samoans I know aren't phazed about American society at all. Of course that's only my limited experience over the past ten years, and I don't know if it actually applies to you or not.

I know I'm not as bad off as some people. But I still get angry at people here. (where I live) by that I mean I hear them talk and watch them live. Unlike the right-wing in sensible countries with better school systems, nationalized health care, and welfare systems that really take care of the old and infirm, shorter work weeks, adequate maternity leave for both parents, etc. the right-wing in the United States only perpetuate their adipose layers & their fundamentalist religious nonsense, they siphon money out of poor communities with detached retail stores, they import cheap crap and exploit foreign workers who are kept from unionization under threat of violence, and support our schoolyard-bully foreign policy.

It's true that the entertainment industry is only a part of the problem. There are lots of other private industrial monsters I plan to help disintegrate. I've gotten more politically extremist with age. It's because I realized how little I have to lose - I'm quite annoyed with how much of a cowardly sell-out I was when I was 20 - my friends and I were the image of sheer cowardice, timid self-serving old farts at a tender young age. Honestly, I have no understanding of conservatism beyond that.

Being intellectually honest with myself, on the other hand, has had other side benefits - I can solve problems and understand issues in engineering and math that I thought were beyond me back when I was twenty, I have better & nicer friends, I know where my anger and frustration comes from, I sleep better.

I don't know how those things are related, but they're all true - everything just clicks together nicely nowadays.


I get suspicious when other scientists try to pull a fast one without explaining their rationale - so I try to get confirmation from other sources, try to repeat the experiment, etc. (you know, otherwise it's fascism) However, 'axioms' are never appropriate in politics, shoshidge - we have free will, we are not Schrodinger's cat, we are not bouncing ball bearings in a cage, we are not fruit flies in a vial. That's also why I don't buy the line that our way of life is acceptable and there is nothing to be done because everybody is inherently greedy, brutal, competitive, etc.

I make explicit choices on how I act based on a thorough examination of the consequences. The reason I don't ram Mercedes Benzes off the freeway or pour used motor oil down a storm drain is not because I'm afraid of getting arrested and going to jail, or fear of retaliation or because I don't want to swim in a beach full of polluted gunk. I only refrain from those activities as long as I believe there is a communal benefit when everyone makes that decision. Same with the reason why I save leftovers to hand out to homeless people or tutored high school kids or volunteered at the hospital. I make the world around myself civilized to the extent that I act in a civil manner - nothing more, nothing less.

Determinism vs. Free Will was argued over and done a long long time ago. The last time it was seriously discussed was during the Enlightenment. Forgive me if that sounds insulting and condescending, forgive me even more if you don't know what I'm talking about, because you still live in the Dark Ages, but that was probably the only thing that redeems Western civilization.

(Just happens I've been thinking about changing my icon to an image of a Gutenburg press.)

good debate here shoshidge..

number one: reactionary? everything's reactionary...reactionary does not define the attitude of their behavior. That's like saying they are reacting. No shit. The question is in what manner? Tell me seriously, what is the emotion behind their reactionary behavior. Is it panic? I think yes. Is it worry? I think yes. Is it overzealous. I think yes. Is it controlling, meaning beyond the realm of being responsibile to consumers and fair to an advancing technological industry? Without a doubt. Is it monopolistic? Without a doubt. Do they overstep their bounds? Unquestionably. Are they presumptios in their riteousness, calling people pirates all the time? Yes. Are they smug and even dictatorial in all this? The previous questions suggest they are more than dictatorial. At what point do they become fascist? How far must they go with their controllingness before they become either dictatorial or fascist? Do i think they will begin shooting people in the streets over cds no. Is that what it takes for YOU to call them fascist. I think yes! I think they must actually recreate the holocaust before you call them fascist. Shew!

Its the entire package Shoshidge, not just the issue of banning file-sharing.

"The continually fail to predict and incorporate technological advances, rather, they try to prevent the advances from establishing themselves, which is stupid and futile."

And fascist too. To continually fail to predict and incorporate technological advances sounds pretty f'n fascist to me, not to mention trying to halt technology. Turn back time? If that ain't fascist i don't know what is.

Shoshidge stop defining fascist by your terms.
You can't just stick to YOUR personal definition of fascism.

: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control.

an autocrat is one who has undisputed influence or power

the question is do they have 'strong undisputed influence or power

OFCOURSE

The riaa has arrogantly molded the industry to favor only them, restricting creativity, and shutting out the competition including many prospective artists just to make a few more millions. They also spit on the consumers that make them rich refusing customer satisfaction. They have attempted to stop free speech on some levels, to undermine advancements in hardware and technology, are trying to limit our choices with hardware and cd players and the with the playability of media. Everywhere else in the world convenience and the pushing of technology is becoming the norm. Yes other industries restrict as well, but none i know of are so terribly lagging as much as the music business right now.

Add all this up and you got yourself a pretty fascist organization

I know what you mean about the term being overused, and ill-used. But in this case it is rather appropriate. Seems to me you'll have find another issue where you can vent you're frustration on the misuse of the word. Nevermind file-sharing. Altogether they are fascist.

Now many agree honoring copyrighted music is a fair request, however stamping out millions of music files supported by entire industries is the most absurd fascist idea, whether they're choosing to be or not. Remember one does not have to choose to be fascist to behave fascist.

Petula..brilliant writing,

Shoshidge..its hard bein the opposition round here. I certainly see that. Nevermind what the riaa throws our way, alot of looneys pop in and stir things up for a laugh. Then alot of smart but uneducated people waltz in and create disguises for truth.

Why so much turmoil round here? Venting. The world is crazy too, its that way for a reason. Not enough people stand up and say BULLSHIT, i'm not takin that. The fewer stupid/irresponsible people in the world screw it up for the rest of us. Violence, drug abuse, poverty, all of it stem from ignorance or a lack of concern. Too many people turn their back these days. Too many people stand down or look the other way. That's why things stay the same.

Yes, you are deserving of more respect. It was a worthy point. One i think deserves whittling down. Yes, more here should be respectful to the rare opposition. I for one.

You have a point about the word being misused, i'll agree. No one can truly say the riaa is choosing to be fascist for simply standing up for their copyrights. But YOU absolutely cannot say they don't fit the definition as a whole. Its impossible. I showed how they easily fit the defintion; at least one version from merriam-webster. But given their fascist track record, i don't think i'll give them the benefit of the doubt on the file-sharin issue. You however can believe it unfascist.

