Naomi Klein - The Shock Doctrine

josef k.

Dangerous Mystagogue
"Sure, why not?"

Well, I don't know. Is there a more-or-less equal distribution of child sex slaves in every world city?
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
this sounds fantastic if the people in power buy into it. which, ah...

I mean like most things having to do w/democracy this all works better the more affluence there is, more surplus of power so to speak. but there isn't enough affluence to go around is there...

Yeah, and they usually don't. But does that mean those who do should stop?

I mean, the tard gallery is having fun letting this thread descend into chaos, as they usually do when their idiotic arguments have been shown up for the nonsense that they are, so have fun with it.
 

josef k.

Dangerous Mystagogue
I mean, the tard gallery is having fun letting this thread descend into chaos, as they usually do when their idiotic arguments have been shown up for the nonsense that they are, so have fun with it.

Speaking on behalf of that party, we thank you nonetheless for your heroic efforts to drag it back to the really important questions.
 

vimothy

yurp
Anyone standing up for the rights of the disenfranchised or disempowered should stop standing up for those rights because that's too much like "speaking for" them...
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
Yeah, and they usually don't. But does that mean those who do should stop?

I mean, the tard gallery is having fun letting this thread descend into chaos, as they usually do when their idiotic arguments have been shown up for the nonsense that they are, so have fun with it.

actually I dunno I thought it was pretty interesting until, no offense, you showed up. not that I agreed with everything that was put forward but I dunno, it was a discourse. not that discourse has to be civil. anyway.

no, it doesn't mean "those who do" should stop. but 1) they're in the minority, certainly, over the long run of history & 2) anyone who buys into isn't the problem, yuhfeelme? *EDIT* to elucidate: trusting the powerful to buy into "it" of their own accord is a sucker's bet. goes against human nature doesn't it.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
actually I dunno I thought it was pretty interesting until, no offense, you showed up. not that I agreed with everything that was put forward but I dunno, it was a discourse. not that discourse has to be civil. anyway.

no, it doesn't mean "those who do" should stop. but 1) they're in the minority, certainly, over the long run of history & 2) anyone who buys into isn't the problem, yuhfeelme?

I didn't do anything but disagree with the usual suspects, who act like flagrant babies whenever anybody does just that. This is one time when it was definitely not me doing the thread derailing.

Yes, of course, I agree with you. Isn't that obvious?
 

josef k.

Dangerous Mystagogue
The metaphor of the derailing thread is quite interesting. It is a crazily mixed-metaphor. The thread is a train, and the train is a thread. Either, it was going to get somewhere, or sew everything up. I guess it starts sewing mutantly, and spins into oblivion.
 

nomadthethird

more issues than Time mag
The metaphor of the derailing thread is quite interesting. It is a crazily mixed-metaphor. The thread is a train, and the train is a thread. Either, it was going to get somewhere, or sew everything up. I guess it starts sewing mutantly, and spins into oblivion.

Meanwhile, who gives a fuck.
 
Top