/lit/ - Literature

literature

I think it's as shit as ever just that it's more visible nowadays.

The one thing that has got worse is that younger generations have been shown to be more selfish than the ones that precede it. It could just be a sign of youth or could be sign ideas of community and collectivism are dead. Hope it's the former.

I guess most people are sort of functional and productive enough like they've always been. The lure of material comfort and social success alone is enough to make economies function and that will probably never change unless some sort of magical post-scarcity pops up. As a lumpenprole living in a country with social liberal policies I think they'll hold out well enough to keep supporting me for the decades to come at least. It's all good.

Neither. Socially, a few things are worse, a few things are better.

That's why I put my hopes in STEM; it's the only thing that continually gets better.

>>3633264

I'm not pining for any good ol' days, but today's youth has tested at an all-time low for empathy, which is not a little frightening.

>>3633264

Do you think Facebook could be a cause of this? Facebook and all social media for that matter is basically a giant circle jerk

>>3633280
No, I don't think that's it...
Take my younger brother for example, he is 6 year old but shows a staggering lack of empathy and he never came in contact with Facebook...
He poked a girl in the eye the other day. On purpose.

>>3633280
You think any social organizations and events aren't huge circle jerks? Church mass? You think that's not one big "we are great for coming here" circle jerk? Or what about a book group or a PTA meeting? It's all a bunch of people jerking off all over the place.

Facebook is just an e-version of it.

>>3633280

No. It's a trend that's been going on far longer than the existence of social media. A good documentary to watch is Adam Curtis' Century of the Self in which he says how using the work of Freud and Jung advertisers and marketers were able to pretty much shape modern society. Furthermore, politics moved away from collectivism to individualism. We're the sons and daughters of monetarism.

Important thing is this problem only seems to exist in Western Europe and the US. Other places have youth who are far less selfish yet still use social media as much.

I don't see society as "one path."

Is see it as very complicated, yet I take solace in the ratio of disasters vs. non-disasters in contemporary human civilization.

I feel fine about it.

>>3633290
>He poked a girl in the eye the other day. On purpose.

That is children in general, and has been the case since Methuselah was born.

I think old people do think it's getting progressively worse, and always have. However, I also think that instant access to all information, video games, and TV will have long-term ramifications for today's youth.

>>3633292

Going to church for example servers a purpose. Facebook is basically just girls posting pictures so everyone can tell her how pretty she is

>>3633290
That's normal. When I was that age it was full Gangs of New York battlefields with everything we could find.

>>3633305
What purpose does a church serve that is any less vapid than that of Facebook?

Increasingly lazy and loose parenting is also troubling, I find. Young parents seem more interested in being a child's friend than their parent.

>>3633309

Lets not turn this into an anti religion shit fest but there is the social aspect and religious aspect to going to church

>>3633305
>Facebook is basically just girls posting pictures so everyone can tell her how pretty she is

And church is basically just self-righteous twats pretending to be pious so the priest can tell them how they're living good lives.

It's the same, dude.

>>3633310
They seem more interested in children as an accessory or as a novelty, something that has an ephemeral interest to them, and like a puppy received for Christmas, is discarded the moment the initial novelty expires.

Obviously I don't mean literally discarded, but emotionally.

>>3633312
There's a social aspect to Facebook too, which puts it on a level peg with Church. Saying it has 'a religious aspect' doesn't mean anything.

>>3633314
>discarded the moment the initial novelty expires.
>Obviously I don't mean literally discarded, but emotionally.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/22/nebrasks-safe-haven-law-a_n_120757.html

>>3633314
>>3633310
And through this they fail to instill any manners, courtesy or any sense of decency in their kids.

>>3633316

So people dont go to church for any spiritual reasons?

>>3633322
Of course they do, but why does that mean it has any value?

>>3633324

Who said anything about value? What does it mean to have value?

>>3633320
That's what I meant by discarded. Parenting requires effort, day in and day out, to instill in your child values they can carry into adulthood. When a parent grows bored of their child, they will cease to teach them, cease to educate them, and in the case of young parents, had nothing to teach them in the first place.

>>3633258
I am one of those people who think things are getting progressively worse. I am in my twenties and i can say the first 10 years of my life i witnessed a society and community that i feel has evaporated over the last ten years. I am not sure if this view is a product of reality shaking events like 911 and columbine or if i might just be a pessimist. I do believe that people used to have an optimism and a unsubstantiated hope for the short term future; and i what i see today is people trying to appear happy through artificially stimulating them selves with instant gratification.

>>3633310
That's the result of egalitarianism and liberalism. Today a parent may resemble more of a friend, they used to be absolute monarchs. There's a direct correlation between the micropolitics of the family and the politics of a nation.

>>3633322
>So people dont go to church for any spiritual reasons?

If people wanted to be spiritual, they'd shut themselves up in their closets like Jesus advocated.

Going to church pretty much signifies that one is not spiritual nor seeking it.

>>3633329
You stated it had a purpose, which implies value. If that's hard for you to understand let me state it in terms of your original statement: What purpose does the religious aspect serve?

>>3633333
That's progress. First we must do away with delusion before we can strive towards something in any efficient way.

>>3633336
this is the stupidest thing i've ever seen

Has anyone read The Silence of Animals: On Progress and Other Modern Myths by Gray? How was it? I am interested in reading it but I am not sure if it is worth the price.

>>3633340
Only because you'd like it not to be true. It is, however.

>>3633340
This isn't /b/. If you think it's stupid, explain why.

>>3633333
But seriously, I mostly agree.

>>3633334
I've never made that connection, but damn, you're right.

>>3633333

i've never considered how living in the post-9/11 era has affected society's psyche

>>3633349
Yanks scared of being attacked on their own turf.

>>3633337

Does spiritual and social satisfaction count a purpose of church?

>>3633354
What does spiritual satisfaction mean? What purpose does it serve?

I agree that it serves a social purpose though.

>>3633334
I always miss that absolute monarch parenting these days. I'd consider myself young - 21 - but still my parents and grandparents were just like that, and never took any shit from me like new parents of the 21st century. But then again, my family is mixed, Dutch-Asian.

>>3633349
As a non clap/ brit it never really affected me.

