TigerWars' forum posts

Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts

Incompetence: Opposing parties refuse to cooperate with eachother, and only work for thier own political gain, creating a system in which important issues hardly see any kind of resolutions. Adding to this, nearly all are corrupt and work in a deeply corrupt system in which lobbyists control their votes and corporations fund thier campaigns. Though some politicians have honorable intentions (your team!), there is always some check or balance in government that prevents them from accompishing meaningful legislation (damn other team!)

 

Evil: A shadow government, or a concealed third-party (think the Emperor from Star Wars), pull strings from behind the scenes. Disallowing any important issues from seeing any kind of resolution to keep the people divided and bickering. The only legislation or major policy decisions that come to light are ones that serve its intentions (Oil, Money Power). Having control over all major banks and corporations (news media, food, military industrial complex, music, hollywood etc.) , they sculpt society as they see fit and even control the government through the guise of lobbyists and special interest groups.

 

The first seems much more rational but I challenge people to consider if the second option is truly impossible? Couldn't it be true? What wouldn't be possible with unlimited money?

Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts

Life is like a videogame. Our purpose is to experience as much as we can and our ultimate goal is to achieve happiness. Our enemy is fear and as we conquer it, we level up, allowing us the courage and experience to take on new challenges and gain more happiness. Its pretty awesome actually. Life is **** amazing...if you learn to play the game right.

Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts
I try not to think about how messed up the world is.-Fromage-
Ignorance is bliss I suppose. For some reason, I can't stop thinking about it...and it frustrates the hell out of me. Especially when people just act like everything is normal. It's not. Some real shit is happening outside our little bubbles and we just can't all to seem to care enough - I'm including my self in that too.
Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts

[QUOTE="TigerWars"] 

To your point before...Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia also was a society that didn't value individualism. Where's the line? Are we doomed to just constantly be in control of a oppressing government or do we have the ability to live in a society that values human intelliengence/creativity/individualism as a crucial part in technological/moral/conscious progression?

Jimn_tonic

The only way we can avoid an oppressive government is to actively engage and implement it. If you don't, other people will, or the government will make it's own decisions. This whole notion of "having the government stay off our backs" simply doesn't exist anymore. Your individuality, and the individuality of others, have nothing to do with the advancement of our species.  Sorry.

Seeing as most all leaps forward in human progression originated in countries/societies that allowed/valued individualism I am inclined to disagree with you. Compare the Renaissance Era, Industrialization, Internet age etc. with North Korea...*crickets*. No need to be sorry

Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts

the fed was audited..  nobody cared.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=9e2a4ea8-6e73-4be2-a753-62060dcbb3c3

comp_atkins
I was not aware. Thank you for the article
Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts

[QUOTE="TigerWars"][QUOTE="kuraimen"] Very interesting response. I agree for the most part but the problem for me is that is nigh impossible to organize in such a structure because the leader would almost certainly corrupt. It would take almost an enlightenment or a new level of consciousness for us to organize like that without risking restrictions of human creativity and potential via means of corrupted government. We would ALL have to be on the same page.kuraimen

I think it is possible. We should redefine the concept of leader too though. Humanity was organized on those type of horizontal structures for something like 90% of its existence. Everything changed after the agricultural revolution when groups started to get bigger then the concept of leadership changed into much more vertical structures of power. We just need to find an equilibrium. Leadership today is a very deteriorated concept. Recent research suggest that today's leadership positions are apt for psychopaths. Psychopaths have ALL the traits that we consider desirable to be successful today (initiative, passion, obsessiveness, lack of laziness and, more importantly, lack of empathy so they can make decisions in a coldly manner) but that is absurd. So it isn't strange that many people who are in front of governments or companies are basically psychopaths who care little about the people their decisions affect. We need to redefine our values and our priorities if we want to change, stop focusing on money and material gain as a sign of success and start focusing on how can we help people achieve self-realization. Put humans and the environment as the kernel of our concerns and not cheapen life by placing money there.

 

But of course to change that we need more and better education. THERE is where we should start.

 

Very well said, I agree and hope one day we can reach that. I ecspecially liked your point about money and how meaningless it truly is, all things considered.

 

An species advanced enough to travel through space (most likely at FTL speeds) is not a species that values individuality.