Good debate indeed, I'll concede then that the RIAA does exude some definite fascist aromas, especially in the arena of copyright protection.
I'm still not as convinced of their total inherent evil, in fact, I think they were necessary at one time.
Until recently, quality recorded music was very expensive to produce, it was impossible for all but the very lucky few to self-finance a recording.
Without someone to front the money, great records might never have been made, listen to "songs in the key of life" and imagine how expensive that must have been to do in the mid seventies.
Accepting that financing for recorded music had to come from somewhere, you are left with two choices, state or private.
In my experience with the grant system in Canada, I know that getting a grant for a recording depends on your ability to play the bureaucratic game rather than the artistic merit of the proposal itself. As a result, a plethora of taxpayer funded shit has been recorded, when the shit fails to sell, the shitmaker usually blames mass media and lack of arts appreciation in school. He then applies for another grant and gets it and the whole stupid circle starts over again. I've met guys who live on grants.
At least there is a glimmer of merit based recognition in the privately funded system(not always).
Computers have eliminated most of the usefullness of the RIAA as recording, marketing and distribution are not within the grasp of the common schlepp.
SO whether the RIAA is fascist, pseudo fascist or not, I still think they are doomed to obscurity.
And now I'll address some of what Petula said...
Petula, you are not my professor, congressman, or even my friend for that matter, between my day job and trying to make music, I'm left with very little leisure time, the time I spend butting heads with you is time i could be spending with my girlfriend or any other corporeal person in my life, I'm doing the best i can with the time allotted to me, if my arguements don't make sense that might be your problem as I'm trying to keep my statements generalistic and layman comprehensible.
Your criticisms of American culture are usually anecdotal, which is effective when trying to persuade someone emotionally but aren't very useful when determining the overall viability of a culture of 300+ million.
Even in Canada which is one tenth your size, I could find an example of some horrific act of human or corporate degeneracy in any newspaper in any city in any given day, So what?
On a statistical level, when considering factors like safety, economic opportunity, health care availability, Americans, on average, have it pretty good.
We all know the U.S. isn't perfect, but if it sucks so badly why are people from the rest of the world tripping over themselves to live there?

Your insistance on equating conservatism with greed, religious intolerance, selfishness and social apathy fits with your appearent tendency to evaluate things by their worst case scenarios.
Most conservative people are pretty decent, they are not on the same planet as Fred Phelps and Pat Buchanan, and they shouldn't all be lumped together.
If I insisted on writing off all liberals as atheistic, communist, drug-addicted bleeding hearts I imagine you would take issue with that.
I don't believe you are intellectually honest with yourself, I think like many politically passionate people, especially activists,(left or right), you seek out information that supports your pre-existing point of view, and ignore or ridicule any conflicting viewpoints. This state of intellectual denial is important to maintain ones political resolve.
You seem incapable of encompassing the reality that some people who consider themselves conservative are actually intelligent, informed, decent folks. The only difference between you and them is that they have been exposed to different media.
I listen to a lot of talk radio, I switch from the right wing AM station to the leftist campus station or CBC, and whoever I'm listening to, I really try to give them the benefit of the doubt, whether they are Dr. Laura or Noam Chomsky.
I don't agree with any of them all of the time but unless they are total wacko assholes like Phelps, or loudmouths like Jello Biafra, I feel no reason to classify them as evil or stupid.
I still don't think the RIAA is evil or stupid.
I guess I'm just a pussy fence sitter.

Also, Petula, while your endeavors to improve the lot of the less fortunate through volounteer and charity work are commendable, and I appreciate that your politics seem motivated by the desire to speak on behalf of those under-represented people, that does not mean that everyone around you is so selfless.
As for myself, I probably don't do as much as you claim to, I volounteer at the local campus radio station and help out around the community when I can, I am not a selfish greedy person.
Nor do I believe that most people around us are selfish or greedy but all it takes is a few assholes to ruin it for everyone.
Laws and regulations exist to provide consequences for negative actions which might be performed by those of us who lack the moral initiative to be good people for the sake of it.
Accepting that pragmatic truth does not ,by default, suggest that I endorse greed or selfishness as was earlier implied.
And this brings it all back to the initial "gift economy" saga. A society full of nothing but Petulaclarks would not need laws or regulations, but if you let the Shoshidges in,(as you portrayed me earlier), the whole thing would fall apart.
And this is what scares me about the way idealistic, utopian, "leftists",(I still cringe having to use that term, sorry), think.
It's not their motives or their hearts, which are usually fine, but they envision a culture that eliminates poverty, social injustice, violence, socio/economic heirarchies and environmental degradation without ever considering the sorts of things that would have to happen to make this culture come about. They assume such a culture is a natural development of human social evolution, and therefore, because it hasn't happened yet, they jump to the conclusion that some group or groups must be keeping it from happening.
They also gloss over the fact that cultural revoloutions which have started with these very same principles and aims have resulted in some of the most horrific large scale abuses of human rights followed by a regime which was usually just as bad or worse.
Conservatives want an end to violence, poverty, crime, environmental devastation, selfishness and greed too, to suggest otherwise is foolish, but they endorse different tactics to bring those social changes about.
I think many people of your ideological stripe don't give the social conservative mindset a reasonable hearing, you just listen to what the loudmouth, extremist lunatics have to say, assume they speak for everyone and brush them off, ridiculing them as ignorant, mean spirited bigots.
I'm not saying I totally agree with social conservatives but some of their points are bang on and make much more sense to my ears than their socially liberal counterparts.

Yeah sausage, its about control.

Daggon deep man. I like.

Eh, conservatives to me means..we own you

The world is full of good people. Yes conservatives are good too.

Petula simply gets it in a way most others do not.

I have a problem with Leftist. Its the extremity of the definition. The idea that someone is just a lefty is why things don't change. Righty and lefty? What about human.
Sometimes you have to stop and just look at somethin for what it is.

When you're doin more than well, when you have an entire people in bondage..and things are runnin smooth for you..its easy to want to keep things the same. OH, now that i have things just the way i want them..lets be conservative. Huh?

Clean things up? Ever think the mess was made by the system/people. And with real niceness..sharing things doesn't necessarily have to mean some ridiculous hippie world where everybody has nothin save a joint that's passed around. Most idealists (whose boundaries conservatives like to stretch/compartmentalize)
just want real cooporation..we can still have buildings and corporations and money to play with (people should just stop hoarding it).

I don't like the terms "leftist" or "right winger", mainly because most people are a bit of both.
Both terms are very loaded, if I could think of a better way to distinguish the political differences of the two I would use it.
Another problem is that most people don't even understand the meaning of either term or the metaphor they represent.
My best definition of leftist is this...
A leftist is someone who believes that political and/or economic power should be spread out and not concentrated in the hands of a small group of people, and...
People should be encouraged to restrain their personal desires if such desires have the potential to directly or indirectly deprive others of equal gratification.

Simplistic? maybe, but I think most left leaning people would agree with those sentiments.
Hell, I agree with them, maybe I'm more of a left winger than I thought.

I think conservatives are best defined in terms of feedback.
Society should reward positive, constructive action(positive feedback), and punish negative, destructive action,(negative feedback).
All true conservative viewpoints can be traced back to that concept of positive and negative feedback.
Conservatives also value self reliance, patriotism, and strong family bonds.
I agree with those too, that's my problem, I'm a left-servative,( cons-iberal?).
Neither wing is right for all situations, that's why a balance between the two is ideal.
By the way Spwee, I liked your point back there about not having to choose to be fascist in order to be one, its like being an alcoholic, who is usually the LAST one to realize that they have a drinking problem.

Ugh, what slaughter of terms on that last post! (I dare not even read the few before it.)

In the U.S. (as opposed to other places, where the terminology is quite different), "conservative" refers -- in its root usage -- to a conservative amount of government interaction in ones daily life and in business. Liberal traditionally refers to more involvement, including "social programs". Do not confuse the American left Liberal with classical liberalism, which refers to something closer to ideological libertarianism than socialism, er, I mean the "Left".

Don't get too attatched to Left and Right referring to a one-dimensional political spectrum, or try to make sense of it otherwise (left-handed? puh-leeze.)

So, not only can using these terms in the way you have confuse people who don't understand U.S. politics, but they've turned into party (rather than ideological) identifiers.

I refrain from making any judgement calls on the conversation to save me from the trouble of seeing whether I've been responded to.