>>3633363
As a Brit in never affected me either. I don't think any non-Americans give a shit about it beyond the loss of life, which is obviously pretty tragic.

>>3633336
>If people wanted to be spiritual, they'd shut themselves up in their closets like Jesus advocated. Going to church pretty much signifies that one is not spiritual nor seeking it.

Church services commemorate the Eucharist per Christ's command and continue Jewish traditions (reading from scripture, singing hymns, etc.) that existed before he was even born. Church services have existed since the first centuries of Christianity; one can attend them and also devote time to eremitic spiritual exercises.

>>3633302
I'm an old (late fifties) person And I can tell you from experience that everything is getting better, and it's getting better faster. You would not believe how hard things were in the sixties and seventies compared to now, how much closer to the edge, how much dirtier and lower quality everything was. Trust me, if things go the way they are, in fifty more years it will be paradise on earth. and people will be bitching about it because they're old and nostalgic for their youth or young and don't remember.

>>3633367

It's mostly important as a watershed event that ushered in an era of taking away muh rights and pursuing a foreign policy even more retarded and wasteful than usual.

>>3633258
>Are you one of those people who think that it's getting progressively worse

yes

>>3633374

There's more to life than constantly increasing the rate at which we can churn out new iPhone models. You should know that grandpa.

>>3633374
>>3633374
No, I completely agree with you. I think it is getting better. But I also think it's going to be a while until we see the impact the internet and video games have had on today's children.

>>3633381
Like what? Spirituallity? Being in touch with God?

Once technological utopia comes, high-quality literature will follow.

>>3633385

>implying literature wont be completely dead in 50 years

>>3633361
Indo's zijn over het algemeen wat traditioneler, denk ik.

>>3633386
There'll be another renascence, and then it'll be fine.

>>3633385
>Once technological utopia comes, high-quality literature will follow.

Hahaha. Ridiculous. Technological utopia would bring an end to all meaningful art and literature. Strife is what pushes man to greatness.

>>3633389
>renascence
It looks like you won't be the one ushering it however.

>>3633333
I wrote that^

>>3633280
Facebook is no more the reason for this depression then masturbation (their just tools for instant gratification)
>>3633314
>>3633331 and some other post about people with kids
If you don't have kids don't tell people how to raise kids,
>>3633334
but i would agree that what used to be absolute authority is being chipped away by popular media and certain social pressures.
I do not mean to portray these things as wholly evil or good but basically the tension between the two groups Home and society have been waring away at each other up to the current result. I think it is safe to say people will not stop having families in the future and if we are heading downhill its not something that cant be course corrected in time

>>3633381
true, but everything else is better too: the food is better, the movies, it's like there's no comparison. People can say things out loud now that would get you beat up AND thrown in jail just forty years ago. When I was faculty sponcser for the college gay and lesbian group that was trying to form, the meetings had to be held secretly, they had to use me as the sponsor because if any of the gay or lesbian faculty had come out and signed on, they could have been fired. When the psych department had a student show up at the counseling center saying they thought they might be gay, before the group started, they were referred to the school chaplain. I had to check all of the gay and lesbian books out of the library and keep them in my office and leave a big note on the shelves because the kids with athletic and other scholarships couldn't check them out or they might get reported for moral turpitude and lose their scholarships.

and lets not even talk about how long and difficult research used to be, or the fact that technology idin't work half the time and if it did it broke down so often that there were actually people called "repair men" who got paid to fix them,

again, you guys have no idea.

>>3633392
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/renascence

Not him, but. It's an alternate spelling of renaissance.

>mfw plebs don't know this

>>3633392
I touch typed it, spelled it wrong, and then my computer auto-corrected it to the wrong one. I think you need to calm down.

>>3633396
>If you don't have kids don't tell people how to raise kids,
Great argument there m8.

>>3633396
>If you don't have kids don't tell people how to raise kids
>tfw you nave to get a nuclear plant first in order to reprimand other nuclear plant owners concerning their waste management
>tfw not enough money for a nuclear plant
>tfw I'll have to allow the world to go to shit because poor
>tfw three headed fish shoot at me with glocks
>n-no judgement

>>3633396
>If you don't have kids don't tell people how to raise kids
Yeah, that's fucking retarded.

>>3633396
>If you don't have kids don't tell people how to raise kids

>>3633399
It's a pleb word that was spawned because anglo's were scared of frogisms

>>3633385
>Like what? Spirituallity? Being in touch with God?

Perhaps. Or at least with each other. In any case, our frantic pursuit of indefinite material 'progress' has led to just as much destruction as it has creation and needs to be reconsidered. But it probably won't be.

>technological utopia

I don't think that the utopia you envision wouldn't be conducive to anything of artistic or intellectual merit.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this but...

Brave New World?

Is that the "goal" that we are pushing towards? Is it a bad goal? Is it a good goal? When this topic comes up, I keep coming back to that book and reflecting on its message. Another anon wrote that "strife makes man great". Is that really true? If it is, is it "right"? What does "right" even mean?

brb existential crisis

>>3633410
>I don't think that the utopia you envision wouldn't be conducive to anything of artistic or intellectual merit.
Contentedness doesn't require artistic and intellectual merit.

>>3633387
Klopt wel, mijn Indo-opvoeding had vooral de nadruk op respect voor je ouderen, dit mis ik wel eens bij jongere kinderen. Ook bij jonge mede-Indo's trouwens.

>>3633409

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/renascence
>first known use 1727

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/renaissance
>first known use 1845

C'mon, stop pulling stuff out of your ass.

>>3633428
>merriam-webster.com

in the interest of total clarity I live in NYC, and no i don't think you or anyone should give a fuck about 911, also if u visit NYC don't go to the 911 memorial its just a tourist attraction to make money.
>>3633349
>>3633353
>>3633363
>>3633367
>>3633378
But i think you are not being truthful with yourself the impact of 911 is not about the deaths its about the fact that a person with a weapon could walk into any location paint it red with blood and there is nothing stopping them. The fact that nothing is sacred and there are no limits to what a person can do dissolve the delusion that we can control any aspect of our lives. I think that 911 and columbine much like Kristallnacht, or raiding barbarians in the dark ages Are just acts of random violence that cant be shaken off from the psyche because we or built for fight or flight but there is noway to fight or flee this threat to your personal safety

>>3633428

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=renascence
>First used as a native alternative to The Renaissance in 1869 by Matthew Arnold.

