[ExI] anti-capitalist propaganda, was: retrainability of plebeians
jrd1415 at gmail.com
Tue May 12 02:11:18 UTC 2009
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 3:35 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> ...if a poor young person is using the
> really high-end stuff like cocaine, she must be either stealing or dealing.
This "conclusion" -- if I dare to call it that -- is defamatory,
presumptuous, and based on... what evidence? You are not a drug user
yourself. Have near zero experience with any drug culture. Yet you
are drawing conclusions and making assertions like you know something.
Get yourself to a narcotics anonymous meeting and talk to some real
coke users, then come back to the subject after gathering some facts
and thinking about them.
You are Republican in your inclinations, so your "stealing or dealing"
options are suspect of being based more in your tribal distrust of
Obama than in any assemblage of fact. It would be equally "fair and
balanced" for me to observe that "stealing and dealing" is a fairly
concise description of what Republicans do, or to observe that your
employment at LockMart is fully funded by taxpayers dollars taken by
force from taxpayers, redistributed to you for no commercially
productive purpose -- for no purpose at all beyond buying your vote so
those higher up thieves can authorize yet more theft and waste of yet
more taxpayer dollars. Can you spell "accomplice".
But because you are my friend I would never say that. Consequently,
and sadly, I cannot claim to be free of the taint of corruption.
Small note: stealing and dealing are challenging and risky endeavors
requiring no small amount of thought, creativity, initiative,
emotional discipline, and courage. Stripped of moral and legal
prejudices, stealing or dealing are hard work indeed. But white boys
born to privilege or good fortune, or both, rarely get a chance to see
the world from this hard rock perspective of "a man's gotta do what a
man's gotta do."
> The money for that cocaine cries out for an explanation.
To you, because you don't approve of him, but otherwise, nobody cares.
He was a kid ferchristsake. This is pure Clinton-blow-job bullshit.
Since then he's gone to college, to Harvard Law, was president there
of the Law Review, worked as an attorney, as a Harvard Law Prof, as an
Illinois state senator, and as a US Senator. And now he's PotUS,
will likely be so for the next eight years, followed by another
democrat, and then another. (OK, the dems will surely screw this up,
clueless, spineless, and corrupt as they are, but for the next eight
years Obama is gonna ream the Republicans real "horror show".) The
worm has turned and you need to get over it.
> ...how do you theorize the current reader of the
> free world came into possession of that cash, doing evidently NO work?
Hmmmm, let's see. You said "evidently", right?
He actually did work, you just don't have the info. He had a
prosperous friend. He had a prosperous white friend. He had a
prosperous white girlfriend. He escorted (or "escorted")white
Hawaiian tourist babes. (These are some of many non-prejudicial
possible answers. See how many you can come up with.)
Best, Jeff Davis
Can we please get extropian now? Please? Put yourself on moderation, Spike.
More information about the extropy-chat