I was referring to contemporary North American liberal/conservatism.
Generally, the terms "conservative", meaning minimal government involvement in the daily life of its citizens, and "liberal" meaning more government intervention are accurate but there are some exceptions.
I stand by the definitions earlier, they could be more detailed but they represent what I've observed to be consistencies in how left/right wingers see themselves,(not each other).
Showboat is right, though, when he points out that the North American tendency to equate leftism with socialism and conservatism with capitalism is a recent and isolated phenomenon.
If being leftist meant being libertarian than I'd probably consider myself one.
But I'm not writing a political textbook here I'm just expressing my opinion, and to bring the topic back home I don't think either wing of the spectrum is inherently fascist.
Fascism transcends the left/right political spectrum.

Showboat..you got me on disseminate whoops! i thought it meant something else

I think Shoshidge has his idealogy down..not sure he right on his concepts though

fascism transcends the left/right political spectrum you say Shoshidge..

guess what Shoshidge..fascism is the left/right political spectrum

the wealthy ready-made the economic world abroad..the lesser-moneyed politically biased itself to compensate

left and right is mostly slanted to balance itself out..who doesn't know this

why such extremism..economic favoritism

if the liberals/leftists lobbied for absolute fairness..my guess is short-handedness is what they'd get

look at the independents..they get short-handed every election..damn i good

i'm an independent..person that is..signed up as one though i think independents represent the best of both democrat/republicans. i think they represent the better thinkers..like the ones who founded the constitution..i think they represent a more cooperate effort; one that does not ride on bickering

now to cut to the chase: gross economic favoritism is the sludge of the world; the middle of the two parties is where its; meaning A SOLUTION TO ALL THE WORLD'S PROBLEMS

economic deprivation is the cause of all the mess..at least 95% of it i'd guess

about the definition of leftist, i'm not entirely versed in politics..the world is not created equal..that's for sure..to systematically impose perfect equality is kinda ridiculous i think..

does anyone want to know the PERFECT ideology; the ideology to clean up the world's problems and honor people's right to earn more at the save time

its called decency - the rest you can throw out

common sense/responsibility/decency

if there's enough resources for the entire world..then why do people go without

greed-the fear of not having enough; an innappropriate fear in this land

there is room for opportunism and getting ahead in my proposed ideology - and people will remain unequaled because nature has made us that way

but there is no room for poverty, social problems, and political injustices in my ideology

Very little to argue with there.
I'll ponder it and come back later.

Is anyone even reading this one anymore?

Spwee, this is a fun topic, thanks for the debate, let me see what I can do with your last post.
Independants don't do well in elections because they don't have the pre existing funding and infrastructure that traditional parties do, also they represent a lot of unknowns.
In good social and economic times like now, (and they ARE good for MOST people in the Western world), people tend to go with the "devil you know" and shun radical or unfamiliar political ideologies and personalities.
This is frustratingly demonstated in Canada where we've been stuck with the same mediocre, useless idiot for a prime minister for over two terms.
The left thinks he's a chump, the right thinks he's a total idiot, his own party is trying to get rid of him.
No one actually respects him but he keeps getting re-elected because he's seen as harmless and incapable or unwilling to rock the boat too much.
Political vision means change and although people here love to whine, deep down they know that they're pretty well off, they lack the desperation to go with an unknown party or ideology.
I'd say the same goes for everywhere else in the western democratic world right now, which is why I don't indulge in the same paranoia as others we know do.
The political climate as it exists today will not introduce a government of fascist, goose-stepping maniacs, only people who are suffering create or allow to be created those sorts of regimes.
But I digress...

I truly believe that our unfortunate meddling in the economic affairs of the developing world started with the best of intentions,(don't laugh).

Sort of like Christian missionaries who travelled abroad to 'enlighten' the savage pagans of the world.

Aid and investment in the developing world started in the golden age of scientific and humanistic arrogance, before the environmental movement,when we thought that science, reason and civilization could cure all of the world's ills.
We also thought that we could bring the whole world up to our standard of living.
What we did was give them a taste of our consumptive, dazzling lifestyle, now, some of them want more, others realize it's just a rat race and want no part of it and they are culturally conflicted as a result.
The trouble is that our planet cannot sustain 6 billion people living like North Americans do.

We would need 'Three Earths' to provide the space and raw materials to give six billion humans a North American lifestyle, to use a much coined environmentalist phrase.
Which brings me to Spwee's last point.
"There is no room for, poverty, social problems and political injustices in my ideology".

Very noble, and very utopian, you hear similar statements a lot from good, compassionate people
everywhere.
And here is my much stated but never answered point...
Yes, our planet has the capacity to feed, clothe and house six billion people(maybe more), but not at a level that North Americans are used to.
So, in order to raise the standard of living of the vast majority of the world, you will have to do one of two things...
1. Develop space-based industry and agriculture(my first choice) or...
2. Convince the people living in western democracies to live with less, a LOT less.
The first option is becoming less and less likely these days(sniff).
The latter option is where shit gets ugly.

First off, we need to stave population growth, someone please tell me how to do that.

China only allows one child per family, and they're pretty strict about it too, yet their population grows by 14 million people or so a year.

Some of the more common hallmarks of increased wealth include diversifying the diet and increasing the living space.
How are you going to convince some Texas good ol' boy to eat soy cake instead of prime rib?
How are you going to convince the Colorado rancher to live in a Hong Kong style apartment complex?
Can't you see where this goes? It's very nice to say that we should all do with less but in order to actually make it happen you need an oppressive government that spans the globe, snuffing out the natural human desire to get ahead.

And you guys worry about losing your freedoms at the hands of the RIAA.
Global equality would require a government which tells you what to eat, where to live what work you do ad nauseum.
Backing them up would be an effective and ruthless police force.
Sounds like a libertarians' nightmare to me.

If you see it differently, please let me know because I've just gotten myself a little depressed.

I'm going to crawl into bed with a bottle of wine now.

i like the last line

dude, did you read what i wrote

in all fairness, i'm kinna tired of teachin you

glad ofcourse to receive another post from you; i've learned some from you as well; that there are two sides to everything; people generally are doing the best they can given their own state of conciousness; who i perceive as evil-doers doesn't necessarily make them evil or people with concious evil intentions

i seriously will have to wind down a very good thread; sometimes its hard to map out for another one's personal socio-economic vision for the world

you are guilty of compartmentalization again shoshidge, you do it over and over; you are guilty of the very leftist/rightist behaviors i expressed

its in the MIDDLE MAN

YOU KEEP ASSUMING

YOU ARE PRESUMPTIOS

YOU ARE A STANDARD RESPONSE MECHANISM DESIGNED BY THE WORLD - one who attempts to deprogram himself i'm glad

and you wonder why you stir shit up

here: "only people who are suffering create or allow to be created those sorts of regimes."

ONLY PEOPLE WHO ARE SUFFERING????????????????

damn i hit post by accident..

now i was saying

only people who are suffering create crappy regimes?

not anyone else?, LIKE THE ONES WHO CAUSE ALL THE FUCKING MESS (the rich)

the poor/suffering are just reacting MAN

ITS CALLED FUCKING DESPERATION MAN; at some point in human suffering you create the worst regime in the world to stop hurting;

blame the cause

the GODDAMN RICH

make bad regimes


You make logical absolutes

Tell me Shoshidge, (i know you're expressing an opinion) but HOW IN THE HELL can you gain another view IF YOU DON'T LET GO OF ABSOLUTES

"So, in order to raise the standard of living of the vast majority of the world, you will have to do one of two things..."