Muh native alternatives. It's ugly and unnecessary, especially since English is the ultimate slut amongst languages.

>>3633432
Just admit you made a mistake, bro. Or don't, but stop trying to pretend you didn't screw up.

>>3633435
When this happened to the Greeks they came up with fabulous things like Cynicism, Stoicism, Epicureanism, Scepticism and other great schemes of mental self-sufficiency and imperturbability.

>>3633408
just because you have kids you are somehow more qualified to dictate rearing strategy then someone who doesn't...

you can't be this stupid

>>3633397
>true, but everything else is better too: the food is better

The food that most people eat is utter shit, man. Epidemics of heart disease and obesity due to the overavailability of mass produced garbage aren't a solution to famine, they're its mirror image.

Film has not really improved, from what I can tell. There have always been a few good films and a bunch of shit ones, only today producing shit ones has become a trillion dollar industry.

The degree to which homosexuals and others are allowed to share their 'alternative' sexual lifestyles with the public is not really something I would consider using as a measure of our society's wellbeing.

It seems like we just don't agree at all.

>>3633443
The fun thing is that people who are capable of critical thought usually have so many doubts about child rearing that they delay or even abstain, where dumb people just sort of stumble into it and take it from there.

>>3633443
You realize that that's exactly the sentiment >>3633408 is trying to relate with that reaction image?

>>3633404
>>3633405
>>3633408
Really that's all u heard i wasn't saying don't have an opinion just realize your opinion doesn't means shit cause kids are for the majority of the time little monsters that poop scream and eat. U can not reason with them and they are too stupid to know any better. The only way to make them shut up is give them a pacifier or let them scream till they go horse. And i don't know why you worry about the world when today's kids come into power cause you'll already be dead from the current generations mismanagement

>>3633453
inability to read reaction (images) is a sign of...

>>3633457
As someone who has kids, I'd just like to state that you're a fucking retard.

>>3633415

It absolutely requires intellectual merit, and art manifests and helps lead to intellectual merit.

>>3633448
Just because a gay guy can say he's gay without being fired from his job doesn't mean he's "sharing his sexual lifestyle."

>>3633442
yes and all their stories and myths are filled with incest, betrayal, murder, and narcissism. nearly every famous Greek is a footnote in a lesson on what the hell not to do

I was thinking that technology grows fast, but the mentality doesn't keep up with technology...

>>3633410
>don't think that the utopia you envision wouldn't

Double negative was unintentional

>>3633413

>discussing literature
>please

seriously though, on impulse when reading Brave New World (like 1984) i wanted to resist against it because 'muh feels' i guess, but also because that was the intent of the book. It smashes the idea of utopia.

>>3633438

Feel free to learn an ur-language, because you seem so offended by the fact that linguistic exchange exists.

>>3633463
>Just because a gay guy can say he's gay without being fired from his job doesn't mean he's "sharing his sexual lifestyle."

I agree that this shouldn't happen, but I also think that public openness about sex has gone too far. Heterosexuals are just as bad in this respect.

>>3633453
yeah, I just wanted to throw my two cents in, and besides misspelling "than," I liked how my response actually addressed the fallacy behind the statement, rather than just snidely repeating it

>>3633404
>tfw unable to prevent the holocaust because I've never tried running a country like Hitler
feels bad.

>>3633457
>>3633443
>>3633453
>>3633408
>>3633404

>>3633396
^I am sorry i wasn't clear in this but i don't have kids

>>3633461
u can say that but not saying why doesn't correct whatever mistake u think i made

>>3633512
>>3633512
>I don't have kids
Obviously.

>>3633290
If thats what you're talking about then it isn't cause for concern. 6 year olds are still developing the ability to understand how decisions can have impacts.

something something capitalism

>>3633526
>retort

something something cultural marxism something feedums.

>>3633526
Capitalism was never the issue.

>>3633531
>mfw a liberal used "freedom" as an argument for something like abortion but then supported a florescent lightbulb ban and accused any detractors of being ignorant rednecks who care too much about "muh freedoms" near me

>>3633545
mfw /pol/ fags keep posting that image... Tell me something. Are you against killing bacteria? No? Well than what is your point? Also...are really really equating the choice of bringing a human being into the world with being able to buy the particular light bulb you want?

>>3633559
>breaking eagle eggs is illegal because they are considered baby eagles
>killing baby humans is ok because #420 yolo blaze it i dont want no kids

>>3633545
>Buying a lightbulb is the same as having to raise a child you don't want and have a fetus inside of you for nine months.

Shiggy wiggy doo, can you even support human life inside you?

>>3633488
A) your responses have been against people who agree with you.... this is bad. B) your images make me want to murder you. You are a fag.

>>3633363
>>3633367

>I'm Brit
>9/11 didn't affect me in anyway!

You're delusional.

American foreign politics has shaped GB quite significantly.

>>3633545
>life =/= sentient life

>>3633571
>>3633559
Hit a nerve. I bet I described you pretty well. That's the thing about liberals, they appeal to freedom and "rights" when it suits their arguments, but when they disagree the other person is an ignorant redneck who needs to shut up about "muh freedums". I don't blame you kids though, it's what you were taught in public school.

>>3633396
>If you don't have kids don't tell people how to raise kids

Yes - male doctors should not give birth advice to expectant mothers.

>>3633390
>strife needed for art

Don't think so Tim. For most of history significant pieces of art and culture were predominantly created by and indulged in by the upper classes.

The only thing a technological utopia would do is possibly eliminate art for the lower and middle classes, who would prefer to just get 'jacked in' to a simulation and have the pleasure center of the brain directly stimulated. But hey that rather happens right now with video games, porn and processed foods - and pop culture is clearly shit. If anything getting rid of the 'average' person and returning the arts to the domain of high society will be a great thing.

>>3633570
I mean..are you real or a troll? I can't tell. Here's what you should do: Stop making analogies. Period.

