This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Religion Of Consumerism
Submitted by Mike Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
The notion of consumerism as the religion of the United States is nothing new. That said, Warren Pollock did an excellent job explaining just how corrosive this mindset can be to a society. We were particularly taken by the idea that since the vast majority of people define themselves almost entirely by their level of consumption, or by some desired level of future consumption, their consciousness becomes easily controlled and their worldview easily managed and molded.
They simply cannot see life in any other context and so they become trapped within a very sick and twisted form of human existence.
And then there's George...
"...But I'll tell you what they don't want. They DON'T want a population of citizens capable of critical thinking. They don't want well-informed, well-educated people capable of critical thinking. They're not interested in that, that doesn't help them. That's against their interests. That's right. They don't want people who are smart enough to sit around the kitchen table and figure out how badly they're getting FUCKED by system that threw them overboard 30 fuckin' years ago. They don't want that. You know what they want? They want OBEDIENT WORKERS. OBEDIENT WORKERS. People who are just smart enough to run the machines and do the paperwork, and just dumb enough to passably accept all these increasingly shittier jobs with the lower pay, the longer hours, the reduced benefits, the end of overtime, and the vanishing pension that disappears the minute you go to collect it..."
- 36243 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -



"One of the more pretentious political self-descriptions is 'Libertarian.' People think it puts them above the fray. It sounds fashionable, and to the uninitiated, faintly dangerous. Actually, it's just one more bullshit political philosophy." -- George Carlin. But what the fuck does he know. He believes in pensions. Probably a socialist.
We will all end up socialists before they are done with us. They keep forcibly taking our income and property against our will and at some point we will find ourselves in line for what meager handouts still exist, at no choice of our own other than perish. Everyone in the Soviet Union ended up communist or dead. There will be no other choice in the end if you want to eat.
There is another choice, which is what Carlin was trying to tell us. Drop the bullshit team stuff. We're in this together and no black and white ideology is going to solve our problems. Not that he's some kind of oracle, but he was pretty damn observant of human nature.
The only choice as I see it is to remain as self suficient as possible while doing everything within our power to deprive our freedoms from those who seek to rule us. We will never be truly free as there is consequence in everything we do, but we can deprive them the power over us that living in debt provides and the rampant consumerism for useless toys.
Work towards the ownership of your home, buying what you can afford, not what you think you need or deserve.
Work to educate yourself towards self sustainment, feeding yourself with minimal market participation.
Work towards self employment so as to not be directly dependent on anyone for your daily bread.
Work towards fulfillment, self derived, through your personal accomplishments rather some piece of worthless crap you picked up on sale at Best Buy.
They own us because we sold too cheaply
stroling down the sidewalk in st. pete florida along the ocean last week. following an egret working the neighborhood ghecko scene. classy gait with shoes to die for. he gets fish for brecky. lizards for lunch. strictly organic. nice party. suddenly he stops. he's all eyes, so am i. he flexes his neck side to side while holding his gaze firm along the travel of his bill...as if to mezmerize his meal. in a flash he's up with the prize. squeezing the breath out of it long enough to flip it length wize down the shoot. down the street a family of fatties, honking three ice cream cones, consumed by calories and credit, waddle to their astrovan in walmart flip flops. i've put my application in for next time around. a bird of prey will do just fine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdphtMWjies one of the great poems ever
Thankyou.
wisdom.
Consumerism is about to take a HIT!
The BIGGEST Coverup in USA History
"What Obama and NASA don’t want you to know!"I hear you, but there's shit like sewers, water, internet, and a bunch of other things that require group participation. Team you or me isn't the answer anymore than handing over power to someone else.
"require group participation"...That reminds me of something my World History teacher in HS would say. He had massive sweat stains in the armpits of all of his shirts. I just don't like the sound of it.
"I just don't like the sound of it."
Exactly. But it's a fact. I don't like the fact that we're all mortal and in 100 years not a single one of us will be here. But it's a fact.
LTER
any team concept is lost on the libtards, they fear and loath anything where people have to band together and take action as a group. How the fuck the most militarized nation in human history also has the most virulently obstinate group of libtards as well is a definitely a glitch in the matrix. But this false individualism also serves a dual purpose, it divides so to be easily conquered. A libtard is a shelter in place easily demobilized single combat unit. No effect in force. Easily controlled militarily....it's brilliant, the gov't lets libtards play act their fantasy knowing they can easily be redacted when it goes revolution because they have NO STRUCTURE, NO EFFECT IN NUMBER. Individuals are easily defeated in an armed conflict.
partisan fighting takes team work whan taking on a well militarized gov't....'merikans are totally fucked when it's time to go partisan especially with libtards in abundance
So what you are saying is that you're either with us or against us? Get a grip.
no
what I'm sayin is, missionccomplished!!, fuck can i get a beer and a hooker stat this boat makes me feel queeezy.
All I see is you trying to create your own team.
the club is really really small and you ain't in it, but the team is really really fucking big and your are most definitely in it, just don't recognize it is all!!
George Carlin litters some truth in with more modern Catholic propaganda. It doesn't make him a prophet, it makes him an apologist and a conniver.
I'm not suggesting we will live independent of the rest of society, but we sell ourselves, our freedoms, too cheaply. Because we need a sewer we are to suppose that whatever it costs is irrelevant. The employees can earn whatever they think they deserve and "we"will pay it.
We have surrendered ourselves to this system with evidently no recourse. Because we need a sewer we can have every imaginable department of government overseeing every aspect of our lives simply because we, living as fellow humans in a common society, share virtually everything. As one cannot fart without it offending another we will need a agency to police, appraise, tax, fine and punish, after a thorough committee review. Taking this path of rationalization, I see nothing left but complete totalitarianism. Democracy will not restrain it but enable it as people will continue to impose their will on their fellow citizens.
We the People, of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Do you think "perfect" meant something different in the 18th century then it does now since in today's definition, you can't make something more perfect if it's already perfect?
Do you think welfare meant something different back then than it did after LBJ's Great Society redefined it?