I WILL HAVE TO

no I FUCKING DON'T have to to ANYTHING!

PEOPLE HAVE TO

what?

be responsible/decent/sensible

NOW I CONCEDE THAT HUMAN'S MAY BE SUCH PIECES OF SHIT they might fail (from fear probably)

shoshidge, the people CANNOT IMAGINE A BETTER WORLD; they CANNOT IMAGINE A WORLD where STATUS VARIES while EVERYONE does the right thing (within the framework of their societal status ofcourse)

(some guy)I'm a millionare; but i don't need 250 million

i'll take ten million; let my janitor make $40,00 grand a year, my secretary a 10,000 grand bonus; my workers are well-compensated

know what that does it frees up the system; it frees the economy; it creates an economic boom, people work harder, a love for their jobs, greater cooperation; feeding itself

china overpopulates yes

but teach responsibility; instill it in everyone and people may CHOOSE to stop overpopulating;

'how bout one child', they might say

'it serves us well' they will say

and they won't enfore a law, no rule, no twisting peoples arms; children will simply grow up understanding that responsibility works, the opposite doesn't the fruits of the world RELY ON THE WHOLE

this will be instilled in all, it will be taught in schools, it will become common as milk, THE STANDARD..the way WATCHING TV IS THE STANDARD..the way HOARDING MONEY is the standard..the way DYSFUNCTION of the world is the standard

YOU (shoshidge) represent absolute PESSIMISM:

"to actually make it happen you need an oppressive government that spans the globe, snuffing out the natural human desire to get ahead."

OPPRESSION IS THE ANSWER, you say

OVER AND OVER, guys like you say OPPRESSION IS THE ANSWER

YOU SHOSHIDGE..not the suffering per say

..UNLESS WE OPPRESS PEOPLE

a responsible, decent, sensible global planet cannot be achieved you say

MY FAMILY'S ALL THAT
alot of families are

why can't the world be

a shit world churns out shit

start from scratch and..

EVERYONE GETS AHEAD

the rich don't get mugged

politicians live up to their word

TRUTH becomes honorable

drug use recreational/responsible, not an escape, not a social problem

BECAUSE PEOPLE AREN'T DESPARATE ANYMORE

squabbling becomes outworn

FUNCTIONALITY DYSFUNCTIONALITY

you call this an advancing society??

bullshit it is; this is decay, relatively speaking

a car works *functions

why can't society

it can be suped up in places *fun exciting has variation

why can't society

forget to put in oil deprive the parts high-end the engine too much

you get decay

"Global equality would require a government which tells you what to eat, where to live what work you do"

oh you don't say

well if you can't beat em join em i guess

THANKS FOR BACKING THE FASCIST ORDER OF THE WORLD ALL THE WAY

that's the way they want it

Demonstrate to me an occasion in history when a society in peace time, that hasn't just fought a war and are reasonably secure in their personal and economic prospects, established a fascist oppressive government.
The vast majority of authoritarian regimes rise out of the ashes of war.
Even if you dissagree with that, its not nearly as inflammatory as some of the stuff others have ranted about around here.
I did read what you wrote, but some of my last post went on some unrelated tangents, sorry.
You've hit on one of my personal 'words to live by', which is "your enemy is never evil in his own eyes".
It's easy to assume you opponent is stupid, ignorant, malicious or evil, many otherwise intelligent folks in this forum and elsewhere have fallen into that trap, it is more difficult to empathize with your enemy, sometimes, doing so makes you doubt yourself.
that might be why many empathic people have no interest in political activism, they don't want to be put in a position to feel that polarized against anybody.

We are all influenced by are surroundings but to call me a 'standard response mechanism designed by the world'... if that were so I don't think I'd be such a sore thumb around here.

I was hoping you would take a stab at the last half of my last post, I've been itching to talk that one out but no one ever bites, they just call me ignorant.
Still, you're more polite than many of the folks around here, thanks for that.

"that might be why many empathic people have no interest in political activism, they don't want to be put in a position to feel that polarized against anybody."

whoa baby..real smart (never thought of it that way), thanks

that explains alot..who wants that kind of opposition..hassle

"The vast majority of authoritarian regimes rise out of the ashes of war."

i don't think anyone's debating from whence most authoritarian regimes rise

i think we're saying they have many catalysts

war cues their reality, a symbol for the oppressiveness IN PEOPLE

think about it, war arises OUT OF OPPRESSION

doesn't it Shoshidge

oppression has many forms especially in this country..it doesn't necessarily pronounce itself with war, but ofcourse that's where most auth. regimes arise, after an old (bent out of shape)order is torn down

overt oppression doesn't arise from happy people

man continually oppresses himself, over and over

"Demonstrate to me an occasion in history when a society in peace time, that hasn't just fought a war and are reasonably secure in their personal and economic prospects, established a fascist oppressive government."

No..who would say unnopprossive happy society's choose misery

But i will say oppessive governments can form from them..oppression tends to take root where there's some kind of production - what else would a dictator steal? an abandoned shack with a drunk and a goat living in it

standard response mechanism..we all are to a good degree, i didn't mean that as a big insult or anything..we tend to churn out what society tells us - you think its easy to free your mind, it took alot of effor for me, you definitely think for yourself (or are learning to) that's why i complimented you by saying you are deprogramming yourself

as for the last half of your post (the part you wanted treated), its simple

if people remain oppressive and ignorant
enforcing equality will be necessary
designating them all the more oppressive and ignorant

if people wise up
they will create harmony
not a fictitious world of perfect equality

I don't endorse oppression any more than you do.

I would love to live in a world of justice, peace harmony and plenty, I really would.
It is possible to create a perfect, just society, but not on a global scale.
Humans are evolved to live in tribal groups of 100 people or less.
In a group that small, everyone knows everybody, conflict management can be done on an individual basis, based on the specific circumstances involved. There is also a strong community bond, total interdependance, and competition from other tribes.
That is the way humans are designed to live.

The city and the nation state are very recent societal developments in human evoloutionary terms, true global awareness is less than a generation old.
Because we are not designed to live this way, certain imperfections arise, crime, poverty, alienation.
It has nothing to do with ignorance, we're just square pegs trying to fit in a round hole.
I think it is folly to believe that 6 billion people(or even 6 million or 6 hundred thousand people) can ever expect to be satisfied with their life, we're too diverse.
Some wealthy people are woefully depressed, some dirt, poor goat herders are content.
Total social harmony is a state of evoloutionary stagnation, as a species, we need conflict and a reasonable degree of suffering.
For some people, the threat of poverty is the only thing that gets them out of bed in the morning.
I may sound Darwinist, but why not? We're still animals aren't we?
If you remove the predators from an ecology, the prey stop evolving.
For us, being on the top of the food chain, the predatory pressure comes from each other and the environment.
In pre-historic times, war was one of our main evoloutionary drivers, it stayed that way until weapons technology allowed for indiscriminate killing.
Now, please don't think I enjoy warfare, suffering or killing. I think we should be in a constant state of self improvement, I don't like the idea of people wallowing in poverty or being pushed around by dictators.
But when people start wishing for global harmony, i just don't think they've thought it out, no one ever comes up with a strategy to make it happen.
I think they should be careful what they wish for.
As for me being a pessimist, I tend to defend what our culture does RIGHT instead of constantly moaning about how much it sucks.
I think as a culture, us 'western democratic' types, on a statistical level, have it better than any equvilantly numbered group of people anywhere, anytime.