If the eagle decides to crush its eggs no will will put the eagle in jail. Eagles are endangered, and humans aren't (I can go to the store and buy 12 packs of non-endangered eggs). No one is killing another persons fetus without their consent...The ways in which your analogies don't hold up is staggeringly long.

>>3633570
>He thinks fetuses are babies

As a side note did you lay that eagle egg? An apt analogy would be if you could decide for others if they should get an abortion or not.

>>3633577
I'm not the one resorting to strawmanning.

>>3633532
And it's certainly not the solution nor contributing to one.

I don't see it being worst than any time in the past, no. Not necessarily optimistic of the outcome but I don't see an impending doom, either.

>>3633589
It's the most efficient way of distributing resources.

>>3633582
So if its because we already have too many humans, why don't we start killing the poor ones? Though somehow I bet you wouldn't like that.

Go ahead and define objectively where a fetus becomes deserving of "rights". I'll try not to laugh.

>>3633588
If someone asked you if your political beliefs were in support of individual freedom, would you not say yes? But yet you also mock others for using freedom as an argument when you disagree.

>>3633577
Wait... calling people dumb rednecks isn't okay but posting images of a 'liberal' with a little jew operating his thoughts is? Also, I am not sure when I called you an idiot redneck, but I am sure that you have now made multiple claims about liberals. Good job being illogical, racist, and, worst of all, predictable.

>>3633584
>>3633582
>>3633574
>>3633571
>>3633559
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwejQBIyjow


MY

FUCKING

SIDES

>>3633559
>Are you against killing bacteria?
sure
>No?
why u might ask because it was me or him
>Well than what is your point?
that life is not a term its an existence
>are really really equating the choice of bringing a human being into the world with being able to buy the particular light bulb you want?
PLZ odds are the kids going to drown in a pool anyway when the parent that doesn't give a fuck about them isn"t paying attention anyway; so what impact will that have? the more important question is are u insinuating that the collective waste saved by this brilliant policy maneuver will not save us from the impending environmental collapse?

>>3633594
>individual freedom
To a degree, once again you're strawmanning. Exactly like last time. See for more details>>3633596

>>3633600
>Thinks I'm an americlap.
>Thinks the US has anything close to a leftwing

>>3633604
Would you not say you support individual freedom? Or is it just freedom that you like?

>>3633609
>implying the sentiment doesn't apply to all of the leftwing

The doublethink in leftist circles in astounding.

>>3633449
>people capable of critical thought

I dont completely disagree, but usually it's the people who didn't have proper parenting themselves who have the most doubts and put things off.

>>3633600
>leftists

>>3633611
I support individual freedom. As a result, I support someone's freedom to kill a cluster of cells growing in their belly.

>>3633611
>Thinks the world is black and white.

>>>/pol/

>>3633397
the food was sooooo much worse in the sixties, and the spoilage and waste was unimaginable. people got most of their vegetables from cans.

and i'm not talking about
'alternative lifestyle " crap either. kids were killing themselves, and i had to take in two girls from a puerto rican community because ALL their relatives kicked them out when they found out they were gay. This was not about parades and values. this was kids dying. This was when there used to be gay and lesbian "deprogrammers" . There were some evil assholes back then, and a lot of people went along with it. I was an old Goldwater man, and still am I guess, so i'm not that surprised if i'm a bit out of synch with current liberal thought or whatever, but let me tell you, rape and kidnapping were not that uncommon, and beating was downright regular, it's one thing to dislike couples holding hands in wal mart or whatever creeps you out, it's another to beat them to death with tire chains.
and the over availability of garbage goes along with the over availability of good stuff. In the sixties, all we HAD was the garbage. take a look at an old store circular sometime.

movies, it's a taste thing i guess. we had a thing called a drive in in the old days,and some of the stuff that put on there you wouldn't watch if they paid you now. It was mostly just a make-out place though, or a picnic place down by the screen, so maybe a good movie would have been distracting.

>>3633620
>>3633611
>>3633600
>>3633594
All dat samefagging.

>>3633594
I am this guy>>3633582
Also I am not sure how many people I am debating... please identify yourself somehow... or don't and hide in your anonymity like a KKK member (zing!).

"So if its because we already have too many humans"

Is that what I said? Actually I said it is because there are too few Eagles, and I fucking like eagles.

"why don't we start killing the poor ones? Though somehow I bet you wouldn't like that."

Well... see above. Also I don't think poor necessarily = bad or unworthy. But I don;t advocate any sort of killing of poor OR rich... You give away something about yourself that you are ready to make the assumption poor = bad, though.

"Go ahead and define objectively where a fetus becomes deserving of "rights". I'll try not to laugh."

How about I pose the same question to you. Why is conception the marker? Why is killing a sperm not bad? sure it has only half the chromosomes, but maybe its just half as bad...however since 10000 sperm died in you left nut while I was typing this, you better go to jail.

I look forward to your next stupid post. Please include another analogy. You know how I love those.

>>3633621
What about gun laws? Economic regulation? Suddenly individual freedom doesn't matter to you much, I'm guessing.

>>3633632
I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make anymore.

>>3633633
>can't answer

So you admit that I'm right? That you consider yourself a supporter of individual freedom but yet support legislation that directly restricts individual freedom?

There is one main problem with society today which is this:

We long for a better society, we know life and society can be better than this. But we're too comfortable as we are and so are scared too make any drastic changes. So we just tinker with the current system a little bit here and there (oh maybe cut a few bits of government or invest in a few more here) - no one is willing to make the changes necessary as we fear losing what we have although we know we could have so much more.

>>3633641
Well that's a pretty conclusion to draw from my observation that you're not making any sense.

>>3633633
You're arguing with a libertarian he lives in a world of trains, delusion and a lack of political relevance. There is no point to be made.

>>3633608
Wait... is it just me, /lit/, or is this complete babble?

Lets start off with the bacteria thing. Bacteria is just an example. you have killed countless earthworms in your day. Was it 'you or them', too? You have strayed so deep into the illogical that I believe you are drowning in your own stupid. "Life is not a term its an existence"... What the fucking fuck is this?! And, although environmentalism is important (I'm sure you are crouched over your keyboard, posed to rage against that too) its relevance here is marginal. Do yourself a favor and go to the library, find the philosophy section, and pull the shelf down onto your head.