Do you think the Founding Fathers were infallible?
Work towards the ownership of your home, buying what you can afford, not what you think you need or deserve.
You do not own your home -ever. The .govs giveth, the .govs taketh away.
Work to educate yourself towards self sustainment, feeding yourself with minimal market participation.
The government is clamping down on organic gardens and rain collecting. The fight is coming to you whether you like it or not.
Work towards self employment so as to not be directly dependent on anyone for your daily bread.
Work as it exists today serves to feed the beast that enslaves us in the form of taxes -which goes to MRAPs for SWAT teams and other military-grade hardware to the .govs. This is tied to the solution which I'll explain shortly.
Work towards fulfillment, self derived, through your personal accomplishments rather some piece of worthless crap you picked up on sale at Best Buy.
Work towards community instead instead of individualistic fulfillments, because we're all in this shit together so we might as well hold each other up.
Now the solution:
The only way we can bring our rogue government back in our control is if people stopped paying taxes and consuming en masse -like in millions, and if we do need to consume we do it via a black market where we all put in what we're producing and buy/sell/trade from each other. The longer we participate in the government's game the longer this will drag out. We need to build enclaves that have their own proxy governments to replace the illegitimate government we're ruled by today, but it needs to be done in tandem so that we can organize quickly for the inevitable violent force the .govs will bring.
The solution may begin on the individual level, but it will be executed on the community level.
"Work towards community instead instead of individualistic fulfillments, because we're all in this shit together so we might as well hold each other up. The only way we can bring our rogue government back in our control is if people stopped paying taxes and consuming en masse -like in millions."
Whateva. The Obammy free shit army wants moar free shit. NOW.
And why is that? Are they part of the "Free Shit Army" because they're lazy, or because they don't see any other alternative to sucking off Uncle Sugar? Community gardens are huge where the Free Shit Army reside because many within those communities see the benefit in learning how to cultivate crops. Teaching people how to grow their own food and giving them their own plot of land to tend has brought formerly divided communities together, and this approach would be a great preemptive to the revolution that is to come.
"Community gardens are huge where the Free Shit Army reside."
yeah like when mah hommies in southside chicago ain't be shooting at each other, they be cultivating gardens.
whateva white boi.
Community gardens? Ha. Food deserts exist where the free shit army resides. They most certainly do not have community gardens. Unless some billion dollar libtard government program steals my money to go in there and make it for them. I did see that one time on a Sanjay Gupta special program.
Yes that would be horrible if some "evil" government decided to steal all our money from underneath our matresses so that people would actually be able to grow food in restored property where an abandoned mall once stood when they could be building a hegemony.
It never ceases to amaze me that when someone actually suggests that the "Free Shit Army" ought to be weaned off the government's teat there's so much resistance to that idea. But then again if the "Free Shit Army" ceased to be that would mean ZH would have to hate something else it doesn't understand like say, the socialists.
The "restored property" that you speak of that used to be a mall still BELONGS to someone. Do you not get that? It doesn't become free shit army property just because a mall isn't there any longer. It doesn't belong to the free shit army, the government, or me or you.
Yes I would imagine if the land belonged to the city government then it would belong to SOMEONE, but that isn't the point. I'm talking about not only feeding people but giving them the means to feed themselves. Though you're so wrapped up about the "Free Shit Army" loop to realize that educational programs such as schools or infrastructural programs are an INVESTMENT in the general population. Teaching people how to feed themselves is an INVESTMENT that will pay off and reduce government dependence.
But I guess it's easier to bitch about something than to come up with an actual solution.
Dude, I worked for a decade for a urban nonprofit org. In a major US city. Working closely with these community gardens. You need to take off the blinders man. That is NOT they way it works. Primarily rich liberal suburbanites, .gov grants and corporate tax write offs are used to start these things and once the funds stop or whitey doesn't come around to organize it, they fail. Time and time again. This is not my opinion but years of on the ground observation. And as pointed out above, they are always on someone else's land, not the communities.
So I guess that's it then -nonprofits cannot operate (and fail) without a rich white surburbanite and subsidies in the mix so there's no use trying, right? What's funny is you think I'm the one wearing the blinders.
http://blog.ted.com/2013/03/06/a-visit-to-ron-finleys-la-garden-plus-5-m... look more into this then get back to me.
my point is that we should minimze our dependencies, but we never eliminate them. Sure we will always pay taxes, always have, but is it not better to at least own your property rather than rent and have one less landlord? As massive as we know government to be they will not be able to monitor everything we do, so if we can grow and prepare our food, or purchase from non corporate entities, then why not. There is no silver bullet here. We got here one step at a time and will only get out in the same way. Yes don't pay taxes, but do it by not earning, otherwise go to jail. No freedom in that. Self employment is just one less dependency, again nothing absolute, but better. As an employer I'm very familiar with what weaknesses employees live.
Lastly, nothing wrong with caring about your community, but we will never become the communist dream of sacrificing all for the state OR the community. If we cannot derive personal fulfillment from our life and work personally, we will never be able to do it for our community. For most normal people, they find their greatest satisfaction in their accomplishments, where ever they find them, but seldom in money alone. Especially not buying things.
I think it folly to think that somehow we will overthrow those guiding us down this path to hell. Revolution has seldom come out for the better, usually ending up with something far worse than we were escaping. We simply need to reclaim control and responsibility for our lives. Its not easy. Those who have enabled us to get where we are, are not going to make it easy to reclaim our freedom. It could happen, but probably won't. Far too many don't think it can, won't try and will hold out only the most extreme solutions that they will never act upon.
Its not illegal to act independently...yet. we still have a chance...if we try.
"my point is that we should minimze our dependencies, but we never eliminate them."
That is a good point, however, naieve in the context when dependencies are synthetically institutionalized. Nowhere is this more true than Fascism in the USA. Look at housing and GSE's. A private public ("homeland") partnership between banks and government where the point is to screw those most vulnerable and threaten the rest with basic necessity.