Our culture, in spite of its many imperfections that deserve improvement, is the closest humans have come to that harmonious state in our history, and it keeps getting more so.
Does that sound pessimist to you?
In fact, I think it's my lack of doomsday "the RIAA is going to take over the world AAAHHH!", AMerica is going down the tubes-style rhetoric that sets me apart from the REAL pessimists around here.
I generally like the direction our species is headed, but we need breathing room, we have to get into space or else things WILL become unpleasant for everyone.

This is fun, eh?

shoshidge buddy..hmmm

well, like i said..people find it hard to stand the complainin

nobody likes a whiner..

but i think you have to start somewhere

first you have to shoot down what's wrong

exclaim what's wrong, when people argue..

things get settled sometimes

forget ever devising a strategy for world harmony

you can't strategize spiritual evolution

how bout we just keep going forward, and evolve from the inside - out

In "Another Roadside Attraction", Tom Robbins expressed his belief that humanity,(especially the western world), is in a transitional state from one culture to a new one. This process might take decades, but it's happening regardless.
It's obvious that the culture that has served us well for 12 thousand years or so has reached the end of its usefullness,(sorta like the RIAA).
I just hope I'm alive to see the dawn of a new cultural direction capure the imagination of everybody.

I still think, though, that global harmony is not where evoloution is taking us.

Evoloution thrives on conflict, even true spiritual awareness thrives on it.

Look at the way monks from all faiths impose masochistic rituals on themselves.

Maintaining your faith through hardship is one of the ways faith tests itself, for that you need hardship to live through.

One of the primary axioms I see in our culture today is the belief that maximizing the comfort and fufillment of the individual is an important societal goal.
No one should suffer if possible.
I think that's why we have so much divorce, lawsuits(and lawyers), special interest activism, and high rates of material consumption.
I don't think that is a sustainable concept, it is contrary to evoloution.

Imagine a herd of elk acting as if the well-being of each member of the herd out-weighed the survival of the herd itself.
That herd would not survive very long.

Evoloution is cruel, it preys on the weak and the sick and rewards the strong and successful.

That is directly opposite to how our societies work, we tax the successful to prop up the weak and the sick.
I'm not saying that is bad, I'm glad my culture is like that to a reasonable degree, but as a long term survival strategy it is counter-evoloutionary.

If our species ever reaches a successful state of pure spiritual and/or cultural harmony, we will have, in effect, ceased to become animals who are bound by the brutal workings of evoloution.
I'm not entirely sure that would be a desirable state.
It sounds nice though, and it sure sells a lot of new age literature!!

In the meantime, I wish we would move our farming and industry into space so we can have enough room to live down here without pushing all other living things into the oblivion of extinction.
That would be a short term "band aid" soloution to keep us busy until we evolve into happy balls of light or whatever.

you crack me up

i find it beyond comprehension that you believe violence to be such a necessary part of continued evolution; yes violence must be felt to achieve peace, otherwise peace would not be felt

but i think your problem is you cannot imagine a world without war/strife, its all this earth has known

yes it is a part of nature; strife, violence, scrappling over a piece of meat

intelligence is also a part of evolution; meekness is a survival mechanism as well
these are two darwin characterics often unrecognized (koalas do quite well, where are the dinosaurs, successful evolution requires alot of peace, love and cooperation as well; survival of the fittest is generally interpreted as survival of the strongest/most brutal, brute strength in other words

if you'll notice those who create war these
days are the ones becoming extinct; or at least reject a kind of imposed peace

alcada is going under; i mean the world is getting smaller, everyone feels this

we cannot help to become as one, it is the natural state of things colonies to states, states to countries, countries to u.n.'s, and finally a united world, one that will agree on a kind of single governing body; this will be feared yet agreed to out of the need for convenience; people's needs will call for ease of communication, trade, and so forth, calling for cooperation, peace and new boundaries.

notice shoshidge how humanity continually becomes as ONE

notice

its impossible not to, blacks become as whites, whites becomes as blacks, all races adopt one another's traits and so forth; look how rap finds its way into commercials now, even old white people rap; nothin wrong with it but we tend to inherit traits we come to peace with

all beings need comfort; otherwise we would all check out; peace IS comfort

even as things seem bleak as ever, amidst the chaos notice how the world is being cleansed of war-makers; a slow process yes, but as you know evolution IS a slow process

your problem is you cannot imagine a world without war; what will we do when the availability of all goods is guaranteed

yes i agree, we are striving to be as gods

i read a book once that phrophesies man will be able to power entire cities for months WITH A SINGLE GRAIN OF SAND, i am told there is massive inherent energy in atoms alone, we've all seen what a nuclear explosion looks like

think about it; A SINGLE GRAIN OF SAND; then replicators will make production a thing of the past; STAR TREK?

yes shoshidge what will we do then? life seems empty without war doesn't it, it has become a kind of push for every phase of our evolution

there is more shoshidge; lots more

and i imagine there is strife on other worlds; so in that case, for you shoshidge, all is not lost

for a peaceful guy you sure believe in war alot

its that kind of pessimism that allows it to survive; you create what you can imagine

what the hell, keep it going if you got more to say

Oh I do...
First off, were you insinuating that Koalas are meek? I've heard their mean bastards but that's bordering on irrelevant..
I knew you would think I was a war monger, that's the knee jerk reaction I get from a lot of people.

War, as an evoloutionary driver, became irrelevant when we invented gun powder.
I said as much in the last post.

Although it is sometimes necessary in a defensive sense, I don't believe that war benefits humanity in any long term sense anymore.

I said 'conflict' is necessary for continued evoloution, that doesn't inherently mean violence.

You are correct that we as a species are melting into one big umbrella culture, I don't have much of a problem with that, but a lot of people do.

Part of what the anti-globalization movement stands for is their belief that cultural homogenization is BAD.

The fundamentalist(Islam, Christian, etc), hatred of American culture stems from their steadfast resolve to resist being influenced by it.

Ask aboriginal people around the world how THEY feel about joining one big, global culture.

And let's talk about your white rappers...
The same thing happened in jazz.
Jazz was invented by blacks and was considered to be exclusively black music for years, gradually white folks started taking an interest in it, which was good for black musicians who enjoyed more respect and more money. But as jazz became truly multi-racial, black people started losing interest, they wanted their own music again, something un-corrupted by white European influence.
So they invented Rock and Roll, which followed the same pattern.
So they invented R&B and rap. Which they will abandon for something else when it becomes too broad.
Do you think black rappers like getting out rapped by some white-trash punk?

Cultures define themselves by other cultures, another hold over from our nomadic, terratorial, tribal days.

I don't know about you, but I like the thought of cultures in this world having the freedom to be different, even offensive to ours.

Again, global monoculture? Be careful what you wish for.

About your 'prophesies' regarding the grain of sand, show me the science and we'll go there, I am passionate about science fiction.
And as much as I enjoy Star Trek, it is more or a 'space fantasy' then actual science fiction, the replicators won't be coming along in our lifetime, probably not anyone's.

I am not pessimistic but I know baseless, wishful thinking when I see it.
I believe that humans don't need to evolve into a 'higher plane' in order to improve ourselves.
That belief is based on the idea that there is something wrong with us to start with.
THAT belief is based on the assumption that the viability of our society is estimated not by its technological progress and cultural/intellectual
acheivements, but by its ability to minimize individual hardship.
Our obsession with trying to make everybody happy all of the time is dragging down our cultural progress.
That might make me insensitive but not pessimistic.