>>3633647
Liberal whose mad that I hit the nail on the head detected. Keep on considering yourself a champion of freedom while at the same time calling people ignorant who disagree with restricting individual freedom in the name of "morality".

>>3633545
What really puzzles me with the "pro-choice" crowd is how they often oppose the right for men to choose if they want to pay for the child. Not to mention how I seldom meet anyone who is for the right to kill a few months old baby as almost every argument for abortion could be applied for killing babies. I think that Romans had it right.

>>3633658
>>3633658
Is that what you tell yourself to feel better about the fact that people keep calling you an idiot?

>>3633487
>public openness about sex has gone too far

Eh the problem isn't the openness, the problem is that most of it(in contemporary media/art) is portrayed in such a crude and pornographic manner. America's attitude on sex is that of a horny teenage boy.

>>3633659
There's absolutely no reason that men shouldn't be able to sign a contract absolving them of all responsibility for the child.

>man wants child
>woman doesn't
>aborted cy@

>man doesn't want child
>woman does
>18 years of child support inc

>>3633662
>implying the opinions of those who are less intelligent impact me

captcha: toddlym ALPHA

>>3633658
Sure thing friend. Care to tell me about how Ro- I mean Rand Paul is sure to become President?

>>3633675
Care to tell me about how Obama will bring about tons of "change", please?

>>3633673
You're completely delusional, I'm out.

>>3633659
I really like it when either side extrapolates from pro choice or Life and assume it applies everywhere else. As in "Why are Pro life people wanting to go to war?" or "Why are pro choicers against lightbulbs?"...I mean come one... this is the definition of straw man.

>>3633680
>I'm pro-life because I think people should be able to do what they want with their own bodies.
>People shouldn't be able to open a lemonade stand without a permit.
>Buying certain kinds of light bulbs should be illegal.
>We should tax unhealthy food because people are making choices I don't like.

>>3633573
For instance?

>>3633677
>Not even an americlap
>>3633673
>Dat libertarian delusion
I bet you see yourself as a "captain of industry" in the making.

>>3633611
>>3633620
>>3633632
>>3633641
>>3633673
>>3633677
>>3633594
>>3633570
Why do you have so many laughing pictures? I am beginning to think you are actually a mental patient....

Nurse! Nurse! How did this man get access to a computer?

>>3633413

>strife makes man great

It feels good to know I'm not the only one who thinks that

>>3633689
>Strawmanning because you got Star Wars: Knight of the TOLD republic

>I support liberty
>except when people make decisions I don't like

>>3633685
uhhh...why did you respond to me with that?

>>3633668

This sadly will probably never happen. From the perspective of the law there are three parties at hand and of them the child is given priority. If the court sees that child support will drastically improve the child's life then it will call for it irrespective of whether the man is at fault or not.

This is also the reason why sometimes you get situations were a step dad is paying for a kid who isn't even his after he gets divorced.

It's a difficult situation either way because this is not about abstract concepts of freedoms and rights. It's about how to provide for the child. Personally I would make it illegal for anyone to conceive and carry on a pregnancy if they have no reliable income and nobody formally consented to providing such income.

>>3633697
>Star Wars: Knight of the TOLD republic

Lel epic trewl breh.

Another laugh picture
>>3633692

>>3633668
>sign a contract absolving them of all responsibility for the child.
It should be the other way round. It should be assumed that woman can take responsibility of their decisions and if a man wants to take any part he should sign a contract. The assumption of needing a man to take responsibility is just a leftover of the patriarchy.

>>3633680
Did you reply the wrong post? I think both issues I mentioned are very closely related to abortion.

>>3633694
So eternal struggle is the whole point of man?

>>3633713
>doesn't understand evolution

>>3633709
>a man wants to take any part he should sign a contract.
It takes two to tango breh.

>>3633709
yea.... I think I meant to reply to this guy:>>3633545. Your post is actually a real thought from a human brain.

>>3633713
Yes. We must struggle to become greater.

who anarcho-capitalism here

You guys, I'm the old guy from here>>3633627
>>3633397

I am a lifelong republican and I had an AuH2O bumper sticker on my lark convertible, which was a piece of shit, but i never saw a Studebaker that wasn't, and i bet most of you have never seen a Studebaker period. This is because they sucked.
everything in the past sucked. the metal rusted faster, the toys broke quicker the cars wouldn't go twenty five thousand miles without an engine overhaul. Ever see a timing gun? You probably never will either,

You got three channels of black and white, and you had to go turn the antenna to bring one of them in, all the news was propaganda and only the crazy hippies, whom i despised then and despise now, had the guts to point it out. records were on vinyl that a regular needle wore out in a few thousand plays, selling rotten meat was protected by law and the government could and did put you in the army whenever they goddamn felt like it.

the black toilets were tiny stalls in hotel basements and diapers were picked up by a guy in a truck that you could smell coming three blocks away.

Everything cost an ass and a half and it broke the day after you bought it. remember tube testers? of course not.

point is, the world was worse, people were meaner and more scared, more selfish and hardheaded because the harder world they grew up in made them that way.

sure, people talk about thirty five cent a gallon gas, but don't point out that a fourteen year old boy working as a farm hand could pull in maybe four dollars on a good day. I started out working for one dollar, thinning corn,

Guys, everything is better, and has steadily gotten better since the days i was old enough to remember. Not just for me, for everybody. Nostalgia is shit. the golden age is now. in the sixties we would never have asked for, or imagined, better.

>>3633715
>Doesn't know evolution is purely reactionary and deals more with finding a comfortable niche in an environment.

>>3633717
>if you didn't want the child you shouldn't have had sex

That's the same argument used to argue against abortion.

>>3633717
Playing Devil's advocate: They could sign it with their penis, and the contract could be inside the girls vagina.

Posting in wrong board: IP is a fucktard.

>>3633725
Except dude man made the thing but he doesn't have to lug it around for nine months.

>>3633703
I like the laughing pictures, lightens the tense tone to see people having a good time. Keep it up, I say.

>>3633729
There you go again assuming all sex is for procreation and that he wanted the child. You are literally using the same arguments that pro-lifers use against female abortions against males being able to terminate responsibility.