Another, independent people were once dependent on private pensions and capital, now retirement (just like GSE's) is dripping with government collusion and politics vis a vis public bailouts for systemic and pervasive corruption. Safety and soundness at the individual level was (again) synthetically removed (stolen!). Sadly, the latter will produce absolutely nothing for anyone but the Fascists while the rest receive bloody conflict for being rational and prudent (independent).
With fraud markets turned upside down, and the complete disassociation from truth, independency is now breeding dependency. Those that make crazy and poor decisions are rewarded and the rational are punshished. This situation has completely undermined "full faith and credit" of absolutely everything, independent or not.
Many like myself see through the horseshit and see the problem for what it is - absolute corruption from top to bottom, brought to you by fraud-finance, insulated by incorporated government "deciders" -- pick a branch, Fascism owns them all.
Get rid of Nixon's fraud money machine (and Johnson's war-profiteering), and Bush's Zupreme Kourt and there may be a shred of integrity left in the markets (from somewhere besides the USA). Today there is very little, and decreasing. If you have children/grandchildren they will be forced to relearn that a bird in the hand is better than two in the bush. If hard assets are not buried in the back yard they are stolen by your best friends in the government, for your independence (called the war on dependence).
Implying Libertarian is just another black and white ideology.
Oh right, you meant to say "let's all work together as a team" [Have a Cigar, Pink Floyd] i.e. you earn the money and we decide how to distribute it.
It is just another black and white ideology. Get over it.
Is freedom or liberty another useless ideology?
No. Liberty and Freedom and the ends. False ideologies are the false means.
Without liberty, there are no ends other than the ones perscribed by those in authority. You will not have a choice in your ideal system. You will simply be meat for the grinder.
Get over your ignorance, and perpetual deceit?
How is a principled approach to asking questions and promoting rational discourse an ideology, and how is it black and white?
So what part of your belief system are you willing to question? Seems to me that every time I challenge it I am the enemy in your mind.
You're an absolutist, that makes you 100% my enemy.
If you understand Libertarianism, you would know why you are my enemy. Since you do not understand why you are my actual enemy here, you obviously do not understand Libertarianism.
What you promote is the desctruction of choice. It's either the government's way or the highway for you. You attack Libertarians because we as individuals threaten your philosophy of life and your position. You call us black and white while working from a position that does not allow opposition to it's core tenet that the government is the absolute authority.
You wonder why we as individuals seem like we are arguing in black and white colors? It's because you only see black and white, while pretending that cooperation and compromise are the grey color when it means nothing but enslavement and derision of choice and liberty. You want to support statism and it's gradual incremental grab on everything that it seems to try every 100 years or so.
I understand Libertarianism. One day you will understand that freedom is not that easy. To me, you are part of the problem in that you advocate for that which would be the very end of what we have left of freedom.
I wouldn't even mind his ignorance were it not for his belligerance. He spends all his time on ZH telling everyone else they are wrong. That is not a person who is promoting freedom. No matter what else he says, I know he and I are not in anything together.
You are wrong. Now it's not everyone else.
And there's the belligerance. Right on cue.
LetThemEatRand,
For the sake of clarity, how do you characterize yourself? You hate libertarians, you say there is no difference between the two parties, so what are you? For the record, I am a conservative.
Almost everything you write sounds extremely liberal. Liberals always tell everyone else they are wrong, whereas I prefer clarity over agreement. I was just wondering.
I don't characterize myself. I leave that to everyone else, like you. What I believe in is freedom. What I don't believe in is classification. Especially by everyone else, like you.
I went through that phase too, when I left High School and started to rebel.
Then I realized that people have to classify things to be able to understand them, that is how our languages work. I'm all for grunting and making noises that are less formulated, but eventually those too would end up having the same thing occur, that is how languages evolve. What you are crying against is Human Nature, and Libertarianism proposes to simply leave Human Nature to it's own devices.
So I sit here still saying that you simply do not understand Libertarianism and what it is. It's not an ideology, it's a system of allowing differences of opinion. What you are saying is that you would rather have nothing than to let anyone have something. The day you stop being such an Absolutist, which by the way leads to Nihilism, is the day you will finally understand what I am geting at.
Also I find it best to not believe in things, especially things that popular people say. Least of all when they deride others for classifying them then do the exact same in reply.
Also, I never said freedom was easy. Did you forget my background already after 5 days? I know hardship better than most of the people on this site. I know struggle and I have lived in third world countries that barely have running water as well. I understand clearly what is at stake and what it costs to be free. Having been running around getting derided for multiple years by everyone and their mother to finally these days where I no longer have to argue my point to get it across I understand clearly my argument and where you stand with yours. I've heard the same argument you are making now, but only I heard it coming from my own mouth about 15 years ago.
The West attained Peak Liberty around A.D. 600. Most people didn't like it all that much.
If you mean the people who used to be rich, sure.
" What you are crying against is Human Nature, and Libertarianism proposes to simply leave Human Nature to it's own devices. "
But what exactly is "human nature" ?
Do you think hunter-gatherers do not try to restrain/control some part of "human nature" ? Do you think a family do not try to restrain/control some part of "human nature" ?
Why, do you think, some people wrote things like, for example, "thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbour" or "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, ... " ?
Even though I'm what some people would describe as an agnostic, I understand quite well the reason for the previously cited commandments and some others. Unless you live absolutely alone in some isolated region, I personally don't see any possibility of leaving "human nature" to its own device .
By the way, it also seems to be part of "human nature" to try to control other people and their opinion, ... at all levels of a society . So, should we really leave "human nature" to its own device ? :-)
If we were to follow your advice, we would fall into the same trap LTER does every time ;-)
deprivation and struggle- does not always lead to great freedom 'theories' ; a soft life can also create poor ideas of freedom and liberation....i.e. both can come up with some pretty draconian &/or lame versions of freedom (in my experience and in reading of history).
Perhaps the psycho/sociopaths who are able to rise in the ranks and work industriously for higher level sociopaths are worth much more of our attention? After all they can play emotionless chess while we play emotional checkers.
Lets get a grip on the sociopaths in our midst and limit their rise and undue influence over nations and the world, then we have a hope.