Check out an interesting book called "The Story of B" by Daniel Quinn.
It's an easy but thought provoking read and it talks about some of the same issues.

about the book..no

i'm tired of people asking me to educate myself on their ideology..like i have the time

the story of B might show me why you're logic is so skewed, why you tend to inherit every opinion that exists, even opposite ones, that you're shifty as a point guard

even when further delving demonstrates that much of your opinion remains under the surface, like us all, i still find you unusually precarious with your expressions

you have a level of civility, sense of fairness yes, admitting at times a failing in some proposed logic, but with each exchange i'm flabergasted at how YOU ALWAYS AGREE WITH OR MAKE MY POINT, doing so in a manner that suggests my OWN point has been refuted or joined with yours where it wasn't

then you have this uncanny way of sticking out a new point IN AN ARGUMENTATIVE FASHION, at least that's how i read it. classic case of being right all the time..at least i think..or perhaps you're simply arguing with the world as we all do when we make our points

nevertheless i have enjoyed/am enjoying our debate..

if by 'conflict' you meant friction instead of violence i will spare you the accusation of being a war mongor, but you must understand that superficially you sell yourself as one

NOW Shoshidge more of your absolutes, you really are a study (i don't mean to be mean), an observation. Let me correct, you make BAD absolutes. I make absolutes, but i think i am right. Your absolutes are WAY off base. Remember when i said smart mind..poor theory. That's why you stir shit up. Alot a times you are more correct than half the people i come across, you have studied the larger picture quite well and don't budge just because public opinion leans you in another direction. I like that.

Shoshidge: "If our species ever reaches a successful state of pure spiritual and/or cultural harmony, we will have, in effect, ceased to become animals who are bound by the brutal workings of evolution."

That suggests spiritual harmony exempts conflict.
That suggests we would no longer be human. That suggest humans must be defined by their imperfections, not by a more perfectionary state.
WE will cease to be bound by the brutal workings of evolution you say. Is that bad? You seem to suggest so. Must evolution be brutal, or are you making an observation. Is that oberservation correct?
Depends. What level of evolution? Complete union with God, the oneness. Yes, i imagine strife does not exist there. What about a lower plane of evolution, like global harmony. Like no more wars, differentation and merging of cultures, a step back from the chaos, a catching of our breathe, a study, a coalescing of our less-than-harmonious past. A looking inward, friction within, great friction within, an expansion outward into space, a new beginning, conflict (brutal and sublime - war with outer worlds), a fight with one's inability to experience boundless joy, the exploration of matter, of thought, of time travel, of it all, a simple state of beingness, a reflection, over and over for centuries, peace upon peace, hyper-imaginary games of the physical and mental, challenges beyond comprehension, conflict at one's disposal, meaning toppled with meaning, a collapse of it all, and a brand new warlike beginning.

No conflict you say. That's what life is..
friction. Brutal or not, there is much to fulfill us.

i like how you sell yourself as a realist..well you are..i am too

i think its early for us to fathom the technology of our future,

that's my point..our mind houses so little..comparatively speaking

i've read of beings, that exist mind you, living robotic birds of immense size, dinosaurs on other planets, beings and places we would be unable to comprehend

i've seen things you people wouldn't believe..from blade runner

you say "i'm not entirely sure that would be a desirable state"

that my point..your not sure

sounds like a conflict of the mind

with you it has begun

about this padding of the world..i agree

it is a sickness

it appears we are too busy warring to work it out

perhaps in the future

"I am not pessimistic but I know baseless, wishful thinking when I see it."

what is baseless, a greater future is baseless and wishful thinking

sounds like the very definition of pessimism to me..

is this great beyond coming tomorrow, doesn't appear to me..but to some degree you are a pessimist..you just don't know it

"I believe that humans don't need to evolve into a 'higher plane' in order to improve ourselves"

what plane should we evolve into then..shoshidge..a lower one..you can only go up (improve) yourself; maybe regress, but you can't stand still and evolve

"That belief is based on the idea that there is something wrong with us to start with."

the belief that evolution requires a higher plane? individual hardships must be removed?

no that is YOUR belief and others perhaps

if you believe in it you make it true

base evolution on those BELIEFS and that's what you create; evolution that's necessary because we are wrong, evolution made out of denial of pain

why must we evolve out of those reasons?

because YOU say we do Shoshidge; you have made an absolute: evolution means 'changing based on unsavory reasoning'

I say lets evolve to experience OUR greater selves, lets evolve to have peace of mind, because we seem to have very little, that you agree

we create pain and chaos then furiously attempt to subjugate it with a pill or a law or a new war

OUR beliefs ARE WHY WE SUFFER

not because we are WRONG

because WE HOLD those BELIEFS

that is what evolving means

changing...that is all

changing into something more desirable, or undesirable so that we may better define the thing we want/choose in the next moment

"Our obsession with trying to make everybody happy all of the time is dragging down our cultural progress."

this is what you say:

we are all messed up; we got it all wrong; but we're fine the way we are; we do not need to change to better ourselves; but we must change because "our obsession with trying to make everybody happy all of the time is dragging down our cultural progress"

its all wrong you say,

then what makes it right?

not evolving into a higher plane you say

go downward? we are down, sideways? if not higher then where Shoshidge, if not more war then what, global peace,

no that cannot be achieved you say

if it is, it would be all wrong

its unrealistic

either way everything we'll turn out bad

SO LET'S REMAIN BAD, because BAD IS RIGHT (for us)

you finally say

YOU ARE A PESSIMIST/or AN OPTIMIST of our futile nature to put it another way

"Our obsession with trying to make everybody happy all of the time is dragging down our cultural progress."

yes, when you are obsessed with making people happy ALL OF THE TIME..its a drag

yes, when you think YOU HAVE TO MAKE PEOPLE HAPPY (you are unhappy)..we do not understand that happiness is a choice, an inner state of being

WE CREATE THE OPPOSITE OF HAPPINESS

DO YOU SEE OUR DILLEMMA..we ARE NOT HAPPY

that's why you and others ARE COMPLAINING

you yearn for EVOLUTION

Don't misintrepret the book thing, It's a good book, on the same subject as we're talking about, that's it, take it or leave it.
What you're interpreting as pessimism is my attempt to challenge some assumptions that yourself and others make.

You assume that humans are destined to evolve into a kinder, gentler, more co-operative species, Why? Where is your evidence that this is happening or is going to happen?

You also assume that this evoloution needs to take place, Why? what is wrong with us as we are?

Even if this evoloution you talk about WAS happening, it would take thousands of years.

We have about 50 or so years to come up with solutions to some big global issues, evoloution isn't going to do it.

The soloutions that WILL do it bring with them threats (or perceived threats) to individual liberty and national sovreignty.
A state of global peace can and probably will happen but it will be oppressive.

In one hundred years, when 9 billion-plus of us are fighting over the last scraps of our natural resources and our ecology is fucked, maybe we'll have the balls to take the big step into space.

Space is where REAL evoloution will take place, cultural and biological.

Space will be a refuge for die-hard individualists, whether they be fundamentalist fanatics, hippie communists, or anywhere in between.
There will always be people who don't want other people telling them how to live, what food to eat, how many kids to have, the Earth is running out of room to sustain those people, let's get them out there mining the asteroids instead of trying to make them fit here and turning them into terrorists.