EDIT: You begin by saying to put away pre-concieved notions of politics and patriotism, by then end of the article, you're talking about Jefferson and the founding fathers of the United States. l2takeurownadvice

Jimn_tonic

 

To your point on fouding fathers. I was referring more to blind partisanship and affiliations. I was including thier quotes to make a point. I am in no way a republican, tea party, democrat, liberterian, or whatever. That has nothing to do with what I said. For instance, quoting Karl Marx would not automatically make me a Marxist that subscribes to all his beliefs. That's the trouble with a lot of our critical thinking skills...we like to bottle things up, give them a name, and act as we have it all figured out and throw it in the  corner. ie. YOU DONT LIKE OBAMA YOU MUST BE REPUBLICAN/RACIST/TEA PARTY.

 

To your point before...Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia also was a society that didn't value individualism. Where's the line? Are we doomed to just constantly be in control of a oppressing government or do we have the ability to live in a society that values human intelliengence/creativity/individualism as a crucial part in technological/moral/conscious progression?

Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts
[QUOTE="TigerWars"][QUOTE="kuraimen"]It depends. If the aliens that observe us are organized in an eusocial organization (like ants) then they'll think nothing is wrong with us. Except that we need more government, more corporations, more surveillance and less individuals. kuraimen
What do you think? Do you think we should organize like ants or do you think we are better than that?

I think we evolved with socialized cognition. That means we are social animals with higher cognitive functions and therefore the individual for us is very important even when everything around us is imbued is a social environment. In contrast ants evolved with social cognition (not socialized). The cognitive entity for ants are not the ants themselves but the social organization they are part of: the ant colony. So for ants the individual is completely disposable as long as the bigger organism (ant colony) functions. That's why in contrast individual ants only need very basic cognitive functions (if at all maybe chemical reactions are enough) and really small brains. If you think about it small brains are a must for an organization like that of ants. If ants had big brains and higher cognitive the ant colony wouldn't function because its cellular constituents (the ants) will find difficult to do a mechanic task over and over without much regards for things like creativity and imagination. I believe that with the industrial revolution and, in general, with the increase of population we started organizing in groups more similar to the eusocial configuration of ants than to the complex structures of higher apes which we evolved in but for which small groups are a must. You just can't replicate the complexity of the socialization of small close groups on big distributed groups. So the change was in some way necessary. The problem with this is that the eusocial organization of ants needs, as a requirement, small brained creatures. If big brained creatures like us are organized in such structures then we don't like it and there's a big possibility we will rebel. Power structures then have two options: either they perish under the pressure of big brained individuals who can't stand being organized in ant-like colonies or squash any sign of uprising by force in the meantime they can also look for ways to make people more and more stupid. If you manage to avoid the proper development of higher cognitive functions on individuals then there's a higher chance you can organize those people in ant-like structures. I don't think it is a coincidence that the US has such a deficient education while being the richest country in the world. I think it is purposeful since the US is the biggest plutocracy in the world. So in short I would rather if we organized in social structures that promote socialized cognition and not social cognition.

Very interesting response. I agree for the most part but the problem for me is that is nigh impossible to organize in such a structure because the leader would almost certainly corrupt. It would take almost an enlightenment or a new level of consciousness for us to organize like that without risking restrictions of human creativity and potential via means of corrupted government. We would ALL have to be on the same page.
Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts
It depends. If the aliens that observe us are organized in an eusocial organization (like ants) then they'll think nothing is wrong with us. Except that we need more government, more corporations, more surveillance and less individuals. kuraimen
What do you think? Do you think we should organize like ants or do you think we are better than that?
Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts

Just for a moment, can we all just forget our political affiliations, our patriotism, our favorite corporations or gaming companies, rid ourselves of all types of fanboyism, pre-conceived notions, and former loyalties and just THINK. Think and observe as independant, free-thinking individuals.

 

Yeah? Ok now look at our society that we live in, from an outsider's perspective. An extra-terrestial in a flying saucer, observing our society from the cosmos.

 

A large portion of the population will soon have, in thier living rooms, a live camera and an always-listening microphone fixated on thier families gathering marketing information, our daily behaviors, our habits, our conversations, our life. A large portion of the population is okay with this. After all, it's nothing new.

In the course of the past decade we have given our government the right to surveillance. Any phone, laptop, iPad etc. can be accessed by the govermnet if they have a need to. If they consider the individual a threat to national security, a terrorsist etc. (See the Patriot Act) and they would be able to detain these individuals with no due process, no innocent until proven guilty, because it would be a national security threat (see NDAA Senate Bill 1867). For the majority of the population that is okay. Terrorists are bad, frighteneing people and any measures that can be taken to combat them, should be taken.