~ George Carlin
agreed LTER, "pretty damn observant" of natured humans.
@LTER: "We're in this together and no black and white ideology is going to solve our problems."
Tell that to the niggers and then get back to me. If you're still alive.
the idea that since the vast majority of people define themselves almost entirely by their level of consumption, or by some desired level of future consumption, their consciousness becomes easily controlled and their worldview easily managed and molded
Seem like a few are hanging about here. Let the flames fly!
America will continue to superficially veer left until its last remaining wealth is completely squandered, which at this point is represented by any remaining international trust in the dollar. Once that is gone, America will become disenchanted with the left and will instead veer hard right, which is the direction we always lean when the shit hits the fan. But understand, left versus right in this sense does not indicate who rules -- the same people rule no matter which way we lean. Rule by the left represents the domination of public discourse by "worker" viewpoints while rule by the right represents domination of public discourse by "owner" viewpoints.
But the same douchebags run the machine and rule over us either way. No where are we given the choice between freedom versus control. The only choice we are given is who is going to control us, and that isn't even a choice we make, but instead represents talking points that the rulers believe have the best chance of enforcing compliance.
Once the fiat bubbles full of unicorn farts are revealed to be what they are, public perception will shift decidedly against social programs, against foolish optimism that society can be remade at will into a place where all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the children are above average. Instead, public opinion will veer in the direction of survival, at which point the infirm and the aged will be reminded that they are expected to sacrifice for the good of the whole no less than the young and the capable, and reverence for stoicism and virility will replace the faux and saccharine sentimentality of reverence for the dependent and incapable.
This will, of course, not be any better for society than its predecessor fake philosophy, but it will be instrumental into making America into a global dictator the likes of which we have not yet seen. Thus far the pragmatic brutality of America has remained well hidden, like a shotgun under the bed, because our public perception has not yet faced a stark enough threat to enable us to handle the "truth." But when the going gets tough, we round up people who don't look like us and put them in cages, we burn their cities up without any regard to the incineration of women and children, we drop nuclear bombs on the cities of those we have already soundly defeated in order to send messages to our next potential foes, and we defoliate entire countries in order to starve them into submission. And we do those things when the threats are simply other people fighting other people in other countries. Imagine what we would do if we actually faced a threat at home.
We are Rome incarnate. And just because the crosses haven't made their formal appearances yet doesn't mean they aren't still in our future.
He is a socialist.
It's not an anti-consumerist rant, but a rant about the right of everyone to consume even more.
This is what I hate most about the left. The greatest horror in the world is the guy who can't consume as much as another and they will stop at nothing to cover his shame. They haven't rejected consumerist values, they've doubled down on them.
The left loves to rant about consumerism being the religion of America, which of course it is not. The vast majority of Americans do not define themselves by how much they consume. They define themselves by their work. Go to any party and ask, "What do you consume?" and you'll be met with a blank stare. But ask, "What do you do?" and the conversation flows.
Meanwhile, equality is the religion of the left. They don't care if you are naked, eating dirt, as long as we are all equal. And even then they will bitch that you have a grain of dirt more than they do.
"They define themselves by their work."
Which, more often than not, amounts to more or less defining themselves by some social ranks and purchasing power.
Ok, you're right, but who cares? Why else would anyone work?
The left's anti-consumerism religion is really anti-capitalism. It's nothing new.
The real problem is that the net consumers outnumber the net producers.
" The left's anti-consumerism religion is really anti-capitalism. "
Interesting point.
Is it necessary to be some kind of "leftist" to be "anti-consumerism" ?
According to Gary North (a proponent of austrian school of economics), the authors of the bible have a "capitalist" view of the economy. I'm definitely not convinced that we can conclude they were capitalists (or socialists), but the fact is : they really propose some "capitalist" rules. But, if you know a bit about the subject, you also know that those people were definitely against things like luxury (and isn't consumerism a face of luxury ?).
What is the anthropological/sociological/psychological root of consumerism ?
daemon,
You are smarter than I for even posing those great questions. I believe that the leftist view of anti-consumerism is a cover for their anti-capitalism views. They want socialism, period.
I believe in capitalism. 100%. Capitalism is economic freedom. If you want to be a minimalist, like me, or you don't want to be caught up in the consumerism, then it's fine. It works out.
You do NOT have to be a leftist to be an anti-consumerism person. You can be a minimalist like me and still be conservative as heck, or whatever you want to be!
Point 1) If by capitalism you mean: Free markets, private property rights, etc., then we might have some area of agreement. However, we live on a finite world, with finite resources. The machine of capitalism (which, despite opinions to the contrary, still exists just as fully in a managed socialized economy) is insatiable; it cannot abide limits on itself.
Further, it is growing and consuming at an exponential rate that is unsustainable. This has been coupled with the exponential destruction of the natural enviornment and the exponential growth of the population. I believe most of the people posting here today will live to see this exponential growth curve hit a wall (some kind of natural limit) and suddenly fall. You say we need more producers, but they only produce based on digging things out of the ground and making things with it. This is a very limited activity.
Point 2) I advocate a "steady state" system whereby growth is not sought. In short, we live within our means globally, using no resources we are not able to generate. There are two ways to accomplish this. a) The first, as you have correctly described, is state control or force on a massive scale. Certainly I don't want that, but sadly, this is what our leaders are working toward. b) The other way is by developing a change in consiousness that doesn't see the natural world as something to be exploited, but rather lived within. After changing our cultural consiousness, we can engage in a very small, consensus based government. This type of government has existed for thousands of years (see the Iroquios Confederacy) and does work. It also preserves freedom in its most basic sense, so long as you recognize that economic freedom does not give you the right to destroy other people's ability to sustain themselves. If you respect the land as a communal value, you can have total freedom within that limit.
Point 3) I have no delusions about the likelihood of 2b coming to pass, especially as all the governments of the world work toward 2a.