I'm optimistic about that future, and best of all, it doesn't require any wooly-minded, new-age philosophizing to make it happen.

i respect your opinion, sincerely

you are narrow minded i think, or things are going in a bleak straight line that space will cure, i don't know, i'm not stirred at the moment by your views

wooly-minded, new age philosophizing, i pick up disgust here - i used to consider myself a new ager; now i'm who i am. i don't hold these views to push an agenda, at the same time i have learned that new age literature is information, information about the world, universe, laws we operate on, they apply whether you like it or not, truth cannot be compartmentalized Shoshidge, you try but you cannot

comtemplate what i write, the future i posed was something i thought WE'D CHOOSE FOR OURSELVES, not something a new ager wrote about, or the bible prophesied, its not our destiny per say

i observe

read that; about five times

i observe

things operate; we are operating now

people predict weather patterns, the way a tree grows, the way rivers flood

ofcourse we have free will; i'm not saying an advancing ourselves is a requirement; i'm saying i believe man yearns to better himself, man seeks the truth of himself, things are in motion that allow us to evolve

things the eye cannot see

you are unable to imagine a world without extreme governmental authority; of forced agendas, of forced ideals

cannot people better themself ON THEIR OWN - without intervention; without a single rule or standard to live by or live up to; without some forceful authority twisting it out of them like water from a cloth

in space you see people being individualists

fine; our future lies in space; i agree

new age literature is not where its at; its in our minds, our opinions, in our free will, in our own developed logic

we will be space people taking refuge from a cloned dominated society of peace mongors WHO HAVE IT ALL WRONG, who impose unfair restrictive ideals on one another, who all eat nothing but bread, who are told what to wear, whose lives are equaled to the point of lethargy

now i never said great spiritual advancement/ global harmony was a necessity; if you really want my view of i'll tell you that NOTHING is required of us, that's what free will is

like i said its one possibility of many; i gave you the evidence if you remember (things become as one, taking on the better qualities) its the natural course of things, things seek ease, that's nature, things do not seek constant strife, conflict is yearned for yes, but emotions run high on endless conflict, eventually there is a yearning for great calm

by the way, imposed equality would only add to the strife and would not work; you see how WE AGREE

that's simply why i see us choosing a better calmer world, not one that falls to sleep, we all find disgust in the pulseless scenario you keep twisting my vision into; please stop doing that; stop saying it means we'll all eat the same shit; stop insinuating that's what i'm saying

people will eat what they fucking want, they will eat a fucking turkey on rye, with shit in the middle, they will eat pork until it grows out of their ears; they will get up one day in a peaceful world and decide fuck having ONE kid. i'm having FOUR fucking kids. and the rest will say if that is your choosing. and perhaps it will all still work. there will be greedy folks who hoard, but the majority will remember the chaos such hoarding created and not do business with such people. such people will find themselves without anything; they will realize everything was theirs already; then they will have it again; people will be individuals,

Shoshidge; i know you think you understand alot but hear this; right now
PEOPLE ARE LESS THAN INDIVIDUAL THAN THEY'VE EVER BEEN

the scenario you FEAR

IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW!!!!!!!!!!

we are told what to EAT
what to WEAR
what the STYLE is
what is pagan and isn't
what is ACCEPTABLE to the nth degree
and what is UNACCEPTABLE to the nth degree

WE ARE FUCKING SHEEP IN A PEN you and me

YOU ARE A SHEEP, you are herded by your government

you are signed stamped and approved and sent out into the world to produce things for the rich, that's your job

you're are allowed the freedom to express yourself because it keeps you emotionally cleansed and in check by the dominate race of rich people

you speak the language that keeps us going in circles; that leads us back to the pen

NOW let me brush off the seriousness; i'm just trying to teach you something, it doesn't matter, i understand we're just expressing a some views here on Dmusic

but if you will read the next post..i just wanted to post a paragraph or two from a book
i won't make it lengthy; maybe it will open your eyes the way it did mine

sorry i pooped on your book, i bet its a good read

"Don't misintrepret the book thing, It's a good book, on the same subject as we're talking about, that's it, take it or leave it.
What you're interpreting as pessimism is my attempt to challenge some assumptions that yourself and others make."

i am not assuming anything; you are assuming i am; i keep trying to tell you that

bout the book (might give it a look at the bookstore, see what's up)

"You assume that humans are destined to evolve into a kinder, gentler, more co-operative species, Why? Where is your evidence that this is happening or is going to happen?"

no, i am not assuming that, i feel i am watching it, however, i cannot say it feels written in stone, many outcomes may lie ahead
i gave you some evidence, i have more but you understand my succinctness

"You also assume that this evolution needs to take place, Why? what is wrong with us as we are?"

No it doesn't need to take place. Nothing NEEDS to take place. I said people yearn for peace, ease of mind. They say it themselves, 'I wish for World Peace'. Do you not hear that as often as i.

Didn't i say nothin is wrong with us as we are. Do you read what i write. I said we are who we choose to be. When we desire to be something else we change. Changing doesn't mean we were wrong to begin with, unless we hold that belief. Do you understand now? If remaining the way we are now makes us happy we will. Or if we define ourselves by our unhappiness, then we will remain the same based on that idea. Either way, i hear people saying the world is screwed up. People seem to be calling for change. Alot of americans don't seem fond of terrorists. They seem to be delving into what makes a terrorist. I can only assume so that terrorists are not a thing of the future. Sounds like evolution in the works.

"Even if this evoloution you talk about WAS happening, it would take thousands of years."

Did you assume i meant tomorrow?"

We have about 50 or so years to come up with solutions to some big global issues, evoloution isn't going to do it."

That is the funniest thing i've heard in my life. Change things by not changing. You really are a study. 'Evolution (change) is not going to change things' you say.

"The solutions that WILL do it bring with them threats (or perceived threats) to individual liberty and national sovereignty.
A state of global peace can and probably will happen but it will be oppressive."

Number one Shoshidge: a solution that brings threats, ISN'T A SOLUTION! ITS A PROBLEM!
If global peace is oppressive, THEN IT ISN'T FUCKING GLOBAL PEACE THEN IS IT! global restraint may happen, that would suck, that's just more oppression that will lead to more wars probably

"In one hundred years, when 9 billion-plus of us are fighting over the last scraps of our natural resources and our ecology is fucked, maybe we'll have the balls to take the big step into space."

You have confidence in your DOOMSDAY scenario don't you. I like that about you. Sounds like the great space leap will be more of our

RUNNING AWAY FROM OUR PROBLEMS

TELL ME SHOSHIDGE, WHEN WE'VE FUCKED UP SPACE TOO, WHERE THEN

"Space is where REAL evoloution will take place, cultural and biological."

Well good, if we seriously get our shit together.

"Space will be a refuge for die-hard individualists, whether they be fundamentalist fanatics, hippie communists, or anywhere in between."

sounds funny..not that it can't happen, but i kinna think our labels would dramatically change then..those labels are based on the current socio-economic scheme of things on earth

"There will always be people who don't want other people telling them how to live, what food to eat, how many kids to have, the Earth is running out of room to sustain those people, let's get them out there mining the asteroids instead of trying to make them fit here and turning them into terrorists."

What?? If that don't beat all. Arabs are pissed cuz we tell em what to do you say. Then you say, TELL THEM TO GO MINE THOSE ASTEROIDS!