>>3633731
Lol you are clearly the guy who is posting them. This man is laughing at other posters... not with them.

>>3633725
If she doesn't want it then she can abort it. If she does then why the fuck should he have to pay for it if he doesn't?

>>3633736
It's after the fact, clearly some responsibility has to be established. But you'd be a fool not to see the women is still the one pulling the heavier load in this instance.

>>3633729
He just has to pay for it 18 years, often without the good sides of having a child.

>>3633744
>if the woman doesn't want it she can avoid responsibility and abort it

>if the man doesn't want it he's fucked

>>3633748
>the man doesn't want it he's fucked
Most child support payments are a pittance and scale in relation to what the father makes. In instances where the father wins custody child support payments have to be made out by the mother.

>>3633753
>Most child support payments are a pittance and scale in relation to what the father makes.

Why should he have to pay at all if he doesn't want the child?

>inb4 more arguments that are literally used by pro-lifers against all abortions turned around

Simple solution:

When a couple discover they are pregnant, they must go to the state. The state in this scenario will be represented by their GP. They must both sign legally binding contracts, dictating that they're prepared to care for this child. If one of them is not willing to care for it, then they must either abort the child, or one of the parents may choose to care for it on their own. In this eventuality, the party who chose not to sign bears no responsibility for the upbringing of the child. If neither of the parents are willing to care for the child, they must abort it, unless there the state run adoption department has demand for another child, in which case they may choose to give their child to the state in order that a family unable to bear children can have one of their own.

I feel that this is the best way for it to be done.

>>3633760
>wanting to live in a country where the government controls everyone's lives

>>3633769
I want to live in a country in which the government maintains control.

>>3633774
That's disgusting. Even more disgusting than the birthing pool that was in my living room this winter. Besides, who would trust any government that "has demand for another child" as you put it?

>>3633786
>has demand for another child
Because barren couples shouldn't have children if they want and can care for them.

>>3633774
Why do we need a government at all?

>>3633786
I didn't say government, I said government operated adoption facility. So a couple who can't have children say to them "We'd like a child", and then that creates 1 space. This 1 space is filled by parents who don't wish to keep their children.

The government would really do very little beyond keep track of who wants a child and who doesn't.

I don't see how this is disgusting, unless you're some kind of retarded reactionary.

>>3633795
How are those government paved roads working out for you?

>>3633796
>unless you think the government should control everyone's lives you're a reactionary

Collectivism is reactionary, not progressive. The more advanced countries are trending more and more towards individualism, it's time to deal with it.

>>3633802
On what grounds are you objecting to this? In what way would it be 'the government controlling everyone's lives'? It would just be ensuring children are born to people who want them.

I can see absolutely no way in which this is a bad thing

>>3633801
>doesn't even understand how road building works

99% of the time, businesses pay for the roads to be built and then the government pays them back. There's no reason the private sector couldn't build roads better than the government, like they do with every good/service.

>>3633802
How does that in any way infringe on individual liberty? You can still have a child if you want one. I'd argue that it's better for liberty, because even barren couples can have children if they want them.

>>3633809
>Corporations have my best interest at heart and at no point in history have they ever formed exploitative juntas

>>3633801
Pretty bad. Government has ignored road maintenance for long and the the road network of my area has deteriorated greatly while private owned roads are just fine.

>>3633809
They're non-diminishable and non-excludable public goods. Private firms have absolutely no incentive to create roads anywhere other than their factories.

>>3633824
>The government has my best interests at heart and at no point in history have they ever committed genocide

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_T0WF-uCWg

>>3633824
Globalisation pretty much ensures that no civilised nation can do that.

>>3633833
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_massacre

>Corporate interest
Want a modern example? Look at De Beers.

>>3633839
Off the backs of Congolese and Liberian workers I'm sure.

>>3633843
What?

>>3633841
> the government decided to send the Colombian army to end a month-long strike organized by the workers' union in order to secure better working conditions.

So we are in agreement that government is a bad thing, then? Corporation influence only becomes a problem when they can bribe the government(which is a monopoly on force) to do their bidding.

>>3633843
Who would have even shittier jobs without those "sweatshops" I'm sure you also complain about. They line up to work outside.

Are you frustrated?

>>3633719
>we must struggle to become greater

We're beyond that now, or at least will be.

Rationally handling perceived weaknesses through technology is superior to constant clawing and knifing one another.

>>3633853
>We're beyond that now

What if cavemen found a magic button that served them a 3-course hot meal every day and decided they were the pinnacle of evolution?

>lel fuck all this evolving and struggling shit yolo #BLAZEIT

>Rationally handling perceived weaknesses through technology is superior to constant clawing and knifing one another.

Can you provide a citation?

>>3633850
>which is a monopoly on force

>Thinks in a world without government companies couldn't hire militias and force themselves around.

>Exploitation is ok just because it's the only alternative as is serfdom!
Thank you free markets! You definitely fixed that issue.

>>3633833
A Rumor in Gomorrah

A man has told me god is good,
and stands above all men,
that he will never cast us forth,
though drenched with lust and sin,
That though we heed him little,
and pursue our own accord
he will not seek our bane nor yet,
unsheath his deadly sword
that he forgives excesses
and will not our prayers reject.

There was rumor in Gomorrah,
to that very same effect.

A friend avers that government,
has all our cares in mind.
And will not neglect the comfort of
the poor, the halt, the blind.
he maintains unreservedly,
his faith in policy.
to bring the fruits of honor to
the strong the just, the free.
he says the great in power seek
the profit of all men

It was mentioned in Treblinka,
but I did not heed it then.

Technology will save us,
i have heard a stranger say.
The wonderment of science,
skill, and tools will win the day.
Our comfort and our safety
we may leave to wise devices.
And men who build and train them up,
will coddle all our vices.
they'll see the futre clearly
and avert all waiting dooms.

I think I heard it spoken in
Titanic's smoking rooms.

The forgiveness of the strong is great,
I'm sure most meen agree.
The wisest and the best of us
will surely all be free.
the bold men, wise in letters
with their eye on public weal.
will never be cast out or forced
their knowledge to conceal.
Time alters soon the hearts of kings,
and all will be put right.