Conclusion) If I read you correctly, you wrongly believe that we have only two choices: Capitalism/free markets/development of natural resources or total state control. There are many things wrong with this point of view, but if I had to pick the most important it would be that neither solution actually solves our problems -- which are primarily spiritual because we consume everything, but are also physical because we are running out of things to consume and destroying our ability to sustain ourselves in the future.
No IMO eachside is anti-capitalism. All are desiring debt and wealth transfer over personal savings and assets.
The left just wants more lower level sheeple consuming that which government plans & agrees is acceptable consumption. The right is almost identical - they want us to consume the big corporation monopoly products even if capitalism and the public interest is poorly served & private property rights carved up. Both want us to buy junk, watch junk, work in junk and fight for junk.
The real problem is people think in shrinking left/right terms and debate it, without realising we're all falling into their desired margin that is actually dependant "Consumerism" and thereby we become Net Consumers. As you say net producers are outnumbered.
i think you just proved carlin right you fucking idiot.
social'ist' , libertar'ian' , all of these labels people apply to themselves when trying to explain to others who they are. he's dead on.
i've read much of the 'libertarian' literature before 2008 when it sudenly started getting fashionable to define one'self as a discoverer of a great new philosophy. he's right. nouns are about cutting one's self off---putting one'self above the difficult task of relating to others.
there is an issue that sometimes people need to do this at some point to change things. but generally that noun is 'revolutionary' and it means , regardess of your philosphy , you are simply one of the people willing to DIE and sacrifice your entire life so that others can have the yolk of the governing structure taken from off their back.
i am the first willing to admit i'm not a revolutionary. i don't believe in 'freedom' from the current govenring yolk as worthy of my death or sacrifice. there's plenty about the system I appreciate and value despite that it, like many, if not EVERY other governing system mankind has implmented has not been tinged with slavery.
i think carlin may have his own ideas abou t what is the appropriate level of ownership over one's work. but if you're working and you see less and less, your slavery becomes more a more apparent.
the idea of divide and conquer venn diagram thinking is retarded. for retards and idiots. so call a man a consumerist socialist as a method of rejecting him simply because he expressed outrage at the idea of the 'system' taking possession of the value of your savings---your pension is foolish.
PENSIONS AND SAVINGS ARE ABOUT SAVINGS . NOT ABOUT CONSUMERISM WHEN IN MODERATION. THE IDEA THAT EVERYONE SAVING A PENSION IS AN OBESE CONSUMERIST FUCK----BECAUSE THEY NEED TO EAT WHEN THEY ARE OLD IS A REJECTION OF OLDER PEOPLE'S ENTITEMENT TO THEIR SAVINGS.
IF YOU BELIEVE THEY ARE BETTER OFF SAVING THEIR OWN MONEY UDNER A MATTRESS FINE, BUT THAT IS NOT HOW THE SYSTEM IS SET UP FOR THE WAGE EARNING CLASSES AND WHEN THEY GO ALONG WITH HOW THINGS ARE SETT UP FOR THEM, IT DOENS'T MEAN THEY ARE WORTHY OF REJECTION.
YOUR ATTITUDE DEMONSTRATES WHY CARLIN IS CORRECT IN SHOWING HOW YOU CUT YOURSELF OFF FROM THE REALITY OF THOSE WHO WORK AND SAVE FOR THEMSELVES HOPING TO BE ABLE TO PAY FOR THEIR OWN WAY AFTER THEY ARE TOO OLD TO EASILY CONTINUE LABORING.
GO THINK ON THAT RETARD.
JFC, George Carlin was hardly a political philosopher. Why don't you guys just state simply what YOU think and believe, rather than relying on Carlin quotes?
Note how George always says it doesn't matter what you do because the owners will get their way no matter what. It's almost like he was part of the machine breaking the ice but still leaving you to numb to do anything. Funny he would pick on libertarians too.
He also wrote a book that said where his beliefs originated. A Catholic Absolutist with a hatred for people thinking outside of what absolutist philosophies state is truth.
Sounds a lot like our local Rand hater and other resident Socialists.
Here's Carlin's take on religion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r-e2NDSTuE I suppose you won't like that either --- since you believe there is a man in the sky?
News for everyone - it don't matter it you are a hard core capitalist or a socialist --- both systems require infinite growth and infinite cheap resources.
Here's what happens when a key on --- one that cannot be substituted for --- gets too expensive:
HIGH PRICED OIL DESTROYS GROWTH
According to the OECD Economics Department and the International Monetary Fund Research Department, a sustained $10 per barrel increase in oil prices from $25 to $35 would result in the OECD as a whole losing 0.4% of GDP in the first and second years of higher prices. http://www.iea.org/textbase/npsum/high_oil04sum.pdf
Now pray tell what a 'sustained price of over $100' has done to growth?
It has ended growth - pull off QE ZIRP --- and we would have been dead 6 years go.
Thank Bernanke for delaying the death spiral
You're not your fucking khakis.
Fair enough. Heard this shit over and over until I'm blue in the face. I get it.
I have one request: if I'm one of the few who's smart enough NOT to get sucked onto that treadmill, could you please stop making me pay for the other idiots who aren't?
Some one has to pay, and those consuming just don't have the time.
Net producers vs. net consumers. That is so Hypertiger.
That was an excellent video, I can't wait until it's available on limited edition blu-ray.
Consume citizen. It's your patriotic duty.
Pre-ordered my Criterion Edition for 34.99 on Amazon; it'll have to hold me over until the 4K edition is out - and no I don't fucking upscale like a hood rat it's 4K native or nothing in my underwater household.
Just spit my beer out laughing so hard. Gotta get a new keyboard.
$CONSUMERS FOR CHRIST$
"Your merchants were the world's important people. By your magic spell all the nations were led astray." -revelation 18:23, speaking of Babylon the great, the great whore, the financial system.
On e again, the Bible accurately predicted both the money power's deceitful spell and the fact that it would enable consumerism to a degree never seen before in history.
Revelations was written by whom exactly? Why is that the Catholic Church did not publish that particular book until after the reformation from the Scholastic Catholic Church into the fire and brimstone Absolutist Catholic Church?