Actually i think we should just not intrude so much on other cultures. Perhaps if we changed that about ourselves. Perhaps if we would help other nations instead of competing away their chance to obtain resources for themselves.

"I'm optimistic about that future, and best of all, it doesn't require any wooly-minded, new-age philosophizing to make it happen."

Sounds like more of the same garbage down here on earth if you ask me. But i think i get your fresh-start pionneering delight in it.

By the way, new age thought is just thought. I find making sense out of it and not poopooing it has benefits. I treat new age literature the way i treat your opinions. I ask if it makes sense rather than judge it.

bout the book

"something about these beliefs is not working. The idea that there is not enough-not enough God, not enough of the stuff of Life, not enough Life Itself-has led to more than simple competition. It has led to brutal repression, to suppression, and to massive depression. Religions have repressed frank and honest inquiry, governments have suppressed dissent, and millions of people live, as a result, in both economic and psychological depression. All of this has come out of the idea that Insufficiency Exists-for sufficiency would solve all of this."

"If you thought there was enough to go around, there would be no more self-destructive behaviors, no more fighting over resources, no more squabbling over God."

"The prohibition against inquiry elevated Ignorance to a desirable attribute. It became very wise and very good manners not to ask questions. It became accepted behavior. Indeed, expected behavior."

"Certain totalitarian regimes insist to this very hour that only voices of agreement be heard and that voices of dissent be silenced, sometimes in the most brutal ways."

"Such barbaric behaviors are justified by proclamations that they are "necessary to ensure order." Protests by the international community are met with indignant sniffs, repressive governments declaring such issues "internal matters."

and this is seriously for YOU Shoshidge

"In human experience, all things are considered within the context of what you think you already understand. You cannot help but do this. You know no other way to proceed."

"Put another way, you are looking at the Illusion from within the Illusion"

"Every conclusion is an illusion."



ah, the first few quotes up there were'nt so much instruction for you, more me trying to show WHY are society IS WRONG TODAY. ok, not wrong, but problematic.

Whew, a lot to chew on...
I'll start at the top and work down.

-" New age literature is information about the world, universe, laws we operate on".
Geez, where are Spica and Petula when I need them.
I'm not saying that there aren't good books in the new age section, and some of them do touch on truth, but come on!
The Celestine Prophesy is one of the best selling New age books in history, I read it, and laughed my ass off.
I've read others too, good and bad, and they generally seem to take actual truths or observations and filter them through the author's intuitive but highly subjective pre-existing assumptions and desires.
The result is something other than plain information, it is highly subjective interpretation and guesswork, and yes, WISHFUL THINKING, presented as fact or truth.
That being said, I like new age fiction, lots of SF literature could be considered 'new-agey', but it doesn't try to make you believe it's factual truth.

We, meaning the six million people on this Earth, can't choose a path for our future, it's being chosen for us by our size, diversity, historical momentum, socio-economic variables and ecological impacts.
As individuals, communities, or even nations, we can predict where the global tide is headed and either ride it or fight it.

-"You are unable to imagine a world without extreme governmental authority; of forced agendas, of forced ideals"

I can imagine it just fine, I'm living in it.

In order for an increasing number of humans to sustain themselves on this planet without major socio/economic inequity while sustaining the environment,we will have to act in a way that is contrary to our nature.

Our nature was established over thousands of years following the basic evoloutionary drives, eat, sleep, reproduce, ensure the security and prosperity of your family and community, etc...
Six billion people are following that pattern.
Consider very deeply the sorts of things that a global governing body would have to do to convince those people and their descendants to act in a different fashion, a fashion that has worked well for so long its practically hard-wired into us.
Consider these things will have to be done quickly,(a century or less).
Then we'll talk.

People CAN better themselves, but what do you do with the people who don't? How do you define better?

My step-dad thinks bettering yourself involves getting a shinier, bigger car. I know he's a materialistic asshole but how do you convince him? You can't, I've tried! And there are millions in North America alone just like him.

As long as we have free will, we have free will to drive gas guzzling status symbol trucks, shoot elephants, litter, smoke 'till our lings turn black, shit near a river...

Until now, the world has been able to deal with the negative aspects of human free will but that time is ending.

The failure of communism was the result of a well intentioned political concept that required absolute ideological homogeniety from its citizenry in order to work.
Marx and Engels never said anything about tanks in the streets, Gulags and big concrete walls.

They assumed that because their system was so fair and logical, everyone would just willfully follow it and many did.
But the ones that didn't ruined it for everyone so they had to be dealt with.
And that's where the oppression came in.

I'm not twisting your scenario I'm just carrying it to its only logical conclusion.

In an earlier arguement with Petula, I used some stats from an article dealing with the global repercussions of China adopting our lifestyle,(just China, no one else).
The conclusion? There is not enough arable land to sustain them if they choose to eat like us, drink like us, or live like us.
So yes, for the sake of everyone, especially the West, we must tell the Chinese, Africans etc... what they can or cannot eat, drink or how big their houses can be.
If I were Chinese I would find that unacceptable, wouldn't you?

As for being sheep...

We can't be true sheep because there are too many shepherds.
TV tells me to eat shit, the government tells me to eat according to their food guide.
A woman's magazine will tell you to pig out or starve yourself depending on what page you're looking at.

There's a diet book for every misconceived, unscientific notion that any asshole with a few initials on his letterhead can come up with, all of them sound sensible to an undiscriminating reader.

We have no absolute truths and no universal, truly reliable sources of unbiased information to access.

As a result, each of us operates in a state of subjective, short-term self interest, we seek out information that fits with our preconceived preferences and accept it as truth, ridiculing others who choose a different 'truth'.

If we are sheep, we each have our own individual shepherd.

Christians, capitalists, environmentalists, athiests, hippies, Islamic fundamentalists, yuppies, nihilists, new agers, Nazis, teenagers, little old ladies, patriotic beerdrinkin' American bigots, Cambodian rice farmers, holocaust survivors, black power bigots, feminists...

Each one of these groups, and groups like them, have a skewed notion of how to solve the world's problems, they all have literature, testimony and 'science' that confirms their beliefs.
In their own way, they all think they are the "good guys", and rarely compromise or co-operate with unsympathetic groups.

Tell me how you would unite them all towards a common purpose?

We can't wait for evoloution or even global co-operation to make sure this planet stays a good place to live.

The reason I keep harping on the space thing is that it is the only way I can see that will allow humans to keep living as we are without over populating ourselves into a state of total misery and ecological devestation,(unless you want to live under the sea).

If you have a better idea i'd love to hear it.

Maybe confronting the cold expanse of space will teach us how good we have it here.

Maybe we'll meet some hostile aliens to give us something other than ourselves to shake our fists at.

A species living in comfort doeasn't evolve, space is anything but comfortable.

Individualists don't have to be forced into the asteroid belt, they will go there very willingly, if given the opportunity.

Warning: Another book plug- "Life among the Asteroids" by Jerry Pournelle.

Regarding your book quotes..

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH TO GO AROUND!!!
That fact is the basis for most of my arguements, we have plenty because others are poor, we would kill our planet if we tried to make it sustain six billion people living the lifestyle of a North American on welfare.

I have to go, I'm sure I'll talk to you some more..

Always a pleasure!

Yes, actually it has been a pleasure

i truly am done..but i gained as i hope you have as well

about everything you said..well it sounds like very much of everything i've said up til now, and much of what you've been saying yourself

its in the middle man i said

well its somewhere between us

Well said, consider it done for now.
I'll see you around