I heard it in the Gulag
almost every single night.

So go forth with the banner
of of redemption wafting high
and shout the slogan "Liberty!"
in land and sea and sky.
Of justice, peace, forgiveness, love,
proclaim the coming reign.
And cry the truth to power,
and the vanity of gain
That mercy always triumphs,
and that men will all be free.

Go tell them in Gomorrah,
but you didn't come from me.

>>3633876
I really love this poem.

>>3633873
There would be an even greater market for protection, think of how many people there are who would need protecting.

>Exploitation is ok just because it's the only alternative as is serfdom!

>my country is a shithole
>no jobs
>american company opens a "sweatshop" and employs my whole village
>western white liberals cry EXPLOITATION

>>3633882
thank you. it's one of my top three on this board.

>>3633883
>There would be an even greater market for protection, think of how many people there are who would need protecting.
You are truly deluded.

>>3633883
>my whole village
I barely exist above the poverty line and should I ever be injured (in a job with little to no safety precautions) I'm effectively fucked and no one will hire me. Can't wait to starve in the streets or live my whole life as a shoe maker.

>clapping intensifies

>>3633890
>no argument

pist?

>>3633897
>I'm entitled to a good job even though I have no skills that I can offer

>>3633905
>I'm entitled to a good job even though I have no skills that I can offer
Libertarians confirmed for sociopaths and crap trolls.

>>3633792
I recently had an argument with a friend along these lines, and yeah, he brought up families wanting to take care of a child, parents barren or otherwise, and I'm still considering that point of view full of shit.

Even the worst people still love the fact that they're a parent with their own little genetic copy that they dominate on a daily basis. Even in foster families it's still a system of domination, it's not like a child's always going to be adopted by a barren and generous Hollywood couple, sometimes they get a 2 story house that's falling apart in rural Idaho and grow up stabbing people in high school and getting disowned at 15 years old. Fuck adoption systems, kids grow up with no connection to their surrogate parents because they're simply seen as people in a position of power with no actual genetic connection.

If a friend died and their kid was left an orphan, I'd do everything I could to keep that kid in the same social situation I could. My social group contains parents, and every one of us that knows them has babysat those kids. No big deal. We'll take care of their kids, no problem, and we don't need a goddamn adoption agency to place them elsewhere if something were to happen and they had no family to go to, our social family, our community, would be more willing to take care of that child than any foster parent in any home anywhere.

Anyways, I'll be proud to have a child, and yes, I think that barren parents adopting children from halfway around the world should never be a real topic. It just reminds me of slavery. It's really the only parallel I can find.

I guess I'm callous enough to think that a foreign orphan doesn't deserve my love, my empathy goes towards simpler things that I can actually solve.

>>3633915
Bad news, friend. I think you might be an idiot.

>>3633912
>reduced to namecalling

Tell me, why do you deserve to receive compensation when you do not possess goods/services that other people value?

>>3633915
>Fuck adoption systems, kids grow up with no connection to their surrogate parents because they're simply seen as people in a position of power with no actual genetic connection.


you're an idiot. I've had six adopted kids. they've all turned out okay, ones a recovering alcoholic, but three of them are in professional careers and two are doing okay in college, better than okay some semesters. Fuck genetic connections.

you know not whereof you speak.

>>3633920
I think you're right, to a certain extent. In an ideal world there'd be no such thing as someone unfit to work, and a man who loses a leg, or an arm, or even both legs and/or arms, would have them replaced quickly and easily, allowing them to enter the workforce, and ensuring there is no such thing as someone receiving money for nothing.

However, as that isn't a possibility yet, and as not all of us are entirely mentally unhinged, people incapable of earning a living should be treated as human beings and given money to live on.

>>3633915
Well...this person is real. Everyone, listen up! You now have to go through life realizing people like this exist. Isn't that heartbreaking?

>>3633937
>I've had six adopted kids.
May I ask how old are you?

>>3633938
Why should people receive money for doing nothing but existing? Being entitled to free money is part of "being treated as a human being"?

>>3633948
Being entitled to live is, yes. These days money is a prerequisite of this.

If someone is honestly unable to acquire money working, then they should be given money. Money is not the be all and end all. What exactly do you think will happen if some cripple is given money to eat and drink and live his life?

>>3633946
I am not this person, but why the fuck would you need to know this?

>>3633946
fifty seven. Ive posted before in this thread, and a lot on this board.

>>3633958
So they can go "LOOK HE IS AN UNFIT PARENT" or something equally ridiculous.

>>3633965
Good on you.

>>3633956
Why should a group of individuals be able to take some of my money to pay for someone else who does nothing at all to deserve it?

>These days money is a prerequisite of this.

That's funny because I know someone who makes above minimum wage by recycling bottles.

>>3633876
By whom was this written? I'm not at all familiar with poetry.

>>3633970
>That's funny because I know someone who makes above minimum wage by recycling bottle
As interesting as that is, it has no relation to this conversation.

>>3633972
A guy from /lit/.

>>3633972
I wrote it about a year ago in a spontaneous poetry thread, I had had the idea rolling around for moths though, so it wasnt entirely spontaneous.

>>3633970
I think it's safe to say that you're completely insane.

I'm sure you don't think you are, and that's fine. But you are.

>>3633958
Just curious. I've seen that posting style before and he has implied that he is older than your average 4chan user.

>>3633965
Thanks.

>>3633980
>absolutely no argument

>>3633992
Well, in his defense, it would be pure folly to argue with someone who was really insane.

>>3633979
Goddamn, props to you, anon

>>3633992
Oh, of course, because your argument was so wonderful and grounded in logic.
>PEOPLE SHOULDN'T GET THINGS FOR FREE. IF YOU CAN'T WORK, YOU DIE. THAT'S IT. MONEY IS EVERYTHING.

Please.

>>3634001
I asked why a group of individuals should be able to seize money from me using force and redistribute it to those who contribute nothing to the world.

>>3634001
Not him but why is someone who cannot support himself entitled to live?

>>3634008
Because that's what a government does. If you don't like it, that's totally fine. It isn't a concept that everyone can understand. You're welcome to move somewhere without one..