Jesus Christ provided the Revelation to his apostle John who was exiled in Patmos.
As for your other question, you'd have to provide more detail like a source, if you'd really like an answer on that.
Why do I need to give the Christian a source about his own faith and it's history?
These are things you should already know, like what the Church was like during it's Scholoastic phase before the Crusades and expansionism and MOARism.
This is why I can't take hardcore Christians seriously, most of them have no idea about the history of their own churches much less the religions they follow. Being God fearing is one thing, and I understand it, but being so afraid to know the history is simply pathetic and you should be embarassed.
@NidStes:
You are truly showing your ignorance. You have no idea what my background is. I am asking you kindly and in all sincerity what you are referencing. It is late but I am still awake. If you really want an answer, post something intelligible, a source, for instance.
PS- I am not a denominationalist, therefore, your obscure references need to have a source for me to answer your question.
You have access to the internet, use it. It's late in my part of the country as well.
Rothbard wrote quite a a bit about the changes in the Catholic Church.
Nid you truly are an idiot to equate Constantine with real first century Christianity. You have revealed yourself as a bought and paid for shill. You were given a polite opportunity to provide a single factual reference and you failed.
One, just one reference is all I asked for and you proved you are making stuff up!
Come back when you have proof.
You never will.
Just in case anyone is wondering, it is Seek_Truth who is the idiot here. Just one question, Seek: When Pilate asked the Prophet who he was, what did he say in your Bible? By most accounts, he answered I am the son of man.
You see, you exceedingly stupid motherfucker, your divine prophet told you that you could be equal with him. Instead, you chose religion.
Dumbass.
It's not that you need to give a Christian a source about his religion; it's that you are supposed to give the reader a source as to your argument.
Most Christians (and non-Christians, for that matter) are not scholars about the history of religion. Myself included.
Teach; don't deride. He didn't say he was embarrassed. He politely asked you to explain your argument.
Can not teach those whom do not ask clear questions through a text format. I can not infer what might be lost in dialect differences.
Ok, fair enough. Nobody was asking you to write a treatise, just to give a bit more explanation. :)
Frankly, your posts are great (even if I don't agree with all of them), as they are far more intellectual than most comments on ZH. But if we the readers can't understand them, then what's the point?
@Nid
You were asked a very clear question. You chose to sidestep it because you got nothing. This is fight club, bring it.
One, single, reference.
That is all, you duplicitous liar.
Seek, Did you fucking down arrow me?
That was a joke, you guys.
Nope. Ain't gonna do it.
Do you know what's sad? The people who watched George Carlin LAUGHED... why are they laughing? They should be angry or crying or even breaking things! BUT NO... they just laughed... a nervous helpless kind of laughter... Pathetic...
Thats because he was ahead of the time. Nobody nervous laughing now.
If Jesus were to preach today, he could only do so as a comedian... the people will listen to him and laugh because they find it funny... to them, the truth is ENTERTAINING... they could go to the movies and be shown a profound truth, but they would just be entertained and forget about it the moment they leave their seats... that is the typical man in the street today...
So true, that is the way it was in Jesus day as well:
2The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head. They clothed him in a purple robe 3and went up to him again and again, saying, “Hail, king of the Jews!” And they slapped him in the face. -john19:2,3
63 The men who were guarding Jesus began mocking and beating him. 64 They blindfolded him and demanded, "Prophesy! Who hit you?" 65 And they said many other insulting things to him. -Luke 22:63-65
27 Then the governor’s soldiers took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole company of soldiers around him. 28 They stripped him and put a scarlet robe on him, 29 and then twisted together a crown of thorns and set it on his head. They put a staff in his right hand. Then they knelt in front of him and mocked him. “Hail, king of the Jews!” they said. 30 They spit on him, and took the staff and struck him on the head again and again. 31 After they had mocked him, they took off the robe and put his own clothes on him. Then they led him away to crucify him. - Matthew 27:27-31
Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. Galatians 6:7
The men who were guarding Jesus began mocking and beating him. - Luke 22:63
a great man belittled, tortured and killed by a criminal gov't is powerful stuff, the stuff from which powerful martyrs are made... very powerful martyrs indeed. I'm not sure these stories made much of a difference in the mud holes of Passchendale, Iwo Jima, Stalingrad or alike to the men, women and children who suffered unspeakable horrors. When you site scripture you belittle their suffering because your martyr made no difference to them in their time of need.
Indeed!
Indeed! is only the start of my christian complaint, there's a multitude of human evils over 2 millenia that need some explaining as well. You can only sell a used sofa as new for so many centuries before the purchaser is gonna catch on.........shazam!!
Network - "I'm as mad as hell" speech [english subtitles]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_qgVn-Op7Q
Doug Stanhope.
They say if you give a man a fish, he’ll eat for a day, but if you teach a man to fish…. then he’s gotta get a fishing license, but he doesn’t have any money. So he’s got to get a job and get into the Social Security system and pay taxes, and now you’re gonna audit the poor cocksucker, ’cause he’s not really good with math. So he’ll pull the IRS van up to your house, and he’ll take all your shit. He’ll take your black velvet Elvis and your Batman toothbrush, and your penis pump, and that all goes up for auction with the burden of proof on you because you forgot to carry the one, ’cause you were just worried about eating a fucking fish, and you couldn’t even cook the fish ’cause you needed a permit for an open flame. Then the Health Department is going to start asking you a lot of questions about where are you going to dump the scales and the guts. ‘This is not a sanitary environment’, and ladies and gentlemen if you get sick of it all at the end of the day… not even legal to kill yourself in this country. Thanks again, John Ashcroft, you weird bible addict, can’t even handle your own drug. You were born free, you got fucked out of half of it, and you wave a flag celebrating it. The only true freedom you find, is when you realize and come to terms with the fact that you are completely and unapologetically fucked, and then you are free to float around the system.
His job was to tell the truth in a way that leaves the listeners disengaged. When someone tells you not to trust anyone, they mean themselves too.