The kicker? No where in any of the afforementioned legislation does it define what a terrorist is. A terrorist is any individual or group of individuals that are deemed a threat to national security. The kicker? No where in the afformentioned legislation does it define what a threat to national security is. So, it would be determined by the president. Again, this is okay with the majority of the population. After all, they have a fair democratic system in which the PEOPLE decide who is in power and the PEOPLE can tilt the direction of the country. No way, could they be fooled into electing someone who would abuse that power.

The Kicker? The People have seemingly lost control of that crucial power. They are divided, mostly into two groups. They impassionately debate and fight which side is correct, which side is morally right. They defend thier team and villify the opposing team, at all costs. If one team gets caught in a scandal or an unpopular policy decision, instead of focusing on the issue at hand, they blame the other team. They say things like "Well it's not any worse than when your team did this!" or "If you're team was in charge they would have handled it even worse!" The result? Both teams are able to lie, deceive, and cheat and the public is left heartfully defending, what they so openly admit, is the "lesser-of-two evils"...so at the end of the day, the morals and rights that the public so passionatley stands for are channeled into one-of-two cesspools of lowered expectations that gives way to an enormous blame game to which nothing of importance is ever accomplished. The only things that are ever accomplished are things that both the teams agree on: FIGHTING TERRORISTS!! (increased surveillance, increase military power etc.)

The public doesn't see it this way. That is because whenever an unpopular decision is made, one of the teams acts as an advocate for their frustration, a beacon of light that says, "Hey, we agree with you! This team shouldn't do that!" and then it happens anyways, and it just adds fire to the blame game. It all gets lost into the murky past of lies, apologies, and half-truths of the politicians; most of which remain in power anyways. The society looks to the media and says, "There is no way anything evil or immoral can possibly happen because we have free press! The press, of course, would expose any violations of ethics and would never allow a government to function that way!" And in many instances, the press does exactly that. The kicker? The public doesn't care enough. Time and time again the same people are re-elected into thier positions of power. Past lies forgiven, mistakes forgotten, all in the name of the "lesser-of-two-evils"

....

 

So I guess that's my point. I could go on and on about corporations and how they, and they alone, influence our lawmakers decisions and policies (see Lobbyists) and how Money can accomplish anything. He who owns the money owns the world. I could go on about where are Money comes from (Federal Reserve) and how no branch of the goverment can check them, audit them, mandate them to do anything.

 

I guess I am just asking all of us to take control of the society we live in. Be aware of the dangers of allowing or government too much power. Read up on some dystopian novels such as 1984, Brave New World, Farenheit 451, and see the shocking parallells that these worlds have in common with our own. Be proactive in our thinking and stop relying on others to do all the thinking for us. Take a stand, become aware, become a responsible citizen. It was Ben Franklin who said (paraphrasing): "A people willing to give up a small bit of liberty for a small bit of security understand neither and will loose both" it was Thomas Jefferson who said (again, paraphrasing) "A crucial part to any democracy is a revolution every couple generations" They, our founding fathers, understood Tyranny. It was a very real thing to them and they founded this country in hopes of preventing it.

 

So yeah, we have incredibly blessed amazing lives, let's not get lost in all the pleasures and take a moment to THINK.

Avatar image for TigerWars
TigerWars

427

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

2

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 TigerWars
Member since 2011 • 427 Posts
[QUOTE="Chicken453"][QUOTE="Blue-Sky"]

No 

I'm pretty sure only 1 out 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets have life. 

0rbs
Wrong there. There are already 3 proposed places where micro-organic life exists in our solar system, one out of the three has already been confirmed. To OP Yes. Some of you guys should look at the organism the Tardigrade. Though of course a complex organism could never really evolve to the extent that a Tardigrade. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tardigrade

Wikipedia can be edited by anyone. My wife and I talked to our pastor today and he made a great point. If aliens are real how why come are they not in th bible? God laid out his plan and it doesnt look like aliens are in the cards. Looks like this one is in the books. Aliens are great for thr movie business though!

Indeed they are - just by a different name ;) Broaden your horizon on what 'aliens' could mean and you will see it allign with the Bible as well as pretty much any ancient text describing a god or gods.