>>3634010
You're a nutcase. Shall we start killing people the moment they retire then?

Christ alive, Logan's Run wasn't supposed to be an instruction manual.

>>3634014
>If you Jews don't enjoy concentration camps then you should have left Germany xDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

So you have no argument aside from "If you don't like this country, you can GET THE HELL OUT!"

>money doesn't matter
>but please give me yours

>>3634014
>You're a nutcase. Shall we start killing people the moment they retire then?
Calm down, I am just asking and no one needs to kill anyone as they will die on their own if they have not acquired means to survive during their active years.

>>3634025
What would you rather then, anarchy?

>>3634035
>implying you're not living in a state of anarchy right now on a micro level

What is so terrifying about a society governed by voluntary interaction?

>>3634048
The fact that it doesn't work, and that a government, and various private interests, would eventually be formed again.

You're not just crazy, you're also an imbecile. I'm out.

>>3634055
>private interests

Every individual want is a private interest. You're a private individual. Those who can provide services to other will make a profit, those who can't don't deserve a penny. The market can provide defense better than the state just like it does every other service.

>>3634062
>I haven't even got a GCSE education in economics

>>3633863
>what if caveman found a button that served them a three course hot meal every day and declared themselves the pinnacle of evolution

I don't see how this is a counter to what I said. Technological progress is not analogous to magic buttons, in that we still have to educate ourselves and advance culturally to be able to handle these new capabilities.

>>3634089
>no argument
>greentexting

This is like the 10th time you've done this. Just acknowledge me as your superior and leave already.

>>3634102
You're insane.

>>3633577
>it's what you were taught in public school.

Oh boy here we go.

>>3633722
I think your input is great anon. Shame it's hidden in a shitstorm.

>>3633883
>there would be an even greater market for protection

Are you just now discovering libertarianism or something? These are seriously entry level arguments you're spewing.

No serious economist still believes anarcho-capitalism is actually viable.

>>3633948
>why should people receive money for doing nothing

Poor people cause the vast majority of crime.

Effective social nets, up to and including welfare, is actually in everyone's best interest.

>>3634124
Name some more credible economists than Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, and Friedman.

Protip: Karl Marx isn't an economist. Not even leftwingers take the labor theory of value seriously.

>>3634132
If people feel its in their interests they can give it to poor people directly. Where does the government come in.

>>3633920
Because one day the guy without limbs, or without a functioning frontal lobe, or with a son whom requires full time care and a wife who packed up and ran might just be you.

>>3634141
>if people feel its in their bet interests

Most people are idiots who think on a short term basis and would never voluntarily give their money away. Plus proper social safety nets are not just handing people cash.

>>3634146
>because my feelings say so

Not an argument. If I couldn't provide services to other people I wouldn't want government agents to forcefully extract it from hardworking people so I could do nothing all day.

>>3634152
>Most people are idiots who think on a short term basis and would never voluntarily give their money away.

So people might use their money for things you don't approve of? If it's in their best interests to do something and they don't do it then why is it your business?

>>3634155
Starting a policy of ignoring this motherfucker. I suggest you join.

>>3634155
>use money for things you don't approve of

I love it how libertarians view everyone as some sort of supremely rational actor, that always makes effective decisions - despite the constant stream of evidence to the contrary.

>if it's in their best interest to do something and they don't do it then why is it any of your business

Because a persons actions have an impact on others, they don't live in bubbles where the consequences of their choices are limited to themselves.

>>3634155
Yes you would. If you were hit by a car, and your legs and arms and spine shattered, and they told you that you'd never work again, you sure as shit would take disability benefits. You certainly fucking would, and you are completely delusional if you even think about saying otherwise.

>>3634158
I'm joining. I'm also saging this thread, because it has become a mess.

>>3634193
>I love it how libertarians view everyone as some sort of supremely rational actor, that always makes effective decisions - despite the constant stream of evidence to the contrary.

Nice strawman. All I said was that people act on what they decide to be the best course of action. Who are you to say their actions are incorrect?

>Because a persons actions have an impact on others, they don't live in bubbles where the consequences of their choices are limited to themselves.

This is just a talking point that has nothing to do with what I said. If people think it's in their best interest, they will give to the poor, if not, it's none of your business to "help them out" by taking their money by force like some enlightened despot.

>>3634194
You make money whistling outside of the supermarket, any service will do if people like it. In my city people make above minimum wage begging on the side of the road. As long as people are voluntarily giving money, there's no problem.

>>3634158
>>3634197
u pist?

>>3633258
one word

Degeneracy.

>>3633687

Gee I don't know - how about all those American led wars that we've gleefully jumped into?

>>3633645
>We long for a better society, we know life and society can be better than this.

The problem is that instead of finding a comfort zone that we could realistically provide/cater for everyone instead looks to the big mansions of he rich and famous and craves ever more, constantly concerned with the disparity between 'me' and 'you', grass is greener etc.

>>3634035

a healthy well regulated eugenics program and euthanasia program


>>3634132

>Poor people cause the vast majority of crime.

And giving them money is supposed to stop this? Just look at the UK - even with their extensive welfare net, which is more than adequate to provide a means of living comfortably rates of crime are still vastly higher in this demographic than any other.

>>3634362
Is that Chris Moyles?

>>3634362
>rates of crime are still vastly higher in this demographic than any other.
wut? The UK has one of the safest society's to live in, and one of the most absurd methods of recording crime statistics.

>>3634370

I have no idea but he's living the dream.

>>3634375
>The UK has one of the safest society's to live in

>>3634380

>>3634384

>>3634384
>Reading The Daily Mail
>Ever
Pls go

>>3634132
>Poor people cause the vast majority of crime.
Hah, what bullshit! The simple truth is that the richer one gets, the simpler it becomes to avoid conviction for your own misdeeds. Why? I'm sure there are a multitude of reasons, but one of the more obvious is that government systems tend to overlook crimes the more "elite" you become.

>>3634385
Exactly, that's what (>>3634375) is saying with crime statistics.

Let's just say I wish I was born at a point where I would be exiting the planet a lot quicker than at the moment.

>>3634362
>just look at the UK

Terrible example.

>>3634405
>he thinks there is no correlation between socio-economic level and crime