Calling Dr. Howard"" Calling Doctor Fine""" Calling Doctor Howard''''
Get your head out into the light, AND see the third chart here:
http://patrick.net/forum/?p=1230886
If one studies inflation, especially hyper-inflation, and the economies/societies that suffer them, they will see many, if not most, of the same aliments that the American people currently suffer. Generally speaking, an economy/society experiencing inflation becomes more and more short-term focused in thought and action.
Conclusion: The pernicious theft by "printing" and enslavement by debt of the FedRes in collusion with their bully-buddies, government, have not only robbed the people of their wealth, but also of their souls.
"Guillotines are restorers. Restorers of society."
Drop the bullshit guillotines crap and just stop playing. Isn't that what you have been preaching? I don't want to live in a world with guillotines, be they owned by the State or you.
We are giving them this power over us and we can stop. We can say no, just a little here and there but it will be hard. It will mean living on less with less, exactly where we will likely end up anyway, but at least on our own terms and with some control. Right now we can do little. Every person's job depends on the ongoing government/corporate corruption. We know if they stop what they are doing we are going to see a crash. We need it, but few of us want it. We needed it a long time ago but people will do anything to avoid the pain of consequence. That's why we keep electing fucking liars, people who tell us what we want to hear.
Lets just accept our part of the responsibility for this disaster and do what needs done.
Good comment.
Except that he hasn't actually stopped playing, yes. People are so fkn stupid, it boggles the mind. Says he owns 50 acres. Is that so? What happens if he quits paying taxes on that 'property'? The local gendarmerie will come and remove him and his from said property, that's what.
He has built for himself a false sense of security as by Papal Law, every inch of this world belongs to the Vatican, by the law abides, and he doesn't know that.
He doesn't know that natural law has been replaced by maritime law, and that his supreme court has been made subservient to the Vatican, who claims all and sundry, including his future production via the income tax.
He doesn't know shit.
But Oldwood, you once told me you make custom furniture for upscale 'corporates'. Who do you think they are, exactly? I don't mean to bust your balls, but it seems to me there is a bit of cognitive dissonance in play here.
Not preaching, I spent decades developing processes for big MIC contractors, so I'm guilty, too. I kept getting kicked to the curb though, and for the longest time, and had no idea why. After 10 years doing my own thing and telling 'the bigs' no thank you, I think I get it.
They liked what I did, but they couldn't tolerate my insistence that red tape and 'procedure' are bullshit, even though I proved it many times. They thrive on that crap, and I was trying to take it away.
I'm not suggesting we go cold turkey in this. I have done what I could to eliminate debt and keep my business as lean as possible. Everything paid for, my first rule of independence. Secondly, I take no job that I can't bankroll from my pocket. No corporation is going to have me completely bent over by withholding payment. I live on 50 acres, fully equipped to provide pretty much what I need. I don't live in poverty but I try to keep my expenditures within my means. Its all about leverage, about not being living hand to mouth. If I deside to stop operations I can do so tomorrow, won't like it but I can. All I'm preaching is people working for their own independence, their liberty. Our government keeps our country on a leash through debt and dependency. I'm not against commerce, I'm not for everyone living in a cave. Just non dependency. They can't rule us with violence, they must use dependency. We just got to stop.
Wise Words.
OK, we can drift further into soft tyranny, while tax slaves like yourself pretend to be patriots, and everything will be OK. Why do I see a problem with this plan?
So what if he works for upscale clients? It's hard to get poor people to buy custom furniture. And there's no virtue whatsoever in hating corporations or rich people.
I am the CEO of a corporation, and I don't arbitrarily hate anyone. There are exceptions of course, but to my way of thinking there are 3 ways to amass considerable material wealth-
1) Inherit it
2) Dig it out of the ground
3) Fuck someone else out of it
That's about it.
You don't arbitrarily hate anyone? Your comments seem to be concentrated on class warfare. If I'm wrong about that, then I'll apologize. But look at what you just said! You are a CEO who believes that wealth can ONLY be gotten through inheritance, digging it out of the ground (I admit I'm not sure what that means), or screwing someone else out of it. That is leftist thinking, period. And it's loser thinking, frankly.
What about hard work? Paying off debt? Living within your means? Living BELOW your means? Not using debt AT ALL? Making good decisions? Making better decisions when a bad decision didn't work out? Man, I could go on and on. I suspect you don't want to hear it.
This may blast right over your head Serenity, or not, you may be way ahead of me. Please watch this vid and know that I am not the originator of it. It is the recent history of cognitive dissonance presented in a song, with lyrics.
May I present to you, The Rolling Stones- recorded in 1968?
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&...
That happens to be one of my favorite songs, but it was before my time. I'm not from the Kennedy / Vietnam time. So I don't really know the words by heart. But I did watch the video, because you said please, and I also read the lyrics. I get where you are coming from and why you posted it.
I think I prefer "You Can't Always Get What You Want" to make my case. ;)
Anyway, thank you for playing me a song. I was at a party once where someone asked if you were on a desert island and could only have one artist's music with you, who would you choose? And I chose The Rolling Stones. I don't even know why I said that. I guess I thought there was a lot to explore in their music. On the other hand, I was trying to impress a group of guys and couldn't very well say Hootie and the Blowfish. LOL.
Serenity, maybe you think I've forgotten you. Maybe you think I just don't care. Neither is true. I sent you a message that spans a much greater time span than from here back to Vietnam- yet is still just a moment in the grand scheme.
You can't always get what you want is another great song/lyric, although not nearly as revealing as Sympathy.
They say that when the pupil is ready, the teacher appears. I am not suggesting that I could be said teacher- but one day, you will be ready, and someone you can comprehend will appear.
Much love.
We don't elect anybody unless we're the oligarchs, but otherwise I agree -we need to build up our networks, spread the word, organize, and then disconnect from the assholes who subjugate us.
I buy very little, on sale only, and only if its VALUE.
I everyone was like me, you'd all starve
In Yellen We Trust.
You knew we were a fucked up society when the first thing Bush told us to do after .gov...... (Er....I meant a group cave dwelling terrorists) knocked down the twin towers was to go shopping while they go blow up a bunch of brown people on the other side of the globe. If that doesn't tell you how sick our society is I don't know what will.
"Go out and shop"
George Bush, Sept 2001
Couldn't believe it when I heard it.
Am still amazed.
Have you been coexisting in silence with this?
The Public Be Suckered
http://patrick.net/forum/?p=1230886
This was about the time as a conservative I realized I was fucked. The final nail was killing free markets to save free markets, or what ever the declaration of the bank bailouts proclaimed. All they're good for is saving us from the disasters they have created, by economically enslaving us. Conservatives have been completely fucked by the republican party, just as liberals have been by the democrats. The only difference is that the liberals have actually gotten exactly what they were asking for but just didn't realize it.
You say this, and yet you still hold on to your team color.
I still believe in conservative values even though I see very few followed in politics. When I see my principles proven wrong, I will reconsider, but simply because those elected on those principles fail to follow through, is no reason to believe anything different. In fact it simply proves my belief that no person or group should be given these powers in the first place. Power corrupts, absolutely.
Dubya even sent out "$600 cheques" to stimulate the shoppin'
who paid for that, eh voters?
.
"Ummmm... huh huh... uhhhhh... that was, like, other people... huh huh..."
-- Butthead
Must have been an experion error. Now I'm free to be schizophrenic. butthead prophecies and idiots abound.
Poor Dubai.
In 2009 Australians got an AUD900 cash bonus to go spend on crap.
Twisted.
I remember hearing about those checks. They damn sure didn't send one to me though.
I'm not sure how you could insinuate that it was not cave dwelling terrorists who destroyed the twin towers.
After all, their passports were found in the rubble.
So when the aluminium planes sliced through the buildings with aluminium clad steel structure and completely disappeared inside without a trace, causing a fire hot enough to melt the steel in the building causing it's collapse, their passports survived intact.
It's really a miraculous story.
Its so depressing, despite being rather rich.. 1% rich infact, ive always been a bit of a frugalist., never understood the idea of owning things... or borrowing things.. my father spends his cash on ferraris and watches i think my only vice is a few cold ones...
It doesn't matter how much you spend as long as you live within your means. It is the debt that they use to control the world. personal debt and government debt. Even pensions are debt in that they have promised more than they can pay, and hold that over people to enable them to do even more stupid things with the money trying to make up the difference. Our debt and these stupid investment schemes are being used to blackmail us into compliance to their terms. This is not liberty nor freedom.
Money is a nice thing. Useful and even desireable.
But to think it makes you a better person, or more important, or even happier (after the first week), is nuts.
Money is a TOOL, and nothing more.
I think money is a tool of security and power. For the bulk of people it is about security. Getting sick and having the money in the bank to not end up on the street. When people were more self sustaining, they had less need for money. Also, when people lived in closer knit more family ordered communities, we could rely on family and friends to help us through the hard times. Now we live a thousand miles from our nearest family member and can live next door to someone for ten years and not know their name, money is the only security we know, or at least used to know.
Society has two choices;
take responsibility for our own survival, living sustainably, or
Riot in the street burning down the establishment and robbing our neighbors to stay alive.
The only two alternatives I see in the end.
@Neethgie
I can only formulate two words:
Morally Bankrupt...
...and it will get worse...
Perhaps making other people happy is what does it for you. In that case, having lotsa loot and lavishing it on young single mother strippers can make many people happy. Not that I do that. Just sayin's all.
Money is slavery, coin of the realm.
I agree but their is a level of undeniable stupid, two families in our village have been competing by outdoing each other on cars, nobody acknowledges it, neither of them like each other, neither of them really need these cars, but both of them want to be the best to make someone else jealous its a mental disorder.
I dont care about what make of phone i have, i do have an iphone i was bought, but when the contract expired i opted for more minutes for about 12$ a month instead of upgrading..
I read so much about youths saying they wont get laid if they have wrong phone.. its ridiculous.
If you're talking beers that's no vice, just good drinking water. If you're talking broads you are sick, sick man.
haha beers i was wondering why i got so pelted with downvotes
I see the down votes because i mentioned i was wealthy i assume, this is how poisonous consumerism is, you think i imply i am better than you because i have more wealth than the average person?
We need to stop comparing people by disposable income, by what they wear or what they drive, only then can we be happy.
You are not the car you drive or the house you live in, donald trump is richer than ill ever be but is he a good man? wealth isnt a scorecard, once you are comfortable its pointless amassing ever more wealth to buy things that dont even give value.
Hating the rich is very popular right now. I don't hate rich people, as there is no virtue in being either rich or poor. Also, it is a static situation. People move into and out of rich and poor categories many times during a lifetime.
Did you earn your wealth? You don't have to answer, of course. Your comments are somewhat lackadaisical and liberal. That might be why you got some down votes. I didin't up or down vote you.
Yes earned, my father earnt his too, well after i left home so there was never any pass on effect, Im not a liberal, liberals are the reason people in this economy feel pain, they have taxed peoples standard of living to the point where a guy cant buy cigerettes cos someone says they shouldn't smoke, doesnt matter people still want their things so cut elsewhere.
I apologize for calling your previous comment lackadaisical or liberal. Maybe your style of speaking (i.e., "earnt") is just more refined than mine. ;)
I'm glad you earned your money. You are far less likely to lose it because of that. Most people have no idea how hard it is to make and KEEP money. You have to save, do without while other people buy expensive things on credit, and like you said earlier, just be frugal.
The religion of the left is equality. They don't care about anything else. If we were all naked, living outside, and eating dirt, they would be counting how many grains of dirt you had over someone else.
Haha i must apologise for earnt its a yorkshire (uk thing), what really annoys me is leftists attack wealth but they make it hard for people to enjoy themselves in a safe manner, When you tax booze and cigs so heavily that only a few can afford them, people who are poor lose out, they go looking for cheap alternatives and end up hooked on something or making bad choices.
The equality of the left never concerns itself with what sort of equality that is, just that there is equality even if as you say we are all eating dirt.